Put This One Here, That One There, Oh, This One Could....Maybe?

Let the fun begin! We have heard from a number of former teachers that yet another massive turnover of staff at MVRCS is in the works. Once again teachers under the "leadership" (if that is what you want to call it) of Jen Mullen are jumping ship (and we hear some are leaving without having secured employment elsewhere). Of course the 7th & 8th grade teachers and HS teachers are also leaving in droves. Of course this comes as no surprise as rumors had been running rampant for some time. We came across the following postings for job positions and imagine that since the majority of 4th, 5th, & 6th grade teachers are leaving, they have moved a Kindergarten and 3rd grade teacher into one of these slots as a lead teacher. What we found discouraging is that although the school (as are all public schools) is required to hire certified teachers, the job requirements only make reference of it being preferred (or attainable within one year but most colleges require graduates to pass the MTEL before graduation and many who graduate without it are typically having problems passing the test). Further, the posting for the 'Substitutes' make reference for the potential of moving into a teaching position yet does not require certification. Both positions state 'Bachelors  Preferred' - yet another questionable statement and practice. Boy does this school have high expectations for their new hires....NOT! Most districts require copy of certification, college transcripts, and 3 recommendations to even get an interview. Apparently they do not feel these things are important or are so desperate for bodies, they'll take ANYONE. And we all wonder why so many teachers leave mid-year each year!                                                                                                                                                                                       Another ironic and totally fabricated piece of bs on the part of the school is their 'Equal Opportunity Employer' statement....no discrimination or retaliation? Really? Must be confusing themselves with a different school! We pity those poor, uninformed individuals who seek a position within this school as long as Kinnon is in charge.                                                                                                                  Equal Opportunity Employer Mystic Valley Regional Charter School is committed to maintaining a work and learning environment free from discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, pregnancy, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital/civil union status, ancestry, place of birth, age, citizenship status, veteran status, political affiliation, genetic information or disability, as defined and required by state and federal laws. Additionally, we prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose such discrimination and harassment or who participate in an equal opportunity investigation. This last line is our favorite because we all know how Kinnon would react to ANYONE standing up against him and his bully-team! Why don't we ask the individuals who have filed claims against the school in the past how they were treated once the school heard of the allegations. Funny, it doesn't say that preferential treatment (and higher pay, lower expectations) is given to those individuals who have connections to Neil Kinnon. Oh yeah, they can't, that would be an ethical issue (you know, conflict of interests).                                                     We are looking for candidates to be Permanent Substitutes for our Lower School campus. Candidates will also be promotable into classroom settings for all K - 8 positions, i.e. K - 6 classroom teachers and/or subject teachers at the middle school levels.   Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 3 Job Requirements Massachusetts certification preferred or certification attainable within one year of hire. At least 1 year of relevant experience preferred Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required Application Questions There are no application questions required for this job posting.Of course not, that might limit the application pool and show ones theory of teaching. Why would we want to know that of any incoming teachers??? We have current openings in Kindergarten and 3rd grade.Wonder which poor K and 3rd grade teachers have been forced into changing grades? Levine? Flynn? Kozlowski? Penhaligone?   Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 3
Job Requirements
Massachusetts certification preferred or certification attainable within one year of hire. Experience with Direct Instruction and COre Knowledge a definite plus. At least 1 year of relevant experience preferred Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required
	Special Education Teacher - Opening for 2011 - 12 school year, starting in early-mid August. Resouce room setting with pull out services along with some in class services. Qualified candidates will pull out students for tests to read for the students, plus MCAS and other standardized testing assistance, based on IEP plans. Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 1 Job Requirements IEP writing experience required. 1 - 3 years of Special Education experience along with MA Special Education certification preferred. Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required

We have made it no secret that we have been less than impressed with the Special, Education services that Mystic Valley offers. While we believe that the Special Education teachers per se are not the problem (although they could take on a more collaborative approach to teaching by working WITH the classroom teachers rather than independently), we do feel that the department is incredibly lacking due to the lack of leadership on the part of Kathy Kinnon. We have seen their IEP's and find them lacking in substance and in addressing each childs individual needs (too many of their IEP's state the same goals and objectives regardless of the child). Since we know that parents are left to the information that is provided to them by Kathy Kinnon (and Chris Finn when they question or challenge their childs progression and need to be reminded that 'they have other options and MVRCS isn't for everyone'), we thought we'd provide some insight from a well-educated, experienced individual with real Special Education knowledge. We hope this helps parents who are in the process of updating their childs IEP and/or those who do not feel that their childs IEP is adequate. Remember, you may request an additional meeting to address IEP's at any time should you have concerns or do not feel as though your child is progressing under their current IEP.

