Well, it certainly is not flattering at all. It gives us some more insight into district and just what they are doing.
Hey, the LTISD paid for the review and the report which was completed in April 2007 but they were not so anxious to share this with us, the parents and tax payers of the district.
I recently obtained a copy and will share it with you.
After I requested a copy through the TPIA, Becky Burnett said that she considered the document something that should be shared with everyone. She also said that she will provide a copy to anyone who asks without the need for a TPIA request.
Thank you Becky for your help in letting the parents and tax payers of the LTISD know more about the district.
The 89 page document, “BEST PRACTICE REVIEW: Least Restrictive Environment & Special Education Services,” was created as a result of a district wide analysis by Dr. Richard Villa and James Chapple.
This report does not make Rocky look good at all.
After reading this, you really do have to ask yourself: “Just what does Rocky do for all that money that the district pays him?”
Obviously, he does not get paid enough, he even gets paid by outside entities to supplement his meager salary.
Perhaps this report is just one of the reasons that “Loosey Goosey” was exiled to the Community Programs Department?
After reading this report, you can understand a little more about why the LTISD is ranked “academically acceptable.”
Isn’t Rocky responsible for this?
I remember hearing the words “taking responsibility” during a recent Board Workshop.
Isn’t Rocky the “educational leader and chief executive officer of the District. Education Code 11.201(a)?” (LTISD Board Policy BJA(LEGAL)) Isn’t he responsible (LTISD Board Policy BJA(LOCAL)) to “Ensure that goals and objectives form the basis of curricular decision making and instruction and communicate expectations for high achievement.”
Don’t we as parents and tax payers deserve better than this?!
Not with our current management and a Board who is busy looking for “cohort districts” and “lighthouse districts” with which to compare themselves. Shouldn’t they concentrate on fulfilling just one of their self mandated goals: “Provide world-class curriculum and educational opportunities for all students?”
This report has a lot to say about many issues, some of which I will highlight here:
“It is commendable that the District provides yearly training in confidentiality and that the staff are required to sign confidentiality oaths. And yet, confidentiality and student dignity were not maintained. Numerous personnel spoke to the reviewers about students in the presence of other staff and the students and their peers. On occasion students were discussed in the third person while they were sitting and able to hear the comments being made about them.” (Page 18 and 38) Does this sound familiar?
“There was little data indicating that purposeful instructional planning, including daily and long-range lesson planning, was occurring.” (Page 22)
“In general, there was little bell-to-bell instruction occurring.” (Page 22)
“The implementation of the inclusive educational program and services in Lake Travis Independent School District has not kept pace with current and emerging exemplary practices. Several aspects of the inclusive education services are reflective of “best practices” from twenty or more years ago. Despite previous training opportunities, there was little evidence of differentiation, curriculum compacting, flexible grouping, or tiered assignments, in the more than 65 instructional settings that were observed.” (Page 51)
“There was little evidence of purposeful instructional planning, including daily and long-range lesson planning. Lesson planning has many benefits. It serves as a useful blueprint or guideline for the classroom teacher and allows for purposeful planning to meet diverse learning needs (Wood. 2002).” (Page 51)
“There was a limited use of technology in the classrooms observed.” (Page 51)
“Student interviews reveled that hands-on lab experiences in high school biology classes were minimal. One student indicated that his class had only been to the lab one time all year and that during that lesson students were instructed not to touch anything in the lab.” (Page 51)
“The district’s implementation of community-based and prevocational training for students with significant disabilities and clustering of students with disabilities in only some general education classes to receive special education services are not consistent with “the state of the art”; namely, the design and delivery of specialized instruction and related services in inclusive settings.” (Page 52)
“In the vast majority of classes observed, instructors did not utilize the time available by assuring bell-to-bell instruction. We noticed students on cell phones, listening to I-Pods, wandering the hallways, and playing cards during instructional time. One teacher told us when we entered her classroom and saw students playing cards, that she never used the last ten minutes of class for instruction. In a 175-day school year, that is 1,750 minutes (over 20 hours) of instruction that is denied to these learners”. (Page 53)
“There was little evidence of academic rigor. Academic rigor is teaching, learning, and assessment that promotes student growth in knowledge of the subject area and the ability to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate critically the content under study.” (Page 53)
“There was little evidence that data from accountability measures is used to modify or deliver appropriate instruction.” (Page 54)
“There does not appear to be a clear and shared understanding of LRE mandates.” (Page 55)
Did you know that you are required to have your driver’s license scanned if you want access to your child’s school? »« Did you know who get’s paid how much at the LTISD?
