[Local-Maine-Schools] Measuring Progress

[Mike Bush]

This is more in response to the earlier email from Donna Miller Damon, but 
only in one small sense.  In brief, I feel we need to acknowledge the 
opportunity to do more at regional level.  Schools are only one part of 
this debate, but are being asked to be the experimental model, perhaps 
because schools are already asked to do so much, why not one more thing. I 
think best response to the current legislation is to encouarge a more 
thoughtful debate (and action) on regionalization issues, and at same time 
acknowledge that schools can be part of this solution.  A companion effort 
to acknowledging the need for some movement on what i'd call the 'low 
hanging fruit', I think the Governor's proposal should be painted as too 
much too quick, with too little regional involvement.  A more thoughtful 
regional approach that builds on the trust and understanding explained by 
earlier participants in this email exchange is what should be encouaraged 
as the best way to tackle these issue...not a top down approach.   If you 
have time, i tried to articulate some of these issues in more detail in 
the missive below: 

Donna Miller Damon (Working Waterfront article) did an excellent job of 
articulating the ‘Island’ experience and explaining the unique role that 
Islands play in the lives of people. The challenge I see, however, is that 
‘islands’ are really just a metaphor for much of rural Maine.  The 
isolation of Chebeague is not really that different from the small 
communities of St. Agatha or Guilford, or 100 other towns stretched across 
our varied landscape.  The truth of the matter is that countless 
communities rely upon their local schools for any number of things that 
build community and provide an outlet, as well as an education for their 
children, in an atmosphere they have knowledge and control over. 

So what to do?  Will this movement for greater economies of scale and 
reduced taxes devolve into a debate about which types of communities are 
most special or deserving of special treatment?  I think the role we must 
all play is to acknowledge the need to do some things better, while still 
protecting what is truly unique about all of our communities.  There are a 
number of proposals before the legislature that provide answers.  What’s 
needed to begin this debate and commit to needed change is for Maine 
people to acknowledge the need for actions that bring greater efficiency 
and move towards the low hanging fruit that will demonstrate progress. 
Clearly more could be done through regional purchasing districts, greater 
coordination on course offerings, and the like, as but a few examples of 
where this low hanging fruit might be. 

The debate over closing rural schools is the boogeyman in this debate.  I 
think if we really think about some of our rural challenges we might 
acknowledge that even here, in some cases, changes would be appropriate. 
Framing the school efficiency debate in terms of a conspiracy to close 
rural schools obfuscates some common sense solutions, in my mind.  Why, 
for example, do some communities still operate high schools with dwindling 
populations 7 miles apart?  Why are we building new schools on the fringes 
of densely populated urban areas when there is plenty of capacity in these 
urban areas?  Why do schools operate their own bus garages when a regional 
garage would be able to offer better service without the duplication of 
space and equipment?  Our slow movement on some of these issues helps 
explain why so many Maine citizens and government officials are frustrated 
with our current expenditures and resultant high taxes. 

More can be done on a regional basis.  It is unfortunate, however, that 
our most ambitious regional plan has asked our schools to be in the 
crosshairs.  Let me explain with a recent experience that demonstrates to 
me the challenges we have as a State in thinking more regionally.  Not 
long ago I was talking with some community leaders in a small town along 
Route 1,  east of Machias.  The leaders were lamenting that Augusta didn’t 
know that any towns existed between Machias and Calais, and for this 
reason they were often ignored or short changed.  I asked them about their 
cooperation with the neighboring Town of Lubec, thinking that there would 
be power in numbers.  The response was that they had little or nothing to 
do with Lubec and didn’t see anything in common.  I was amazed to think 
their energies and frustrations were directed at Augusta when their 
opportunity to build critical mass and identify was right down the road. I 
thought how much has changed in the past 40 years in the Lubec/Whiting 
area from the days when there were jobs, a movie theater, and a general 
sense of a shared identity, compared to what exists today. 

The impression I’m left with is that much of what we have come to rely 
upon our schools for used to be delivered in different ways.  Rather than 
relying upon vibrant commercial interests and diverse cultural and social 
offerings to help create our regional (and community) identities we now 
rely upon our schools for.  The school play, the shared sense of working 
for a common good (the education of our young), and school sports have 
filled the psychological void left by our economic insecurity, long 
commutes, and declining rural vibrancy.  No wonder our school budgets have 
grown and are under such great pressure, given all we ask them to do. 

Budget challenges and high taxes are forcing us to look at regionalization 
at all levels of government, not just education.  There are no islands in 
this debate.  We all depend upon neighboring communities for something: 
our labor force, affordable housing, a transportation link to the outside 
world, solid waste disposal, services, etc.  There is much wrong with the 
Governor’s legislation for regionalizing schools.  If nothing else, 
however, it will perhaps force us to walk the lonely, but rewarding, path 
towards developing our regional strengths. 