From WrightsLaw: http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/goals.lesson.heitin.htm

Writing IEP Goals

by Ruth Heitin, Ph.D., Educational Consultant

Creating an IEP with a team of people who are all there to design a good educational program for one unique child can be a pleasure. It can also be very productive. When the whole team has the same level of understanding about IEPs, it is even better. Sounds like crazy talk? Just ask those who have seen it happen. The big winner here is the child.

A Lesson in Writing IEP Goals
An IEP is good educational programming. Good IEPs set the standard for good education. Each part of the IEP addresses an important part of educational planning. The IEP team focuses on the unique educational needs of an individual student. The goals reflect the child’s needs. Designing well-formed goals is an important part of writing an IEP.

“How do I find examples of good IEP goals?”

Marie, the mother who asked this question, had attended several IEP meetings for her child. She did not think the goals the IEP team proposed were good. Yet, she didn’t know what good IEP goals look like.

If you are a teacher, you may have the same questions. Good IEPs set the standard for good teaching. Each part of the IEP addresses an important part of educational planning.

IEP goals must be individualized. Rather than relying on sample goals, you need to learn how to write IEP goals that meet the unique needs of a particular child.

Goals
We all set goals for ourselves, whether we are aware of it or not. Our goals can be as simple as getting to work on time. They can be as complex as budgeting our expenses. We know what we need to do, and we set out to do it.

An IEP goal is not unlike a personal goal. With an IEP goal, we create an educational program for a child with special needs. An IEP goal describes what we hope the child will achieve, or the intended outcome of instruction.

The outcome is stated as an action we expect to see. Goals must be measured in an objective way. We have to be able to see the action or count it or score it. When we state goals clearly as actions, measuring progress comes naturally from the goal. A goal must establish a criterion for acceptable mastery.

In short, when we write instructional goals we have to know what the child needs to learn and what action we want to see. We have to measure progress toward the goal. Finally, we set a level of mastery that we expect.

We use standardized tests and informal assessments to measure a child’s progress toward the goals. We can do tallies or checklists or give tests specific to the action we seek. Anyone who looks at the measurement should be able to understand it. And, all those who review the measurement should be able to come to the same conclusion.

Learning how to write individualized IEP goals is an important first step in developing your child’s IEP. IEP goals should also be SMART and based on good educational practice.

SMART IEP goals are:
Specific
Measurable
Use Action words
Realistic
Time-limited

Educational research will help you identify essential skills in the core academic subjects of reading, writing, and math. When you know the sequence of skills for a subject, you will know how skills build on each other. You can identify gaps in skills – skills that your child hasn’t mastered and needs to learn.

Think about how children learn math. A child learns how to add and subtract. Then he is ready to learn how to multiply and divide.

Before you can develop measurable IEP goals, the child’s skills must be measured objectively. Objective data about a child’s skills are the baselines for goals. This data also should show progress, or lack of it, when measured over time.

We tend to use the terms “goal” and “objective” to mean the same thing. In IEPs, there is a distinction between them. We write annual goals. Objectives are the short-term steps to reach goals.

Reading
In 2000, the report of experts on the National Reading Panel explained the research in reading. This included more than 10,000 research studies. All this information helped form a better understanding of reading and what works in teaching (see www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/researchread.htm). The findings from the research changed reading instruction forever. In 2001, Congress passed No Child Left Behind (see www.wrightslaw.com/nclb). The results of the research were included there, too.

Reading instruction requires explicit, intensive, and systematic instruction in the five necessary components of reading instruction:

Phonemic Awareness - the ability to hear and sequence sounds in spoken words.
Phonics - the relationship between the letters of written language and the sounds of spoken language.
Fluency - the ability to read text accurately and quickly.
Vocabulary - the words students must know to communicate effectively.
Comprehension - the ability to understand and gain meaning from what has been read.

