About Me

My photo
1970 graduate of Hemingway High, Hemingway, S.C. 1973 graduate of Francis Marion College, Florence, S. C. (History - B. A.) 1973 Human Relations Award (Chesterfield County School District, S. C.) 1981 M. Ed. (University of S. C.) 1982 Teacher of the Year (St. James Middle School, Myrtle Beach, S. C.) 1988 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Conway Chamber of Commerce) 1989 South Carolina Governor’s School Teacher Recognition Award 1991 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Horry County) 1992 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Horry County) 1992 South Carolina U. S. History Teacher of the Year (D. A. R.) 1992 South Carolina House of Representatives Award for Outstanding Achievements 1993 Teacher of the Year (Socastee High, Myrtle Beach, S. C.) 1993 Horry County District Teacher of the Year 1993 South Carolina Honor Roll Teacher of the Year 1998 Wellman, Inc. Golden Apple Award 2000 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching) 2003 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching) 2004 Joseph B. Whitehead Educator of Distinction Award 2005 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching)

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Meaningful Stakeholder Engagement NOT Supported in Race to the Top - District Federal Grant Application

The following, copied email, was sent to the superintendent of Horry County Schools, the members of the Horry County Board of Education, selected media, and the professional staff of Socastee High School on Sunday, November 3, 2013:
 
 
Socastee Family,

 

 

Horry County Schools claims the following happened in the development of our Race to the Top application.  This is taken from pages 25-27 of section B of our consortium's submitted application.  (We filed a joint application with districts in the states of Washington, Michigan, Idaho, Texas, Alabama, and North Carolina.  By rules of the application, all are bound to all of its statements and assertions.) 

 

 

“Meaningful stakeholder engagement is absolutely essential … engagement must occur at each and every level of our Consortium, must include the active solicitation of feedback that is responded to and acted upon, must be iterative, and must encompass both those directly impacted by the actions of the Consortium --- the teachers, parents, and students of each participating LEA…”

 

“In this section, we provide clear evidence of the process we utilized to engage key stakeholders in robust and meaningful ways… how each participating LEA has engaged stakeholders within its local community."

 

“Each participating district initiated a series of stakeholder engagement strategies aimed at introducing principals, teachers, students, parents, and community members to the RTT-D opportunity, the Consortium’s vision of personalized learning, and the details of the proposal.  Building upon these strategies of comprehensive outreach, each participating district provided stakeholders the opportunity to provide feedback.”

 

“Recognizing the importance of receiving feedback from staff at participating schools, some districts determined the best course of action was to convene teachers at on-site meetings.  Horry County Schools, for example, scheduled meetings at each participating school, preceding each meeting with a detailed description of the content of the Consortium’s vision of personalized learning.”

 

“Our Consortium enjoys the widespread support of teachers within each member LEA.  It is our belief that this support stems, in part, from our inclusion of teachers in the iterative process of the proposal’s development."

 

The totality of the so-called "evidence" provided by Horry County Schools includes four agendas, all with the Race to the Top as one item among many.  The only other “evidence” presented is a 1 and ½ page summary of the Race to the Top grant discussed at a board work session which took place four days after teachers voted on the application.  The following is taken from pages 1-57, the "evidence" section of Appendix B. 

 

 



P. 50    (SC)    AGENDA     Principal Cabinet     Race to the Top (one agenda item)      9/11/13


P. 51    (SC)    AGENDA        Horry County Board of Education (Work Session)           9/16/13                         

                                                Race to the Top Approval (item # 4) – Special Called Meeting

PP. 52-53        (SC)    Race to the Top (1and ½ page summary)                                       9/16/13                     

                                    Presented to Horry County Board of Education at work session

PP. 54-56        (SC)    AGENDA        Executive Cabinet Meeting                                    8/27/13                   

                                    Debrief of 8/26/13 board meeting [item 4b – discussion]           

                                    Race to the Top grant, item # 2

P. 57                (SC)    AGENDA       A-Team Meeting      9 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.                 9/11/13            

                                    Core Values / Race to the Top (11:40-11:50)      one item

 

To think that we were involved in all of this for less than one day, it makes my blood boil.  Oh, we were needed, our signatures of support, only because the district had to have evidence of 70% faculty support, a requirement in the application process.  I will not be professionally abused and used, without publicly challenging this nonsense.  No, I am not Bill Gates, Pearson, Apple, and all of those who have money and power on their side.  I am one voice with truth on my side.  I like those odds.

