Schools chief puts emphasis on math
Dorchester School District 2
The Post and Courier
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Finding space for new students is always a concern for Dorchester School District 2 Superintendent Joe Pye. But he also has some plans for keeping up the quality in schools around Summerville, including a new program to raise math test scores. Pye outlined his goals last week in an interview with The Post and Courier.
Grace Beahm The Post and Courier
Joe Pye
Q: What are your main goals and challenges for the district as we go into the new school year?
A: The No. 1 focus would still have to be continuing to deal with how fast we're growing, as well as how that's affecting student achievement. No. 2 would be student achievement, including the graduation rate. We're going to put a real big focus this year on math. We have a big math task force we put together, and we're putting together a district-wide math model to see if we can't raise math scores. The third area, which still falls under student achievement, is continuing our integration of technology into instruction. We're using it not just because we're trying to keep children interested and be on the cutting edge. We truly believe it does impact student achievement.
School news
TODAY: Tips for good-tasting, good-for-you, cost-effective school lunches. Family Life.
WEDNESDAY: Quick, easy, healthy school-night suppers. Food.
WEDNESDAY: Charleston County school bus schedules and who to call if there's a question. Special section.
WEDNESDAY: Q&A with Dorchester District 4 schools chief Jerry Montjoy. Local.
SUNDAY: Parents can get free supplies and other resources from 1-4 p.m. Sunday at the First Day Festival. Charleston County School District's annual event is held at Liberty Square in front of the South Carolina Aquarium.
Q: Is the math model new this year?
A: Yes, our focus has been on literacy, on the language arts, and we've done a great job with that. Now we're going to do the same thing in math. We have math teachers deciding what are the areas of concern and, first of all, what are the best math practices in the nation. We've researched this and been working on this since last January or February. Now we have a model that we're going to pilot this year. This is for all the grade levels, K-12. Our math scores are OK. They used to be tops in South Carolina, but they have leveled off, and I'm real concerned about that. We're going to use integrated technology as a resource. We want to use lots of resources at the fingertips of our teachers, and we're going to make sure our teachers have training in it, they have something they follow, sort of like a plan. And at the end of the year, if they follow that plan, we're hoping and feeling strong that we will see these gains.
Q: What do you mean by technology that you want to use?
A: Computers and the software. We got the computers. Now what are you going to put on it? We have to go out there and find the right software match-up. So that's why we decided we had to have our own math model as well our own literacy model. So we're trying now to make it a simplified, seamless program, that we can deliver software at every grade level that will mesh.
Q: Are you convinced this new technology will be better than the old blackboard and chalk?
A: Today's children are so into technology, with the iPods and the iPhones. These children at 10 or 12 years of age have stuff that adults can't even afford to think about having. These kids are more and more savvy. So, yes, we've got to connect into that. At some point you have to change the way you do things. If we do it right on the front end, we're going to improve that graduation rate on the back end.
Q: What else are you doing to improve the graduation rate?
A: We started the best options program to meet the needs of kids who are not getting it in the traditional program, falling behind, and failing ninth grade for the third time. We need different modules for different kids. We're starting an evening school at Fort Dorchester and Summerville high schools. This is for the struggling kids who are going to drop out, and in lieu of dropping out, we talk them into continuing their education at night, where there is less peer pressure and they can still do their job in the morning. And they can find out that they are never going to advance in these jobs without education. We're really going to crack down on building that graduation rate up and reducing the dropout rate at the same time, keeping the children connected and letting them see the relevance of why they are in school. We need more individualizing, rather than just having one program that fits all. That's not working. We're just going to have to start breaking down to individual children to get the help they need. And children who are advanced ... do not need to sit through these boring classes all day long while we try to catch the others up. Then they get turned off. We want to get them excited.
Q: That sounds more expensive than "one size fits all," and you're already struggling for money.
A: Well, it is when you buy all this software, but at the very end of the day, it's a lot cheaper than re-educating children year after year. As far as the money is concerned, what we do is close down one program and start another. That's my philosophy here. Before we buy another program, you tell me what we're taking away because our teachers can't handle much more. So we need to streamline and make sure that we are using the most effective programs. I know we have been accused of this, and often it's true, that public education has been reforming itself so many times and we keep reforming and getting the same results. But I'm not talking about those kind of reforms. I'm talking about taking what has worked for us in the past and trying to match it with what we see coming down the pike, what new directions we need to take to get us in position. We're going to have to do a better marketing job.
Reach Dave Munday at 745-5862 or dmunday@postandcourier.com.
|
Posted by WhoCares on August 12, 2008 at 7:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sounds like the Superintendent is more concerned about getting test scores up than actually educating students. I guess he's hoping it's one in the same. IMHO teaching for a test is not the same as teaching for life.
Posted by mrsmomofthree on August 12, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dorchester 2 is a wonderful district and Pye has been a fabulous leader. Charleston County should learn a few lessons.
Posted by teachergal on August 12, 2008 at 10:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
1. I am a DD2 teacher.
2. All anyone that is OUT of education cares about is TEST scores. When the community of NON-educators puts the emphasis on TEST scores, local officials have to follow along or lose the job...Pye has no choice but to follow this emphasis. Test scores do not "teach" children. In my opinion, they show results (strenghts, gains), but are NOT individualized and are NOT in the best interest of children.
3. Pye has done a GREAT job in the middle of a VERY demanding community. CCSD can only hope HOPE to have a fraction of what we have in DD2. I know, because I have been in both places, and I would not go back OR put my kids in CCSD schools no matter what.
4. An emphasis on math is great. We have a great literacy model, and it is right to have a focus point...math!
Posted by teachergal on August 12, 2008 at 10:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
RW...are you kidding? no more diversity studies? HA! that will never go away...we have to be PC...:)
Posted by STREETLAW on August 13, 2008 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe teachergal can explain just HOW a community of Non-educators can get a teacher fired? Teach us, teach.