Learning to read requires a child to learn specific skills in sequence. Children who have difficulty learning to read have deficiencies in phonemic awareness skills. A child with weak phonemic awareness skills will have difficulty learning phonics skills. This child will not be a fluent reader. If the child does not master phonics and fluency, he will not be able to master vocabulary and reading comprehension.

One young teacher made a banner to illustrate the sequence of reading skills. This came from the specialized program she was using. As students learned a skill, she would advance them down the banner. This made it easy for her to write specific reading goals.

Math
After children master math operations skills (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing), they learn how to use reasoning to solve word problems.

One of my clients, Jane, had this math goal in her IEP:

Jane will use problem solving strategies to solve 2 step word problems with + and – (0 – 999) and x and division (0 – 12) on 3/4 trials.

This is NOT a good IEP goal. Why not?
The intended outcome might have been for Jane to solve two-part word problems. But this goal says she needs to learn to use problem-solving strategies. The goal does not state whether she will be able to solve problems. Worse, this goal includes all math operations (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing), making the goal overly broad.

Jane’s math goal is not SMART. It is not specific or measurable. It does not use action words, and is not realistic or time-limited.

How can we revise this goal to make it SMART?

According to Jane’s IEP, using objects helps her to solve problems. A better goal for Jane might be:

Using real money, Jane will be able to show how much money she has after she receives two weeks of allowance, and how much money she will have left after she buys one object, with 75 percent accuracy measured twice weekly each quarter.

Now, the goal meets the five criteria for a SMART IEP goal.

Writing
Achievement in written language requires many skills. Mechanics help make thoughts clear. Word usage and sentence structure help make the writing interesting. Good thought expression sends the desired message.

In Jane’s IEP, her writing goal read:

Jane needs to write a paragraph, with a topic sentence and at least 4 detail sentences, on one given topic using her editing checklist measured twice monthly.

So, if Jane writes that paragraph, has she achieved that goal?

By the way it was written, the intended outcome is that Jane only “needs” to write a paragraph to meet the goal.

A better writing goal for Jane is:

Jane will write and edit a five-sentence paragraph that addresses a given subject twice a month. Each paragraph will include a topic sentence, at least four details and a conclusion. She will earn a score of 75 percent or higher on a writing rubric for each writing assignment. There will be at least four writing assignments per quarter.

Tip: Rubrics are useful scoring tools that measure a child’s progress. A writing rubric includes the criteria and standards used to assess a child’s performance on writing assignments.

The revised goal is specific and measurable. It uses action words, is realistic, and time-limited. The revised goal is SMART!

Our Information, Plus

 

We received some very negative responses to our last posting regarding the handling of both the lottery and waitlist at MVRCS. We noticed that while few took issue with the information we provided regarding the last lottery, many did take offense with the naming of individuals. We feel that our readers need to know that we do wrestle with idea of naming names and try to avoid doing so when possible. We do not wish to destroy anyone or cause harm to innocent individuals. The problem arises though when we have information to share that involves certain individuals. If we are too vague, we are accused of not being well informed. Alternatively if we name the individuals, we are accused of going too far. Additionally, we have to be sure that what we are posting does not put our sources in danger of being discovered or identified through specific information. Many times we have more specific information than we share but feel that it would jeopardize our position. It is a very fine line that we walk and we apologize if we have offended anyone.

A perfect example would be that of the re-admission of two of the Assistant Directors family members. When we were vague and just said that we knew it had happened, we were accused of not knowing what we were talking about. At the same time, when we did name the Assistant Director specifically (without mentioning the student’s names), others accused us of slander and libel. The fact is that the information is accurate and the incident did occur. We feel that as this is in violation of the laws that govern the school, that it should be addressed. If this were the only violation we were aware of we may not feel that it would be worth addressing. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

We have received an incredible amount of information from parents and teachers (both current and former) who have shared with us numerous documented examples of the school not following the laws that govern it. Initially this was dumb founding to us as we couldn’t imagine the school risking their charter by not following the laws. At first we thought that the Department of Education hadn’t been informed of their infractions. Unfortunately we found that many parents and teachers had contacted the Department of Education (we have copies of letters and emails). As we’ve commented before, we are disappointed in how the DOE has handled issues pertaining to MVRCS.

