THE KATY PLAN:
The Katy Plan was the first action taken by Leonard Merrell after he
came to Katy ISD. A Strategic Plan is part and parcel of the Total Quality
Management scheme, and all public school superintendents do one.
They are not truly designed to serve as a "plan," as the "plan" is already set.
The exercise of creating one is designed to fool the public and to cover up the
true agenda. In this case the agenda was to continue the one set by the
previous superintendent, Hugh Hayes, which was to take Katy ISD down a left
leaning path. I did my best to stop them.
Hugh Hayes, had without any authorization from the Board of
Trustees, removed ability grouping from the Katy schools. That step alone,
which went pretty much unnoticed except by me, was clearly a death knell for
academics in our Katy public schools.
When ability grouping is removed, then all students are thrown together in all classrooms. If the student survives that kind of an educational model, he can, if he is able (and his parents have taught him the basics), enroll in PreAP and AP coursework toward the end of his public school education. But the number of students who make that cut is minimal. As a side note, the College Board has been taken over by David Coleman who helped write the curriculum for Common Core. Coleman was also Arne Duncan's roommate in college. Follow the dots, please. The point is, even the PreAP and AP courses are being affected by education reform (and that's not a good thing if one understands education reform.) Read elsewhere on this site the articles on AP American History this fall.
In a
heterogeneously grouped classroom, no student is served. It is unreasonable to
expect any teacher to be able to teach anything at all in a heterogeneously
grouped class, and what happens is that he/she teaches to the lowest level.
The other students either get the subject matter on their own, teach each other,
or miss out completely. Great way to develop an educated populace, yes?
The first order of business for the Katy Plan was for the
Board members to nominate citizens and employees to be on the Katy Plan
Committee. Here are my picks:
Selections for the Katy Plan Committee
Teachers:
Sandra Olson
Community Members
Parents
These were all people whom I knew to be very smart,
knowledgeable about students, and capable of helping me in my goal to return
academics to our Katy schools.
Here is the committee as it was formed by the superintendent,
Leonard Merrell and the Board President, Larry Moore:
The Plan Committee
Steering Committee Members
Joe Kimmel, Leonard Merrell, Larry Moore, Don Stacy*, Stanley
Thompson
Committee Members
Joe Adams, Linda Bailey, Jan Barnett, Alys Brasfield
(Shorter)*, Jim Brasier, Ken Burton, Ruth Ann Casci, Woodrow Coleman, Gloria
Hansen, Bill Haskett*, Mary McGarr, Roy Moore, Sandra Olson*, James Peters,
Barbara Pryor, Charles Rogers, Karen Rue*, Bob (Robert) Shaw, Judith Snyder
Please note the ones marked with an asterisk. They were
my selections. I imagine that some of them were selected because they got
nominations from other Board members too. I fussed mightily about the fact
that the committee only had two teachers on it.
Before I explain how the Plan unfolded, what follows is an
explanation of what I considered the most important part of this plan.
In April of 1996, when I was getting really fed up with
everything Leonard Merrell was trying to do, the Katy Plan was finished and
presented to the Board for a vote. We voted unanimously to implement the
plan. The Board and the committee during the discussions at the end were
clearly in favor of implementing ability grouping once again into the Katy
schools. A District committee to "review and evaluate present grouping
practices in Katy ISD and design [a] proposal to deliver effective instruction
for each student" was a part of the Plan as voted upon. I'm guessing that
when I left, that committee proposal disappeared as no effort was ever made to
change to ability grouping. Actually the intent of the Board was to
implement homogeneous grouping by 1998 (I still have the paperwork to prove
that). But the watered down version is what was presented but never
implemented.
What the committee had agreed upon, however, were these
stipulations:
There was to be, by 1998, implementation of homogeneous
grouping in grades four through twelve.
There would be "flexible grouping" (whatever that meant) in
grades K through two. Grade three would be a transition year. (What they
were doing was trying to drag their feet in case the program got implemented.)
Grades four and five would be grouped by reading ability.
At the secondary level, honors courses would be re-established
in English, history, science and math in grades six through twelve. And
Pre AP and AP courses would continue.
Placement in secondary honors courses would include
parent/student requests for entry. No one was to be denied entry at any
level.
I also tried to get someone active in creating that fourth
year of honors math (probably differential equations) for students who started
taking Algebra in the seventh grade. I was also very opposed to having Algebra
spread out over two years. In my opinion, having to do that was the
result of a poorly constructed math curriculum in the elementary grades.
They just humored me through this whole process. The
agenda was already set and coming down from the TEA (the assistant
superintendent of the previous administration had already told me that) so I
wasted my time that whole year. That's when I decided to resign a year
early from my Board position.
I'm always amused by the fact that Robert Shaw and Judy Snyder
claim on their Board resumes on the Board web site that they were members of
this committee. In those days, they were in favor of the return of
academics to our schools, but they've done a 180 since then. Too bad.