If you are interested in greater detail concerning this topic, study the e-mail I sent out yesterday.  For your convenience, it follows:

 

Socastee Family, Dr. Elsberry, Members of the Horry County Board of Education, and Selected Media,

Please take the time to study the following.  This should be VERY IMPORTANT  to all professional educators and citizens in Horry County and the other six member districts of our Consortium with respect to our application for the Race to the Top - District  (RTT-D) federal grant.  If I have made any errors of fact or in my evaluation, please correct me.

Bobby

 

Stakeholder Engagement in the Development of our Race to the Top Grant Application (Facts) 

 

Section B4 of our 2013 Race to the Top grant application is “Stakeholder engagement and support.”  Our district and consortium have to show “The extent to which each LEA (local education agency) has demonstrated evidence of --- Meaningful stakeholder engagement in the development of the proposal and meaningful stakeholder support for the proposal, including --- a)  A description of how students, families, teachers, and principals in participating schools (as defined in this notice) were engaged in the development of the proposal and, as appropriate, how the proposal was revised based on their engagement and feedback.

Section B4 of our submitted application indicates that evidence for the above can be found in Appendix B.  The first page of Appendix B, the table of contents, cites evidence for B4 on pages 1-57 and refers to it as “Documentation of Stakeholder Engagement Strategies and Feedback.”

The totality of this evidence is listed below and each state participant cited:

P. 1      (WA)   Race to the Top – League of Innovative Schools – Consortium Application             Principal Meeting Agenda (9 principals/3 directors/1 chief of staff/1 CIO             9/5/13

______________________________________________________________________________

P. 2      (NC)    Letter to Parents – from Mark Edwards (Sup’t.) – notification of RTT-D grant application – questions can be addressed to ______          no date

P. 3     (NC)    Letter to Parents --- Mooresville Middle School ---  sent out from homerooms        9/10/13  (copy of above)

P. 4      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- Parkview Elementary --- in teacher boxes ---   9/9-10/13  (copy of above)        

P. 5      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- East Mooresville Intermediate --- sent home to parents     9/9/13  (copy of above)

P. 6      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- Mooresville Intermediate --- sent home to parents       9/11/13   (copy of above)

P. 7      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- South Elementary --- parent notification letters            9/6/13 (copy of above)

P. 8      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- Rocky River Elementary --- from students to parents          9/9/13 (copy of above)

P. 9      (NC)    Letter to Parents --- Mooresville High --- from students to parents            9/12/13   (copy of above)

______________________________________________________________________________

­­­­PP. 10-30          (TX)    Principal Survey (3 pp.)         7 completed                                      no dates

______________________________________________________________________________

P. 31    (ID)     AGENDA        Superintendent’s Community Advisory Council                  3/5/13                         no specific mention of Race to the Top

P. 32    (ID)     AGENDA        Superintendent’s Youth Leadership Council                  9/17/2012                   Race to the Top (one agenda item – 8 schools listed)

P. 33    (ID)     AGENDA        Superintendent’s Council of Presidents                         10/3/2012                Race to the Top (one agenda item)

PP. 34-35        (ID)     UNDETERMINED (list of names and groups)                                  9/5/13

PP. 36-40        (ID)     Race to the Top – Staff Survey (8 schools)                                       no date

PP. 41-49        (ID)     Race to the Top – Parent Survey (8 schools)                                     no date

P. 50    (SC)    AGENDA        Principal Cabinet                                                                9/11/13                       Race to the Top (one agenda item)

P. 51    (SC)    AGENDA        Horry County Board of Education (Work Session)           9/16/13                       Race to the Top Approval (item # 4) – Special Called Meeting

PP. 52-53        (SC)    Race to the Top (1and ½ page summary)                                9/16/13                      Presented to Horry County Board of Education at work session

PP. 54-56        (SC)    AGENDA        Executive Cabinet Meeting                   8/27/13                    Debrief of 8/26/13 board meeting [item 4b – discussion]                   Race to the Top grant, item # 2

P. 57                (SC)    AGENDA       A-Team Meeting      9 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.              9/11/13             Core Values / Race to the Top (11:40-11:50)      one item

Michigan         NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED

Alabama         NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED

 

 

For Your Analysis

Questions: 

1)     Is there anything “meaningful” in the facts presented that can qualify as “evidence” of “engagement” in the “development” of the “proposal”?  Notice the dates closely.  Think about how much time would be needed for “meaningful stakeholder engagement.”

 

 

2)     No evidence is given from any district in our consortium for “how the proposal was revised based on their engagement and feedback.”  Could it be that engagement and feedback were virtually non-existent?  One cannot revise something without something to revise.  What do you think?

 

3)     One form letter notifying parents of the Race to the Top grant application from seven schools in North Carolina sent out in close proximity to the time Horry County Schools’ teachers were asked hurriedly to give their support to the application would lead one to believe that there was very little time for any “meaningful engagement,” and any questions parents might have about the details of the grant could not possibly be answered in time to have any significant effect on the content of the application.  What do you think?