We must say that the laws make it difficult for parents and teachers to file complaints as they must first present the complaint to the Board. Many parents of MVRCS are hesitant to openly file a complaint with the Board out of fear of retaliation. It has recently been pointed out to us that the law reads “A parent, guardian, or other individuals or groups who believe that a charter school has violated or is violating any provision of M.G.L. c. 71, § 89, or 603 CMR 1.00 may file a complaint with the charter school's board of trustees.” This means that a parent does not need to identify themselves but could request an outsider to file the complaint. Additionally (and we feel even more important), the law states that “A parent, guardian, or other individuals or groups who believe that a charter school has violated or is violating any state or federal law or regulation regarding special education may file a complaint directly with the Department.” This means that should a parent have an issue pertaining to Special Education (which we think is a major concern at MVRCS), they no longer have to first present their issue to the Board of Trustees but can file their complaint directly with the Department of Education. For parents of Special Education learners, if your child is not receiving the services they are entitled to and/or your IEP meetings are not held according to law (including the timelines for receiving documents), then we suggest you file your complaint directly with the Department of Education.

DESE 'Common Criteria' - For All Schools EXCEPT MVRCS!

We came across the following information at (http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/guides/commoncriteria.pdf) and thought that it was interesting and worth sharing. The document that it was contained in was described as the ‘common school performance criteria’ from the DESE. Given our most recent blog regarding what we felt to be a less than adequate concern level on behalf of Jeff Wulfson at the DESE, it is interesting to see what MVRCS SHOULD be being evaluated on.  

Comments we found most interesting have been bolded while our comments are in red.

The Common School Performance Criteria (Criteria) have been developed using the three guiding areas of charter school accountability defined in the current regulations, 603 CMR 1.00 – faithfulness to charter, academic success, and organizational viability.

The purposes of the Criteria are:

to bring alignment to the criteria used across all aspects of charter school accountability, from the application process to the renewal process;

to provide charter schools with clear guidance about how the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (Department) defines charter school success and on what basis charter schools will be evaluated; and

to clarify the connections between charter school accountability and state and federal accountability standards.

There is a wide range of sources of evidence that will provide the data to help charter schools, the Charter School Office, and the Commissioner and Board of Elementary and Secondary Education know if a charter school has met performance expectations. A partial list of evidence sources is attached after the Criteria.

            Unfortunately, the wide range of sources that are listed at the end of this document DO NOT include concerned parents other than those chosen by the school to participate in an interview.

Mission, Vision, and Educational Philosophy
The school is faithful to the mission, vision and educational philosophy defined in the charter application and any subsequent approved amendment(s).

           We once again find ourselves drawn to the Mission Statement from the 2003-2004 Annual Report and wonder how true the Board is staying to their original mission statement. If, as is stated below, ‘that a first rate education is the birthright of every child’ then why is has the lottery and waitlist come under such scrutiny these past few years and why are only certain families permitted entry? We’re also not seeing anything in this mission statement (or even the most recent one) pertaining to creating a school that places athletic facilities above academic needs.

MISSION STATEMENT
To establish a school which provides the opportunity of a world-class education. The prime characteristics being a well mannered disciplined and structured academic environment. One which promotes and incorporates certain core virtues, as well as, our common American culture, both which are embodied in our Declaration of Independence and our United States Constitution.
The Mystic Valley Regional Charter School was founded on the following principal:

·          That a first-rate education is the birthright of every child,

·          That all children can learn,

·         That every child should be challenged to reach his or her full potential.

The overachieving goals of the school are to:
•
Demonstrate the heights of academic achievement that public schools can routinely attain when the advantages of charter school governance are coupled with new academic standard,
•
Offer area families new choices in public education,
•
Create new professional opportunities for teachers that permit them to succeed,
•
Graduate well educated, civic minded, principal adults capable of thoughtful, logical reasoning.

AYP
The school makes Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the aggregate and for all statistically significant sub-groups.3
The school does not have a status for accountability purposes of Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring.

          But the school does, and has had a status of Corrective Action and/or Restructuring yet nothing is done about it.

Diverse learners
The school provides services for all students, including English language learners and those with disabilities and/or special education needs, as required by law.
The school implements and follows a Department approved recruitment and retention plan.

            Yes, another big one in our book. The DESE has ruled in a hearing that MVRCS was not providing an adequate education for a student, parents and teachers have filed numerous complaints with the DESE, and we have been in contact on several occasions YET NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

As for the ‘approved recruitment and retention plan’, the DESE has ‘directed’ MVRCS to place recruitment ads in languages other than English yet to our knowledge, they have not.

