This coming year’s students and teachers may feel they’re walking into a different school than the one they left last fall. The Santa Rosa County School Board has meaty subjects on its plate serving the class of 2014 and teachers in August. The School Board not only abolished corporal punishment, but is also easing restrictions on student-owned technology. Additionally, the board is still working to meet state requirements for teacher assessment.
Corporal Punishment
Santa Rosa County School Board voted unanimously in June to remove corporal punishment, a measure for student correction, according to Superintendant Tim Wyrosdick. “In Santa Rosa County,” Wyrosdick said, “corporal punishment was only administered by the permission of parents.” During the last school term, he said, employees followed guidelines for corporal punishment, including having parents present, and still received calls from Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF). Wyrosdick spoke of a situation where parents called a local school insisting upon administration of corporal punishment, even after the dean declined to do so. He said the school relented, the punishment occurred with the parents present, and the school still received a call from DCF. Wyrosdick said schools cannot have a policy which places teachers in jeopardy. The board voted its abolishment last month. Wyrosdick did explain corporal punishment solely referred to paddling or spanking, so if a coach catches a player goofing off, he’s still free to assign running laps.
Electronics in School
The SRC School Board takes another step this fall to meet current relationships with modern technology. “It’s about embracing technology that’s already here. This is a very interesting topic for parents,” Wyrosdick said. Last year, Wyrosdick said, the rules permitted students to have these devices on campus as long as they didn’t use them. He said the board is working to provide guidelines and suggestions for how teachers may incorporate smart phones, laptops, and other commonly student-owned devices into lessons. “Using them in an instructional manner is positive,” Wryosdick said.
Despite the proliferation of handheld technology, not all students own such devices. When they can use these devices in class, students are all on the same playing field. In families of younger students, parents may not even allow their children to have smart phones. Wryosdick addressed this concern saying, “Teachers are adept at knowing their students and their resources. We don’t want any students to be at a disadvantage so schools may either supply something or create a group event. They must facilitate the classroom.” The other problem with handheld technology is the ease of distraction and disruption. According to Wyrosdick, students were not allowed to text or otherwise use their phones between classes, but now they can. “They can’t create a school or class disruption. They’re still monitored and dealt with,” he said. Classrooms of the near future may see shop classes programming 3D printers and science students signing out handheld spectrometers.
Teacher Assessment
Superintendant Wyrosdick said, “I have huge concerns about the mandated teacher evaluation process. I don’t believe the legislation passed is an equitable system of evaluating teachers.” He said he didn’t believe it was a positive reflection of a teacher’s abilities for two reasons. For one, he said, “Student assessments are not meant for teacher evaluations.” Two, he said, “Current assessments are in constant transition, and so it’s hard to score [teachers] from them.”
“The FCAT,” the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, “is going away,” Wyrosdick said. According to the Florida Department of Education, the test began in 1998, administered to grades 3 to 11 to assess mathematics, reading, science, and writing and is slowly being replaced by updated tests.
“In the 2013 and 2014 school year,” Wyrosdick said, “not all students took a test. The law says 50 percent of teacher evaluation is based on student performance. So if a test is unreliable, how accurate is it for evaluation? If a test is unreliable or unvetted, how legally appropriate is it?” Wyrosdick gave the example of a twelfth grade senior government class. He said the class has no state test, so the state required going back to a tenth grade FCAT reading test as part of this senior level government teacher’s evaluation. “We know more about what a student has learned after taking the FCAT than ever before, but it’s not available for every subject.” Wyrosdick said the board has minimized the effect of student performance on teacher evaluation, considering its current unreliable nature.
According to Wyrosdick, the state said the board should write the tests. He said, “We have to develop almost 400 exams in a year. It’s a staff, time, and resource issue. We don’t have the expert people to develop these exams. The system is flawed and ripe with legal challenges.”
Wyrosdick said, “The most effective team building, professional development system is centered on school leadership developing instruction. We need to have grade level directors and department directors that are qualified coaches. The days of poor teachers are gone. There was a season of unaccountability. We have no problem being held accountable. We encourage it.” Wyrosdick said the biggest thing the state did was doing away with tenure. “Dismissing poor teachers was astronomically difficult. The cost of going to court [to dismiss a teacher] was high.” Now, he said, schools can’t afford to keep poor teachers.
“I’m a blessed superintendant,” Wyrosdick said. “The majority of teachers are solely focused on teaching. We are servant leaders, who demand excellence, focused on students and quality instruction.”
This article originally appeared on Santa Rosa Press Gazette: SRC School board making big changes