They could have had a legacy of accomplishment instead of being a part of the
academic deterioration of our schools.
The current superintendent (Alton Frailey) has convened a committee that has
been working for quite a while on HIS strategic plan. They are flying
under the radar, and I don't expect wonderful things from this process.
The process does not lend itself to anything but more educrat pap. I'll bet
there's no indication of returning academics in HIS plan either!
Part of the exercises the Katy Plan committee members endured had to do with breaking out into separate sub-committees to do the facilitator's bidding.
I was the chairman of the Benchmarking Committee. I am
posting our report to the main committee so that anyone can see that our intent
was clear. We wanted a return to ability grouping, to the teaching of
knowledge, not process, and we wanted no part of OBE.
BENCHMARK COMMITTEE’S REPORT
The Benchmark Committee
submits to the Katy ISD Plan Committee the following benchmark items.
These are arranged under each “deliverable” heading.
The Benchmark Committee wants the Plan to contain goals that reflect true
academic achievement for our students.
The Committee also
suggests that curriculum be developed so as to move back to the center with
regard to content versus process learning.
We believe a balance will
better serve our students.
The Committee believes
that the Committee of the Whole should develop the “measurables” for these
benchmarks.
These are our benchmark
items.
DELIVERABLE #1
A LONG TERM EDUCATIONAL PLAN THAT IS VISIBLE, DOCUMENTABLE AND
REPORTABLE.
[And yes, it galled me to have to use this stupid TQM vocabulary!]
High levels of academic
achievement shall be the expectation for students.
A table of
district-wide academic goals such as Round Rock’s shall be created.
(This sample table is
taken from the Round Rock ISD Curriculum Management Audit dated September
7, 1995)
“By June 1996, each
grade level tested on the TAAS shall perform at minimum expectations district
wide as follows:
GRADE
READING
WRITING
MATH
3
89%
85%
4
89%
93%
84%
5
90%
86%
6
91%
83%
7
91%
84%
8
89%
89%
80%
10
90%
96%
82%
In addition, each
campus shall achieve annual increases in order to meet a campus goal of 90% as
soon as possible, but no later than 1998.”
(These goals would, of
course, be adjusted to fit KISD populations.
Conceivably they would be district-wide goals.
The Benchmark Committee thought mastery goals would probably serve the
district in a more meaningful way especially since the TAAS test will continue
to be changed either in content or in levels of required passing
proficiency.)
Curriculum shall be
driven by high caliber course content, not tests.
DELIVERABLE #2
A SET OF FUNDAMENTAL OPERATING PRINCIPLES
Grades shall reflect
actual academic achievement. A review of all schools’ practices shall be
undertaken. A review of Algebra I and
Biology I grades in comparison to grades achieved on end of year exit exams
shall be conducted. A high degree
(at least 90%) of correlation is expected. Effort or participation grades shall
not be taken.
The level of
educational attainment (master’s degree) shall increase, by 25% every two years
for employed KISD teachers. The tuition costs for course work shall be borne by
the district. Course work requirements shall be set by the district. Courses
shall be primarily content based.
Related concerns include tying the acquisition to salary raises, implication for
future hires, and the cost of the program.
Eleventh and twelfth
grade counseling staff shall be better utilized by relieving them of clerical
duties related to class scheduling, so that they may better aid students with
school and post school planning. The
committee believes that this added emphasis and adult monitoring of academic
plans will better direct students’ academic endeavors.
The committee suggests that the Texas Scholars Program be implemented as
part of the counseling program in cooperation with business partners at the
junior high (8th grade) level.
Awareness of American
culture shall be the primary emphasis of cultural awareness activities.
Study hall periods at
the high school level shall be voluntary.
Spelling instruction
shall be a separate content area, shall be graded in all courses, and the use of
a spelling textbook shall be considered for elementary grades.
All writing shall be
graded for mechanics as well as content.
A review of minimum
credit requirements for high school students shall occur.
DELIVERABLE #3
A GENERAL PHILOSOPHY RELATING TO CORE CURRICULUM
Curriculum shall be
planned horizontally and vertically.
This benchmark embraces the idea of
skills mastery in a sequential and logical order for students.
It does not imply a need for integration of the curriculum across
disciplines.
All programs, before
implementation, shall have measurable goals and objectives, an evaluation plan
and schedule to show effectiveness, and a sunset time for modification or
termination in the event that the program is not effective.
Cost of the program shall be a consideration. All programs currently in
place shall be reviewed under these same guidelines.
Latitude shall be extended for programs such as Saxon math, if there are
measurable goals from other research prior to implementation.
Seventy per cent of
each day in elementary school shall be spent on academic tasks. (Lunch, recess,
transition time, time spent being read to, browsing time in the library, self
esteem programs, enrichment programs, art, music, physical education, et cetera
are not to be considered “academic.”)