Professional climate
Teachers are provided with feedback and guidance that leads to improved instructional practice and student achievement.

Teachers can’t approach any Administrator at the school for assistance without it being used against them. Teachers receive less than adequate training and guidance in issues pertaining to Special Education matters.
The school implements a professional development plan that effectively addresses the needs of teachers.

Little attention is given to ‘professional development’ other than the hearing more of the same from the Administration. At no time do they have outside speakers come in to speak on matters that would matter or make a difference to the teachers professionally.

Teachers are provided with structures for collaboration.
The school establishes a professional climate resulting in a purposeful learning environment and reasonable rates of retention for school administrators, teachers and staff.

The retention issue at MVRCS is as joke. With Neil Kinnon believing a monkey could do what teachers do, it is no wonder that they feel underappreciated and disrespected. Again, the only retention plan in place is to hire and retain as many friends and family members as possible – regardless of their abilities or qualifications.

Curriculum
The school’s curriculum is documented, articulates the skills and concepts that all students must know and be able to do to meet state standards, is aligned horizontally and vertically, and supports opportunities for all students to master these skills and concepts.

The part we find interesting here is ‘ALL STUDENTS’….yes, Kathy Kinnon that means those students that have IEP’s and require additional services. Unfortunately we’ve been noting how few of the Special Education students actually pass the MCAS tests.

Decision making and communication
The school has clear and well-understood systems for decision-making and communication. These systems result in a common sense of purpose for all school constituencies.
               

                A ‘clear and well-understood systems for decision-making’ ----yes, all decisions are made by Neil Kinnon and based on his many years of formal education and training within an educational setting. Oh yes, that’s right, he doesn’t have ANY formal education or training in School Administration OR teaching (in fact, he doesn’t have any respect for the profession of teaching!).

Roles and responsibilities
The school defines and delineates clear roles and responsibilities among board and staff.

In one of the annual reviews the reviewer made mention of his concern for the lack of delineation between the Board and the day to day operations of the school.

Board oversight
The board of trustees makes use of best practices to hire (an) effective school leader(s).

Yes, friends and family members who agree to follow the orders of Neil Kinnon
The board of trustees regularly and systematically assesses the performance of (the) school leader(s) against clearly defined goals and makes effective and timely use of the evaluations.

Yes, the Board assesses the performance of school leaders in a very unbiased, honest, and ethical manner……EXCEPT of course those members of the friends and family club. How  Neil Kinnon can assess his sister in law , brother, childhood friend, friends of friends, etc. in an unbiased, truthful, ethical manner is beyond us…..because it doesn’t happen!

The board of trustees operates with a clear set of goals for the school and has developed a set of tools for understanding progress toward meeting those goals.

The board of trustees manages the school in a manner that ensures academic success, organizational viability, and faithfulness to the terms of its charter.

Is a response even necessary for this one? As long as you leave out corruption, unethical behavior, conflicts of interest, putting sports before academics, and back room deals, no comments are required.

School leadership
School leaders administer the school in a manner that ensures academic success, organizational viability, and faithfulness to the terms of its charter.

Are we referring to Dr. McCleary who is given little say beyond the art that is placed on the walls or Chris Finn who has the job only as a result of his childhood friendship with Neil Kinnon (yes, a Business Manager would naturally progress into an Assistant Director position - - - right?). Oh, what about Kathy Kinnon who does little besides make sure she is at the Chinese Buffet on Chinese New Years? Note to Kathy Kinnon….faithfulness to the terms of the charter would mean that all the students receive an education, even those who are on your poorly written IEP’s.

Organizational planning
The school has realistic plans for program improvement, possible future expansion, and adequate facilities based on evaluation and analysis of data.

We like ‘adequate facilities’ on this one….yes, they’ll have adequate athletic facilities and really, who cares about adequate facilities at the lower campus. So they’re a little cramped in there, just think how great it will be to have a state of the art athletic facility for yet another friend or family member to manage!

Family engagement
The school involves parents/guardians as partners in the education of their children.
Families and students are satisfied with the school’s program.

Yes, parents are partners as long as they remember that Neil Kinnon has the final say and that he ‘doesn’t have to have open meetings’ for them.

Coordinated Program Review

The school receives minimal findings in the Coordinated Program Review (CPR) process and immediately addresses any areas of non-compliance.

