My Fifth Email to the BOE on Possible Causes for the Decline and Suggestions on How to Repair Them
A disquieting aspect of the last BOE meeting was how unaware the BOE majority and Superintendent were of the declines in our proficiency. And then, more disturbing, was an attempt to make Dr. Foregger and Ms. Khanna look foolish or silly for even bringing it up. The BOE majority expected Dr. Foregger to be prepared with all the details yet never even considered how alarming it was that they had no such expectation of the Superintendent, who should have reported on this first thing in the meeting. Or how shocking it might seem to those of us watching the meeting when Five BOE members admitted to not having any idea what Dr. Forreger was referencing. And even more shocking when the BOE accepted Dr. Varley’s explanations for the decline – explanations that would take 2 minutes to understand made no sense- and hid the conversation in a committee the public has no access to.
Our school culture is divorced from any real or meaningful measurement and does not authentically celebrate Math, Science, or anything academic.
Presentations on data and information appear to occur in a silo, and to that end, the former Assistant Superintendent in a BOE Meeting (I believe two years ago) informed the public that the District was considering moving away from using state data (that provides the public an objective comparison point to other schools)and seeks to focus on internal data.
The District does not measure to understand – it creates instruments that create information it can bend any way it wants.
Last year I asked Dr. Varley about our proficiencies and provided you with that email exchange. Do any of you believe that the responses I received to that email came from someone with any command of our proficiency results? Seven months later, the most recent developments are even more disturbing, and she is still unprepared to discuss this? Is a BOE Member asking the Superintendent about measures discussed in the community for over seven months and, more recently, with the declines, a “gotcha question?” If the answer to the question is “yes,”; then it confirms every suspicion the public has about how the BOE and this administration prioritize education.
Why aren’t these results with goals connected to each school not posted on the District’s social media page? Does the Superintendent have measurable targets related to proficiencies with comparative data as benchmarks for her performance evaluation?
What has the Superintendent done to cultivate a culture of pride in our math, science, and ela proficiencies?
Do we have academic pep rallies? Does that sound silly to you, and if it does, why?
Have you ever heard the Superintendent say that a School Sports team lost a game because “they don’t care”? or “They are elite athletes, so they just gave up-? What do you want me to do about it?”
How in the world is this acceptable to you?
How is this okay?
And it’s not just Academics.
When asked repeatedly about DEI, as an example, the Superintendent claimed that it could not be measured. How convenient – the one area she prides herself as being an expert and innovator on cannot be evaluated with hard data. Yet the state of NJ can measure DEI in its climate survey so can Universities – hell, even Biology Departments have participated in surveys that seek to measure critical aspects of DEI .
Yet the best the District can come up with is a highly compromised survey that:
(1) Does not operationalize what it seeks to measure to the point where a reasonable person cannot even determine what its’ purpose is
(2) An “anonymous sample” which completely undermines the confidence that the respondents are actually the stakeholders the District wants to hear from OR that they are actually “confidential” and District parents were misinformed about tracking (a very big ethics no-no)
(3) That was designed in a way that is clear to everyone to engineer information the District can twist to mean whatever it wants.
You should know that the survey sent to parents on word study was a running joke for about a week in the school community.
If you are not celebrating or measuring something correctly or at all, you are telling students and parents that “it doesn’t matter.” If the highest level of this District refuses to be held accountable with data, then why should our students? What clarity do teachers have on the academic goals of the District? What are their thoughts on what can correct our proficiency problem? Why should students be the only people in the District that get marks?
Last year (before the most recent declines to what was an already problematic proficiency issue within the District), I wrote an article on what the District could do to improve, and they are the body of my recommendation for repairing this factor.
Having interim targets or long-term objectives in our community plan can be very valuable:
(1) Having targets present in our planning documents and as part of the ongoing conversations solidifies them as priorities – goals and objectives people are unaware of are of no use at all. One of the main reasons goals are established is to give individuals and teams direction and reinforcement of that outcome. Could you imagine being evaluated on goals you weren’t aware of or were never really discussed with you at your job?
(2) Having goals present can lead to discussions about and the development of interim internal measures that mirror the state targets. These can allow us to compare ourselves to other Districts that keep track of and report on their progress. It can allow us to reach out to these districts and discuss differences in approach that may explain differences in outcomes from a similar basis more frequently in real time.
(3) Having the information front and center allows the public and the District to ask more relevant questions because as it becomes a more significant part of the culture people pay attention more to the decisions made with those goals in mind -there is clarity on what is important when there are competing priorities.
(4) It reminds the BOE that while State targets are important, they are ultimately accountable to our community. Berkeley Heights may feel the state targets are too low. Maybe the majority of people in Berkeley Heights feel 80% [much lower now] on Algebra I is simply unacceptable for a District with our resources and applies public pressure on the District to aim higher.It’s not as simple as saying that a copy and paste of state goals would make everyone happy – but that starting point alone could potentially bring a lot of value.
Think about this.
We constantly talk about how our sports teams are doing – and we should. We celebrate wins, mourn losses, we review scores, we follow stats on an individual level even – so far as to report them on the local news EVERY WEEK. As we get more excited about our teams, we post pictures and talk about things like getting new lights for fields (I think we have petition going around with three million signatures)- we are motivated to invest in them more because we have bought into their success. Shouldn’t we at least do a fraction of that when it comes to Math and Science?
And while more years to accomplish the state targets than many parents thought we had is good, what is the plan for that time? More time by itself doesn’t ensure a better outcome. Do you, as a parent, have a good command of what the District is doing in that time? The evidence connected to that plan? What can we reasonably expect concerning measurable gain (not something state targets can answer)? Does the District have internal mechanisms to measure progress? (source)
These targets can be discussed at the next BOE meeting when the Superintendent discusses her evidence to support that COVID and apathetic AP Students are why we experienced the most significant declines while having the highest per-pupil costs out of the seven comparable schools in our area.
I will add that the Superintendent’s evaluation should include these targets, and her performance evaluation this year should seek to hold her accountable for the results we’ve seen and establish benchmarks for the next round. It is clear that the performance of our leadership needs to be tied to the success of all our students.
Related Articles:
Possible Factors Connected to the Decline of Berkeley Heights Schools: Family Engagement
Impact of Reconfiguration & School Transitions on Students and the BHPSNJ Decline
Reassignments, Resignations and the Berkeley Heights Public School District’s Decline
Putting It All Together – Rankings, Ratings, Proficiency and Budget
Five More Snapshots of the BHPSNJ Decline
4 thoughts on “Culture, Data and Measurement: Possible Factors Connected to the BHPSNJ Declines”