I say, let the debate begin but let it grow from a renewed sense of 
regional identity and strength.   Schools are but one partner in this 
regional debate that is framing Maine’s competitiveness in the 21st 
century.  All levels of our public investment from our community planning 
to our higher educational system to our State government should be asked 
to walk the walk.  Progress on all fronts is what’s needed, not a drastic 
dismantling of our current schools.   Such a discussion would give us a 
much better sense of all our regional priorities and issues, and allow us 
to take a step back from the current effort to have the schools be the 
sacrificial lamb for the larger issue of how we develop regional strengths 
and efficiencies. 



"Paul Murphy" <pgmurphy607 at adelphia.net> 
Sent by: local-maine-schools-bounces at lists.svaha.com
02/07/2007 06:31 PM

To
"Local Maine Schools List" <local-maine-schools at lists.svaha.com>, "Gail 
Marshall" <gmarshall at wildmoo.net>, "Brian Hubbell" <bhubbell at acadia.net>
cc

Subject
Re: [Local-Maine-Schools] Measuring Progress






OK...well I am back from the nearly dead...almost anyway.

Gail I don't disagree with your take on the focus on assessment etc... I
don't even think Commissioner Gadroon would disagree (at least in her 
public
statements). I do think, however, that it's fair enough for folks to want
some sort of objective measures as to how education is working in the 
state-
whatever those may be. You seem to be advocating a global approach to the
argument against LSRS and while I think it would be great to fight that 
big
fight, I don't think we have that luxury. It seems certain to me that 
there
will be some change coming out of the legislature. I think we need to 
focus
on salvaging what's essential to maintaining our way. In a nutshell that's
local control of policy and budgets. I think broadening the fight may be 
the
right thing to do but it's a losing strategy. In this case I'd rather win
what we can than be right and go down in flames.

I agree with Brian that we need to be a constructive part of the
conversation. We also need to understand what we are willing to "give up". 
I
mean, do we really care where we buy our paper or computers? Do we really
care if transportation is contracted collectively? If we can keep our 
Union
in tact, keep control of how much we spend on education and of how we
approach education I will consider it a victory. To think we can win by
broadening the argument to Federal policy and issues that might well be
holistically related to the consolidation issue is, I think, a mistake.
Let's put out the fire then chip away at the more global issues.

Paul
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gail Marshall" <gmarshall at wildmoo.net>
To: "Local Maine Schools List" <local-maine-schools at lists.svaha.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:13 AM
Subject: [Local-Maine-Schools] Measuring Progress


> One other point (well, one of the many other points) I wish to make
> is that when educational improvement is discussed within this current
> debate, it is done almost exclusively within the context of test
> scores. I think that narrow focus has pauperized our discussions
> about what it really means to succeed as a student, a citizen and as
> a school. I believe it guarantees that many fine young people will
> find it harder and harder to find a place within our educational
> system.  That is one of the most corrosive and harmful effects of No
> Child Left Behind and Maine Learning Results.  It is a focus that the
> Commissioner uses almost exclusively in explaining her educationally-
> based reasons for her actions, and it is behind the rationale of
> almost every study that knocks or praises what we do. At Union 98 we
> frequently discuss concerns about this slide, but I see us loosing
> considerable ground in that debate in the past few years. It is so
> much easier to point to a bar graph or a chart to measure success
> than to take the full measure of a student or a curriculum. And it is
> all too easy to blame the students and teachers when the numbers
> don't add up.
> On Monday when Ms. Gendron was dissing current test scores did you
> wonder how many Legislators were asking themselves questions like:
> who made the tests, are they appropriate, who decides what is
> adequate work and what isn't, does that rubric change at all from
> year to year, how does the SAT fit into that, how are all these tests
> useful to teachers in helping the students? Were they remembering the
> MEA debacle a few years ago when the tests were all rewritten, had
> outlandish expectations, weren't piloted (this is a recording), and
> had test booklets too big for the average 4th grade desktop-to name
> only one small but telling problem with forethought from DOE?
> This may sound tangential, but from our web page I just finished
> reading my umteenth report about Maine's educational system based
> purely on test scores. And how those test scores don't justify the
> money we spend on education. It is an important part of the debate,
> but like most other facts being cited in this rush to "reform", it
> has been distorted almost beyond recognition. It plays into the sense
> that all DOE and the Legislature need to do to change educational
> policy is to read a few studies and test score reports and hack away.
> (Until they hire another expert to tell them to hack in a different
> direction.)  And that's one of the reasons why we never seem to get
> legislation or policy that values  and reflects input from those "in
> the trenches".
>
> Gail Marshall
> _______________________________________________
> Local-Maine-Schools mailing list
> Local-Maine-Schools at lists.svaha.com
> http://lists.svaha.com/mailman/listinfo/local-maine-schools
>


_______________________________________________
Local-Maine-Schools mailing list
Local-Maine-Schools at lists.svaha.com
http://lists.svaha.com/mailman/listinfo/local-maine-schools


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.svaha.com/pipermail/local-maine-schools/attachments/20070208/97368dc6/attachment-0001.html