New LEAP related coaching position mandates (unfunded mandates from DCPS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

That is all great, but then DCPS should take the money that they spent before in central and give it to the schools to implement it, and not foist an unfunded mandate on them. This is a substantial real hit to many schools' budgets.

Keep in mind this budget is a proposal. Council still has to approve, right?

So... did anyone go to the Budget meeting with the Mayor last night to express your opinion? Are you reaching out to your councilmember and/or to Grosso?

Stop complaining and start lobbying people!

My understanding is that the schools are in charge of teacher training. The training effectiveness has been questioned by the teachers and admin. This was a development created to address real and localized issues that vary by school instead of a one-size-fits all training brought on my DCPS. These schools already have that funding- it was just used for teacher training before.

I can tell you that we have no funding for this. The funding was previously picked up by central. This means real cuts to schools.

(fixing formatting)

Keep in mind this budget is a proposal. Council still has to approve, right?

So... did anyone go to the Budget meeting with the Mayor last night to express your opinion? Are you reaching out to your councilmember and/or to Grosso?

Stop complaining and start lobbying people!

[Anonymous]

Leap/IMPACT webinar anyone? I tried but couldn't access it.

[Anonymous]

Does this impact every single school? Or is there a list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

That is all great, but then DCPS should take the money that they spent before in central and give it to the schools to implement it, and not foist an unfunded mandate on them. This is a substantial real hit to many schools' budgets.

My understanding is that the schools are in charge of teacher training. The training effectiveness has been questioned by the teachers and admin. This was a development created to address real and localized issues that vary by school instead of a one-size-fits all training brought on my DCPS. These schools already have that funding- it was just used for teacher training before.

I can tell you that we have no funding for this. The funding was previously picked up by central. This means real cuts to schools.

yes. In effect it means principals have to shift teaching resources to coaching in order to implement LEAP.

[Anonymous]

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

That is all great, but then DCPS should take the money that they spent before in central and give it to the schools to implement it, and not foist an unfunded mandate on them. This is a substantial real hit to many schools' budgets.

[Anonymous]

However, this isn't a good plan for schools that are not doing well. If they had strong leadership and excellent trainers AND enough resources then they would be in a better position. It has nothing to do with the population of students and everything to do with having a leg to stand on in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

That is all great, but then DCPS should take the money that they spent before in central and give it to the schools to implement it, and not foist an unfunded mandate on them. This is a substantial real hit to many schools' budgets.

My understanding is that the schools are in charge of teacher training. The training effectiveness has been questioned by the teachers and admin. This was a development created to address real and localized issues that vary by school instead of a one-size-fits all training brought on my DCPS. These schools already have that funding- it was just used for teacher training before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will schools fire people or just rename existing positions?

I know in some cases schools will have to let staff go. They are not providing funding for this, so if you don't have the right people, some folks will have to go to meet the position requirements. And these new folks are not there to work with the kids, but the teachers. So, on net, it is the kids who get the shaft, especially those who need more attention. I don't have a problem with the concept, just that DC is claiming that it is "cost neutral" -- it is not "cost neutral" for the schools that they are dumping this on. I assume that this is how central is paying for its new programs this year.

+1 Once again it wasn't well thought out and just sprung on everyone. I am still waiting to hear what the Union has to say since DCPS and the Union are currently in contract negotiations and this will have an impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms[b]. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

Let's break down the bolded portions one by one. A. How can you have an understanding of this issue when you are not involved with DCPS - in any capacity? B. The observations were not 10 minutes. It is a 30 minute observation which means it is not even a full lesson since most periods are around 45 minutes. Yet, teachers were being evaluated on expectations for a full lesson. There is more to this but I'm sure it has already been discussed ad nauseam in other threads. C. Most school are already having collaborative learning cycles as well as individual learning cycles. These are being conducted during a teacher's planning time so the teacher is then placed behind the 8 ball to still need to doing planning and preparation despite having the few minutes allocated to do so weekly. Teachers are not "venting about their challenges" during this time. Teachers are problem solvers and are expending extraordinary amounts of mental energy trying to tap dance to the beat of DCPS who willy nilly throws new policies at teachers every year. D. Where are the receipts showing that it has been brought to the union's attention. Show me a screenshot, a link something!

[Anonymous]

I personally hate to see these one size fits all solutions for all schools. Sometimes, it just doesn't make sense to have two coaches. Especially, when you don't have a solid candidate for the job. I've heard stories about coaches new to the job that have horrible PD, don't know the content, and pile more work on teachers already short on planning time. Schools might need to get rid of productive staff to get these highly paid staff members that might not contribute that much. What's it going to look like in low-income schools? Are they going to be able to retain good coaches so that they can get teachers the support they need in these schools. These have more than 50 percent turn over each year.

[Anonymous]

HS teachers are concerned with what they are hearing. The model proposes to have some highly effective teachers coach for 50% of their assignment. The plan for their remaining teaching load? Distribute the students among the other teachers in their department. No suggestion that additional teacher allocations will be made to schools. Campuses are being told they may need to eliminate some elective classes. Coaching is valuable, but how will LEAP really affect our learners and our teachers?

[Anonymous]

That could be +50 students overall for many teachers. Class sizes will be huge in schools that are not under-enrolled. Would love to hear DCPS pledge that this is not going to happen.

[Anonymous]

+50 *additional* students.

[Anonymous]

I am also concerned about LEAP for schools that are doing well, as it diverts resources away from teaching.

Anonymous wrote:However, this isn't a good plan for schools that are not doing well. If they had strong leadership and excellent trainers AND enough resources then they would be in a better position. It has nothing to do with the population of students and everything to do with having a leg to stand on in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prior teacher, not a DCPS teacher or admin or on LSAT and I feel I have more understanding of this issue than most posting on here.

It HAS been brought to the union. they have already commented on it.

It is in response to teacher complaints they were getting evaluated on a 10 min observation, yet not providing resources to get better.

There are great teachers, many whom can provide feedback to other teachers who are new or struggling. These sessions with the content experts are meant to teach each other and create uniformity among classrooms. Teacher planning periods already do this when teachers spontaneously meet to "vent" about their challenges.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

That is all great, but then DCPS should take the money that they spent before in central and give it to the schools to implement it, and not foist an unfunded mandate on them. This is a substantial real hit to many schools' budgets.

My understanding is that the schools are in charge of teacher training. The training effectiveness has been questioned by the teachers and admin. This was a development created to address real and localized issues that vary by school instead of a one-size-fits all training brought on my DCPS. These schools already have that funding- it was just used for teacher training before.

[Anonymous]

Are there any public statements on this from WTU?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there any public statements on this from WTU?

Never mind WTU, Kamras promised a training and more information last week. We are still waiting to find out how teachers, students, principals, schools and most importantly students will be impacted starting in August. Also, what about the ESY, when does that start? Some proposals said teachers will be in PD before the school year starts, so that would be June or July. There is no information being posted by DCPS, that is most troubling