1st Place: Ryan Ibarra, Morrow County
2nd Place: Jessica Carter, Grant County
3rd Place: Lilly Daggett, Umatilla County
4th Place: Ashley Switzer, Malheur County

Division 2, Grades 6 - 8

1st Place: Kaitlynn Linnell, Morrow County
2nd Place: Holly Lougee, Umatilla County
3rd Place: Zack Clark, Malheur County

Division 3, Grades 9 - 12

1st Place: Vallen Sipes, Malheur County
2nd Plac: Samantha Greif, Grant County
3rd Place: Presley Pahl, Umatilla County

CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL!

ACADEMY is a week-long experience allowing talented and highly motivated students to explore a broad range of classes, lectures, cultural events, and recreational activities. The SOU summer ACADEMY program, which is entering its twenty-seventh year of operation, has long been recognized as an outstanding educational opportunity for students in the Pacific Northwest. Students selected for each residential session on the Southern Oregon University campus in Ashland interact with peers of similar abilities while being challenged by creative, imaginative instructors and activities.

Student applications are available at the SOU Academy Website.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Opportunity

• A two-day training for all participants
• An additional third day session for designated participants to receive specific training to become Moving Math Education Forward professional development providers
• A chance for team leaders to apply for Oregon’s Professional Development: Moving Math Education Forward Implementation Grant

Locations and dates

• Central Oregon, June 16-18, 2009 – Sisters High School (Sisters)
• Eastern Oregon, June 24-26, 2009 – Eastern Oregon State Univ. (LaGrande)
• Southern Oregon, July 7-9, 2009 – Southern Oregon State Univ. (Ashland)
• Willamette Valley, July 13-15, 2009 – Lane ESD (Eugene)
• Malheur Institute, July 22-24, 2009 – Nyssa
• Oregon Math Leaders’ Institute, August 3-5, 2009 (3 parallel sessions offered) – Linfield College (McMinnville)

Registration Information:

Registration Packet (due by March 16, 2009)

Mathematics-Professional Development webpage

Contacts:

Paul Hibbard
503-947-5610
paul.hibbard@state.or.us
Tanya Frisendahl
503-947-5754
tanya.frisendahl@state.or.us

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Pilot Rock Team

The first 2009 Eastern Oregon Knowledge Bowl Competition happened on February 19th. High School competitors from around the region converged on Echo High School for a battle of the brains smackdown! Results for the competition can be found in the forum. A slide show for the event can be viewed by clicking on the photo above.

The news has been out for some time that our neighbors to the North, Washington State, will soon replace the WASL (Washington Assessment of Student Learning). This test was almost universally derided by everyone in the state except for the educational  bureaucracy and the business community. Even with the deep pockets of such supporters as Bill Gates, the overwhelming outrage of Washington State parents finally prevailed. The masses are demanding that the Education Accountability Movement put up or shut up. Goodbye Terry Bergeson and Huzzah for the grass roots!

Unfortunately, replacing a really bad test test with a somewhat less bad test isn’t good enough. Randy Dorn, the new Superintendent of Public Education, acknowledges that the WASL has problems, but does he understand the nature of those problems? Can a valid test even be constructed? Does it even matter? In an article in the Seattle Times, Gerald Bracey writes:

But the bigger validity question is: Does the test make any difference? Are college professors more pleased with students who have passed the test? Are employers? The answer is a resounding, “We don’t know.” States are afraid to ask this question because, if the answer comes up, “No,” they will be seen to have spent millions, even billions, of dollars for nothing.

Read the whole article here: Replace the WASL but do it right

The funding prospects for public education look bleak. Despite incessant prognostication from policy makers and pundits, no one really knows exactly how bad it will get, but it’s likely the eventual financial situation will fall somewhere in the range of “very bad” to “awful.” Cost reductions are a certainty. Already in Oregon, districts are considering, or have decided to reduce instructional days to save money. The savings will come (of course) from reducing paid days for teachers. Children will pay through a reduction in instructional time. In tough times, everyone must bear a burden. It is a fact that the largest cost in public education is teacher compensation. Teacher salaries and benefits account for something in the range of 70% of overall education costs. Other costs include facilities, instructional materials, lunch programs, and general administrative costs. Some of those costs provide bennefits directly to children. It would simply be unfair to them if cost reductions were concentrated in those areas. My modest proposal:

match any cuts in direct services to children with equal cuts (by percentage of  overall funding) in administrative and other costs that don’t translate to direct service to children.

How could we possibly do that? Here are some ideas:

• Limit compensation and benefits for administrators to %130 of the average salary of teachers in a district.
• Reduce the number of administrators in each district, particularly central office administrators.
• Reduce funding for the Oregon State level education Bureaucracy — ODE, TSPC, and other non-direct service agencies.

In order to make this fair, we must also reduce the amount of educational accounting that administrators are expected to do. To this end, cuts must also be made in assessment programs and the attendant consulting services that support them. Everyone must share the burden.

For at least a quarter of a century, the standards and accountability movement and their partners in the various business roundtables, testing companies, and laissez faire think tanks have held sway over all aspects of educational design. Lately, a noticeable and persistent departure of accountability proponents from policy making positions has become apparent. This recent and ongoing exodus of educational policy makers can be likened to rats abandoning a sinking ship.

Of course rats abandon ship so that they may seek mischief elsewhere, and with each admission of failure, standards and accountability proponents complain that the real problem is that “we didn’t do it right.” For those involved in public education long enough, this sounds much like the complaints of the “whole language movement” or the “new math movement” when their promises of a transformed educational system didn’t pan out.

Accountability and standards proponents will seek to reinvent themselves over the coming months. We put put ourselves in peril if we continue to listen to their discredited ideas. It might not be too long before we here something like: “We must destroy public education in order to save it,” a morbid echo of other failures now decades old. A different future will require greater courage from a currently cowardly profession.

Here is an example article from the National Review proclaiming that the standards and accountability movement has failed.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

You can view over 100 photos taken by the IMEF’s resident photographer, Helene Burns, by clicking on the following link:

2008 June Jam Photos

• Creating Wonderful Readers & Nothing Less
• Humor & Communication Workshop
• Touch Math Training at UBESD

Please contact the UBESD if you havve questions.