Funny, some issues have been addressed and re-addressed in multiple year visits yet no corrective action has been taken. Board of Trustees issue for one.

Safety
The school establishes and maintains a physically safe environment for students and staff.
The school establishes an environment free from harassment and discrimination for students and staff, and effectively addresses the social, emotional, and health needs of its students.

No discrimination in this school but if a student does do well they use systematic elimination. That isn’t discrimination is it….? Really?

Employee qualifications
Employees of the school meet all applicable state and federal qualifications and standards.

Ok so only 55% of the teachers are truly qualified (i.e. certified to teach in Massachusetts), oh well.

NonDiscrimination Laws, Specifically Retaliation.....

 We find this law incredibly useful and feel that all parents of students with any type of learning disabilities will as well as their children are covered under this law. Of specific interest to us (and we think should be to Neil Kinnon, Kathy Kinnon, and the Administration) is the portion directly related to retaliation against individuals who seek to provide information or encouragement to those protected under this law. MVRCS has been known to threaten and/or retaliate against individuals, teachers, and staff who attempt to provide guidance or assistance to parents who find themselves unsure of what to do next in effectively advocating for their child(ren). Teachers and staff members take note of this law and how it impacts how many of you are required to direct parents. Many parents have been subjected to harassment towards themselves and/or their children after attempting to advocate for their children. The 'systematic elimination' that the school is so well known for practicing would be considered as coercion and/or retaliation. We know of one teacher who was written up for making a suggestion to a parent that they seek private tutoring that focused on a particular methodology (other than that of the school). The schools actions were not only illegal according to this law but unethical and very much not in the best of the student (which should always be their main focus first and foremost). We suggest that everyone dealing with any student with a learning disability familiarize themselves with this law. We also suggest that parents with children who have behavioral issues who feel they are being railroaded also familiarize themselves with it.

From NonDiscrimination and Retaliation Law

TITLE 28 - JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 36 - NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND IN COMMERCIAL FACILITIES

subpart b - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

36.206 - Retaliation or coercion.

  (a) No private or public entity shall discriminate against any individual because that individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by this part, or because that individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under the Act or this part.

  (b) No private or public entity shall coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by the Act or this part.
  (c) Illustrations of conduct prohibited by this section include, but are not limited to:

(1) Coercing an individual to deny or limit the benefits, services, or advantages to which he or she is entitled under the Act or this part;

(2) Threatening, intimidating, or interfering with an individual with a disability who is seeking to obtain or use the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a public accommodation;

(3) Intimidating or threatening any person because that person is assisting or encouraging an individual or group entitled to claim the rights granted or protected by the Act or this part to exercise those rights; or

(4) Retaliating against any person because that person has participated in any investigation or action to enforce the Act or this part.

A Readers Comment Highlighted II

Every once in a while a reader will post something under an older post that we feel is worth sharing. This readers comments were posted under 'Special Education Issues at MVRCS (Special Education Issues at MVRCS Posting). We know that this gentleman isn't the only one to have a child facing these same issues at MVRCS and want others to know that they are not alone. Unfortunately we feel the need to warn the writer and others that MVRCS does not take lightly to being challenged nor would they welcome parents joining forces. It is a well known (and frequently experienced) fact that those who dare challenge the Board or Administration (especially in regards to Special Education issues which we believe are many) are subjected to various retaliation tactics. Children of these parents are often times retained and/or subjected to increased disciplinary actions (i.e. card changes, office visits, detentions) that make their existence there miserable. We must admit that Paul also makes some very valid points. We also suggest that any parent with a child with any diverse learning needs (be it a learning disability, ADD, ADHD, etc) know Special Education laws and enlist the assistance of an attorney or advocate when dealing with MVRCS regarding their child's education. Check out our list of Educational Advocates and Attorneys HERE.

Anonymous said...