 

4)     How much “evidence” does Horry County give to defend its “engagement” of students, families, teachers, and principals?

 

5)     The totality of the evidence provided by Horry County Schools includes four agendas, all with the Race to the Top as one item among many.  The only other “evidence” presented is a 1 and ½ page summary of the Race to the Top grant discussed at a board work session which took place four days after teachers voted on the application.  There was certainly no time to consider any feedback for revision, none even presented, after the board voted unanimously that night to support our application.  What do you think?

 

6)      How consistent is the presented evidence with the following quotations taken from section B-4 of our district’s and consortium’s submitted grant application”? (B-25-27)

 

“Meaningful stakeholder engagement is absolutely essential … engagement must occur at each and every level of our Consortium, must include the active solicitation of feedback that is responded to and acted upon, must be iterative, and must encompass both those directly impacted by the actions of the Consortium --- the teachers, parents, and students of each participating LEA…”

 

“In this section, we provide clear evidence of the process we utilized to engage key stakeholders in robust and meaningful ways… how each participating LEA has engaged stakeholders within its local community."

 

“Each participating district initiated a series of stakeholder engagement strategies aimed at introducing principals, teachers, students, parents, and community members to the RTT-D opportunity, the Consortium’s vision of personalized learning, and the details of the proposal.  Building upon these strategies of comprehensive outreach, each participating district provided stakeholders the opportunity to provide feedback.”

 

“Recognizing the importance of receiving feedback from staff at participating schools, some districts determined the best course of action was to convene teachers at on-site meetings.  Horry County Schools, for example, scheduled meetings at each participating school, preceding each meeting with a detailed description of the content of the Consortium’s vision of personalized learning.”

 

“Our Consortium enjoys the widespread support of teachers within each member LEA.  It is our belief that this support stems, in part, from our inclusion of teachers in the iterative process of the proposal’s development."

 

 

My Evaluation

 

Having taught document analysis for many years, I can find almost nothing “meaningful” about our Consortium’s “evidence” for “stakeholder engagement and support.”  Idaho seems to have done a better job than the other districts, albeit insufficient, by at least surveying staff and parents of eight schools on some of the content of the application.  North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington present such little evidence that it probably should not be considered evidence at all.  There is certainly nothing meaningful about it.  Michigan and Alabama give absolutely no evidence.  Numerous statements in the application proper (see # 6 above), then, are NOT supported in Appendix B (evidence section).  The question arises, “Was this intentional or an oversight?”  It has to be one of the two.  Either answer is not a good one.

I am still waiting for the last question I submitted to Horry County Schools as part of my Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to be answered, to address its claim to have “scheduled meetings at each participating school, preceding each meeting with a detailed description of the content of the Consortium’s vision of personalized learning” for the purpose of “receiving feedback from staff.”  No one at Socastee High School has identified any such meeting as having taken place.

The only meeting that even comes close might be the countywide televised presentation Superintendent Cynthia Elsberry made at the beginning of this school year in which she presented a brief overview of our forging ahead with technology innovations and the need for all of us to “get on board.”  There was definitely no detailed presentation on the RTT content or our application and absolutely no attempt to gain meaningful feedback from teachers in its aftermath. 

I had perfect attendance last year and this year, and to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a scheduled meeting at Socastee High School for the express purpose of getting input from me or any other professional staff member on our Race to the Top application and/or its detailed content. 

If the above did occur and what I have claimed in my recent opposition can be shown to be false, I will make a public apology to Horry County Schools.  On the other hand, I expect the Horry County Board of Education to take some public action on all of this, if what I have claimed proves to be true.  Accountability must be important to someone besides me.

Finally, as a professional educator and one who was supposed to be involved in an iterative process for the development of our district’s Race to the Top application, long before being asked for my support, I believe I have been professionally abused and taken advantage of.  I am seen as an afterthought in a process in which money and what the district wants is more important than my professional input.  I am especially incensed that our application makes statements that cannot be supported.

I simply want justice to be done, no matter how corny that sounds.  I cannot, in good conscience, teach about the principles upon which our great nation was founded and not act on them.

As a citizen first, and a teacher second, my interest and responsibility (duty) concerning how teachers and others are treated by Horry County Schools and other governmental entities around our country demand that I act publicly.

 

 

Sincerely, respectfully, professionally, 

Bobby Chandler

 

Teacher (Socastee High School, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina)

 

International Baccalaureate Advanced Placement United States History

International Baccalaureate Twentieth Century World Topics

 

722 Pine Drive, Surfside Beach, South Carolina   29575

No comments:

Post a Comment