Time studies shall be performed at each elementary school.
Removal of the teaming
concept at the seventh grade shall be considered.
Placement of the sixth
grade in elementary school shall be considered.
DELIVERABLE #4
GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR METHODOLOGIES TO DELIVER CURRICULUM
Ability grouping shall
be used, K-12. Flexible ability
grouping within the class shall be used in grades K through 2.
Grade three shall be a transition year when teachers, based upon
standardized achievement test scores, teacher appraisal, and other pertinent
factors (including reading level) shall determine placement for grades four and
five. Flexible ability grouping within the class may be used in third grade, but
ability grouping within the grade level shall be encouraged. Grades four and
five shall be grouped by reading ability. Honors courses shall be available in
every secondary school in English, history, science, and math (6 through 12).
Placement in secondary honors courses shall be according to policy amended to
include parental/student requests. Guidelines for retention in the
program shall be developed.
(Although not a part of our recommendation, it is important for the rest of the
committee as well as the administration to know that the Benchmark Committee has
serious concerns about maintaining high standards of achievement for honors
courses. We want to serve the large
majority of our students who wish to become prepared for college level work, but
who do not wish to enter the AP level of class work in every subject level.
We also want to maintain high standards for the “Regular” course level so
that it does not become equivalent to the previous “Basic” class track.
We want to have high expectations of achievement for all of our
students.)
The math curriculum
shall promote the basics with skill demonstration mastery occurring before the
use of calculators. Application of
skills and continuous review of previously learned skills shall occur. Reduction
of participation in the Kumon math program shall occur when similar drill
programs become incorporated into the regular curriculum.
A determination of
sixth grade students’ math readiness and ability shall be made at the beginning
of the sixth grade. At the end of the fifth grade students shall know
multiplication tables to 12 by rote, multiply and divide using fractions, work
with decimals to three places, and divide by at least three numbers using long
division. Identification of elementary schools that are not preparing students
adequately shall be determined and remediation shall ensue.
DELIVERABLE #5
MEASUREMENT AND TRACKING SYSTEM
Testing shall be
aligned with curriculum. This
benchmark implies testing to assure skills mastery and content retention.
It does not imply that tests will be designed so as to make the
curriculum appear to be successful.
Ninety-five percent of
all first graders shall be able to read fluently and on grade level at the end
of the first grade. A norm
referenced test, such as SAT7, shall be used to determine accomplishment.
Reading comprehension
on level by 90% of all students shall occur in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades.
Phonemic awareness
testing of all students shall occur by the end of the first grade, and
subsequently for every student who has failed the TAAS reading portion and who
has never been previously tested.
Of the students
qualified for algebra in the 7th or 8th grade, by 1999 at least 90% shall still
be taking a higher level math course (pre-calculus, calculus,?) in the 11th and
12th grades.
A set of teacher constructed end-of-course exams to be used in secondary schools (6 through 12) shall be created to measure student accomplishment in each academic course. The exams shall focus on common curriculum content across the district and shall provide data for improving lateral consistency and for setting district-wide levels of superior achievement.
Follow-up studies of
KISD graduates shall be conducted using all available data including, but not
limited to, ACT studies and a telephone survey of graduates two years after
their graduation. A sample of at
least 60 students randomly selected from each high school shall be used for the
telephone survey. (The committee believes that knowledge of our ability to
prepare students for post-secondary education or vocations can best be gauged at
the two year mark. Results of the
study, which shall be conducted in the summer of 1996 and every four years after
that, shall be used to adjust the curriculum if necessary.)
Specific curriculum shall be developed in ninth and tenth grade English classes for supporting SAT and ACT test taking strategies and familiarization of content such as that utilized in the Princeton Review.
In an effort to help Katy Plan committee members understand what the school district was trying to shove down their throats (without saying that), I talked the board into agreeing to bring Robert Holland to Katy. He came, and about 100 people came to listen to him. The committee obviously didn't want to know what he had to say as they had other plans. [Please read Robert Holland's columns where he documents the implementation of Outcome Based Education in the State of Virginia.]
Katy, Texas 77450
October 30, 1995
Editor
New Katy News
Dear Editor:
Robert Holland’s
reprinted column in your last week’s paper was well timed.
The governor of California has just signed legislation requiring their
schools to return to the use of phonics when teaching reading.
Unfortunately, big city newspapers refuse to print stories about sensible
educational initiatives in other states, so most people do not know when they
occur. California has responded to public opinion and to the leadership of the
California School Boards Association and will now return to the use of phonics
as THE way to teach reading in that state.
Mr. Holland’s columns,
as originally printed, were pretty much solely responsible for exposing Outcome
Based Education in the state of Virginia. Appearing over a year’s time, the
columns were apparently very effective in explaining OBE Doublespeak as Virginia
citizens voted out not only the legislators, but also the governor who had
tried to make Virginia an OBE beta site.