I have a son with ADHD at MVRCS. In my opinion they are trying to railroad him out of the school. They do absolutely nothing to help him. They take pride in giving him detention after detention, never trying anything new to help him avoid detentions. It appears they take greet pride in punishing students. What is it that MMVRCS actually does to help students ? Not much. They can take a B student and give him/her twenty extra days of school a year and maybe they become a B+ student. Is that such a great accomplishment ? Not in my eyes. The true test is what they do, or don't do with kids like my son with ADHD. The answer is that they do nothing, and they are prod of it. We don't need these statements to be anonymous. We should stand together and have our voice heard. HHope to here from others iin the same position. Paul

An Old Mission Statement from the 2003-2004 Annual Report

Recently we published current MCAS scores and MVRCS approach at addressing prior years MCAS scores in comparison to current year scores. We find ourselves drawn back time and time again to the very unnecessarily complex manner in which they have adopted when discussing their scores in Annual Reports.
The term 'weighted composite average' seems like convoluted double speak. In an effort to unravel or make sense of their smoke screen, we began looking for a definition. We found the following definition for 'weighted average' at http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_weighted_average

A weighted average multiplies each data point by an arbitrary 'weight' and divides by the sum of the weights. Your everyday garden variety average, or arithmetic mean, is actually a special case of a weighted average, except all the weights are equal to 1.

Selection of weights are largely arbitrary but generally based on sound reasoning (e.g. relative population sizes). As another example, let's say you have 5 reviewers of a product giving their overall satisfaction rating. The scores are 9, 7, 6, 7, 3. However you have a very high regard for Reviewer 1 so you assign her a weight of 15 (and the others remain at weight=1).
The average score is (9+7+6+7+3)/5=6.4
The weighted average score is (15*9+7+6+7+3)/(15+4)=8.3
The weighted average is much closer to Review 1's opinion due to your weighting decision.

And we found the definition for composite at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/composite
and thought the the 'combining the typical or essential characteristics of individuals making up a group' definition was the most fitting. 

Ok, so now that we have a better understanding of a 'weighted composite average', the question must be asked why it should matter which sending district a student is from when considering test scores. Even more interesting is that while poking through the 2003-2004 Annual Report we came across their Mission Statement. It was then that we realized how conflicting their Mission Statement from 2003-2004 and their current method for analyzing and presenting MCAS scores within their Annual Report. If, as their Mission Statement claims they provide a "world-class education" where "a first-rate education is the birthright of every child, that all children can learn, and that every child should be challenged to reach his or her full potential then why does it matter which sending district a child is from? AND, we must ask, was this before Kathy Kinnon took over as the Special Education Director (or Coordinator) and the schools diverse learners started failing miserably? Further, given the numbers that we presented in earlier posts, we found most interesting the comment "demonstrate the heights of academic achievement that public schools can routinely attain when the advantages of charter school governance are coupled with new academic standard." Hmmm, given their current standing on unweighted,  uncomposited, and unaveraged scores it is no wonder that this is no longer part of their Mission Statement. Too bad they couldn't find a way to revert back to their founding principles.

From the MVRCS 2003-2004 Annual Report

MISSION STATEMENT
To establish a school which provides the opportunity of a world-class education. The prime characteristics being a well mannered disciplined and structured academic environment. One which promotes and incorporates certain core virtues, as well as, our common American culture, both which are embodied in our Declaration of Independence and our United States Constitution.
The Mystic Valley Regional Charter School was founded on the following principal:

•  That a first-rate education is the birthright of every child,

•  That all children can learn,

• That every child should be challenged to reach his or her full potential.

The overachieving goals of the school are to:
•
Demonstrate the heights of academic achievement that public schools can routinely attain when the advantages of charter school governance are coupled with new academic standard,
•
Offer area families new choices in public education,
•
Create new professional opportunities for teachers that permit them to succeed,
•
Graduate well educated, civic minded, principal adults capable of thoughtful, logical reasoning.

The Mission Statement from the 2008-2009 Annual Report found at www.doe.mass.edu/charter/reports/2009/annual/0470.doc. What happened to the Mission Statement from 2003-2004?

Mission Statement

            The mission of the Mystic Valley Regional Charter School is to provide the opportunity of a world class education characterized by a well mannered, disciplined and structured academic climate. Central to Mystic Valley’s academic environment is the incorporation of selected core virtues and the fundamental ideals of our American Culture, which are embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution

From Referral to IEP - A Timeline

We have heard time and time again from parents that they have been working with Kathy Kinnon and/or Special Education department for extensive periods of time in trying to determine if their child requires Special Education Services.  A few parents have mentioned that they felt as though the process is extensive and can take up to a year. This is NOT the case. Interestingly enough the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education have made mention within their visit reports of the school taking too much time to complete the process from referral to IEP. Many parents may not be aware that according to special education laws that the school is only permitted so much time between referral of a student to the convening of a team meeting. We’re providing some guidelines to help parents who may not be aware of the laws governing special education. We have much more information that we are happy to provide to parents with specific questions (especially regarding having outside evaluations completed, which we highly recommend). Most importantly, if you do not feel good about the IEP or the evaluation, don't just accept it! 

***PARENTS SHOULD RECEIVE A CONSENT FORM WITHIN 5 SCHOOL DAYS FROM THE TIME A REFERRAL IS SUBMITTED***

*** AN IEP MEETING SHOULD BE HELD WITHIN 45 SCHOOL DAYS FROM WHEN A PARENT SIGNS AND SUBMITS A CONSENT FORM***

The Special Education Process from Referral to IEP (information taken from DESE website)

1.      The Referral Process:

a.       Once a student has been referred for an evaluation by either a parent, teacher, or other professional, parents must be notified within 5 SCHOOL DAYS of the referral.

                                                              i.      Forms must meet certain requirements under state and federal law but mainly to seek parent consent for the evaluation to take place and allow parents the opportunity to meet with school officials to answer any questions, the reason for the referral, provide additional input, and what the evaluation will consist of.

2.      Evaluation Process:

a.       Once parents have signed the consent form and WITHIN 30 SCHOOL DAYS the school shall evaluate the child. The evaluation should:

                                                              i.      All assessments must be conducted by ‘appropriately credentialed and trained specialists’ per the DESE.

                                                            ii.      An evaluation should include all assessments that are related to the students suspected disability including:

1.      History of progress within general curriculum with input from teachers (we’d stress with both current and past year teachers for both background and perspective,

2.      Attention skills,

3.      Participation behaviors,

4.      Communication skills.

5.      Social relations with groups, peers and adults

                                                          iii.      Also to be included within this evaluation is a “narrative description” of the students potential, both academically and developmentally.

b.      Optional Assessments:

                                                              i.      A health assessment if a medical problem may limit the student’s success within an academic setting and/or academic successes.

                                                            ii.      Psychological assessment by a licensed school psychologist, licensed psychologist, or licensed educational psychologist, including an individual psychological examination.

                                                          iii.      A home assessment that may be conducted by a nurse, psychologist, social worker, guidance or adjustment counselor, or teacher and includes information on pertinent family history and home situation and may include a home visit, with the agreement of a parent.

c.       Assessment Reports and Results:

                                                              i.      A report shall be completed and submitted in writing what assessments were conducted, the results, and “shall define in detail and in educationally relevant and common terms, the student's needs, offering explicit (i.e. VERY SPECIFIC, DETAILED) means of meeting them.

                                                            ii.      Parents may request a copy of the summaries of assessments that are to be completed PRIOR to any discussion by the Team. These reports shall also be provided to parents at LEAST TWO DAYS IN ADVANCE of Team discussion.

3.      Development of the IEP:

a.       Convening the Team: WITHING 45 SCHOOL WORKING DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF A PARENT’S WRITTEN CONSENT to an initial evaluation or reevaluation, the school district shall:

                                                              i.      Provide an evaluation;

                                                            ii.      Convene a Team meeting

                                                          iii.      Determine if student requires special education services

                                                          iv.      Develop and IEP in accordance with state and federal laws (if deemed necessary)

                                                            v.      Provide parents with 2 copies of the proposed IEP and proposed placement

4.      Contents of an IEP:

a.       An IEP (Individualized Education Plan) is used for students who require special education services and is developed as a direct result of the evaluation and assessments that have been approved by the parents and conducted by the school.

                                                              i.      IEP’s describe what services and related services an individual student requires.

                                                            ii.      While developing a student’s IEP, the school shall consider the curriculum and standards of the school and develop and incorporate instructional methods that will allow student to progress effectively (i.e. identify what accommodations the student requires to succeed within the classroom)

b.      A few side notes on IEP’s:

                                                              i.       An IEP is a sort of road map of the student’s learning. Be sure that a starting point is identified (what the student can do now, reading level, comprehension issues, fluency, etc. and where the student will be and when).

                                                            ii.      DO NOT WAIT FOR A 1 YEAR FOLLOW UP MEETING, SET IT FOR 3 MONTHS TO ENSURE YOUR CHILD HAS PROGRESSED.