I have been trying for
three and a half years to get someone to pay attention to my concerns about
these academic issues in this state and in our school district.
Finally, some are beginning to see the light, but creating this light has
taken many people much time and effort.
You and your newspaper have been at the forefront in the Katy area, and I
applaud your diligence.
When I was initially
discovering the meaning of Outcome Based Education, Mr. Holland’s columns were
among the first I read which, in my opinion, were based solely upon a concern
for the dissolution of academic education in America.
Mr. Holland is a very intelligent columnist who is perceptive and able to
see through the hog-wash being pushed by the Departments of Education and of
Labor, business corporations that need a large pool of malleable and unskilled
workers, huge untaxed foundations, and college level schools of education.
The Benchmark committee that is working on its part of the Katy ISD Plan is hosting Mr. Holland for a speaking engagement on November 13 at Katy High School, and I hope that parents and educators will come and listen to what he has to say. I also hope that these same folks will take the time to read his columns as they appear weekly in your paper. Thank you for this effort.
A cartoon published in the New Katy News on May 20, 1995 (Note the Six to One "time" on the scoreboard! In
those days I referred to myself as "Six to One Mary" just to point out that I was opposed to much of what the rest of the
Board was doing.)
The editor of the New Katy News, George Scott, was trying to point out that the rest of the Board wasn't doing it's job with the "Katy Plan."
Ability Grouping Hot Point of Katy Plan
By Stephanie Johnson
This Week Correspondent
The
Houston Chronicle
March 1996
Despite concerns from parents that the Katy ISD Plan's proposed ability grouping: would be bad for students, the academic blueprint for the district's future appears headed for school board approval later this month.
However, Trustee Joe Kimmel said trustees probably only will approve district goals and "high-level" Katy Plan targets, saving ability grouping issues for another discussion.
Kimmel chaired the Katy ISD Plan's Steering Committee. Among other things, the Katy Plan proposes ability grouping primarily in the fourth and fifth grades by reading ability.
Trustees and district officials met with approximately 175 members of the public to unveil the Katy Plan at a special meeting at Taylor High School on March 5.
Kimmel said overall, the public was very receptive to the plan's many suggestions, and "were generally impressed with the level of detail and the amount of work that went into the plan."
Charles Rogers, public information officer for the district, said the 13 parents who spoke expressed concern that ability grouping would deny their children "socialization" opportunities with students of different ability levels and backgrounds.
Kimmel offered his take on the parents. "They're expressing concerns about the average and special-needs children, about their ability to interact with the whole cross section of students at a school," he said. "I think that's the isse.[sic] If you isolate children by ability group, they don't get to interact with the full cross-section of students."
Both trustees Mary McGarr, who chaired the Katy ISD Plan's Benchmarking committee, and Kimmel said after the meeting that Katy already practices some form of ability grouping.
McGarr said flexible ability grouping within classrooms is based on students' reading levels. And, Kimmel said honors classes and the district's Challenge gifted-and-talented program constitute another form of ability grouping.
"There appeared to be a concerted effort by a group of people that were associated with one of our programs, Project TYKE, and those parents had some concerns about the ability program and I understand very well what their concerns are and understand why they have those," McGarr said.
Project TYKE is for special-needs preschoolers. McGarr said the Katy Plan does not propose eliminating the so-called "inclusion" program, which places special-needs students in regular education classrooms.
McGarr said her committee felt very strongly all students deserve a challenging curriculum --not just gifted students. She said ability grouping actually will enhance the curriculum of so-called average students, for whom, "It's like OK, you're regular, let's sit here and look out the window together."
"We need to improve on that," she said.
Under the guidelines presented by the Benchmarking Committee, students would be able to move from one ability grouping to another at either their or their parents' or teachers' suggestions, McGarr said. This safeguard would prevent "labeling" that would trap students at one level or another.
"I don't know what the objection can be," she said. "Teachers, in my opinion want to see this."
Additionally, teachers would be rotated between ability groups so the district's best teachers can teach "those who have the most difficulty learning."
She faulted the district for focusing only on students at both ends of the academic spectrum. While 85 percent of students in the district say they want to attend college, only 25 percent of those actually finish four-year programs.
"There's something wrong when you've got the student body that we've got in this school district, and larger numbers of students are not graduating form college," she said.
The Katy ISD Plan, she said, "benefits all children. They need help at all levels, and this plan addresses that."
[As a postscript I would point out that public schools do not exist to provide "socialization" opportunities for students! Public schools are supposed to provide ACADEMIC opportunities for students in the best manner possible, and ability grouping allows for that. PARENTS are supposed to provide their children with "socialization" opportunities on their own time and at their own, not the taxpayer's, expense!]