Talk:School Improvement Grant

Untitled

The article is thorough in regards to the expectations of the U. S. Department of Education and will becoming more meaningful as experience by schools with the grants is chronicled and reflected here.

Further clean up needed

• Boldfaced Headings should be converted into section divisions.
  • done Rchard2scout (talk) 13:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
• No cited references should be simple URLs, proper metadata (site name, page title, author and publication date if available, date accessed) should be added. i would suggest use of the citation templates, but that is optional.
  • done Clonus44444 (talk) 16:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
• A relatively brief introductory section is required, that summarizes the article as a whole. This should probably be in the 1-3 paragraph range.
  • done Clonus44444 (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
• Boldfaced text at the start of or in the middle of sentences should mostly be removed.
  • done Clonus44444 (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
• Headings should use sentence case, not Title Case nor ALL CAPS.
  • done Clonus44444 (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
• You do not appear to list any criticism of the model, nor any indication of how school districts or anyone outsiode the govenrment has responded to it, nor how it has been applied in practice.
  • done (see end of article) Clonus44444 (talk) 20:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
• I have corrected the external link format

I hope these observations are helpful. DES ^(talk) 16:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Copied and pasted

A lot of this article is copied and pasted from www.eed.state.ak.us/.../SIG_Overview_AK_Presentation_February_2010.pdf and is NOT encyclopedic there is also a clear conflict of interest with certain "professional" editors. Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought it looked like it had come from somewhere else, but I had been unsuccessful in Googling the source. Thanks. I've tagged it as a possible copyvio. It's possible that it is not, as I'm not familiar with the copyright status of state-produced documents. So I'll let someone from the copyvio team who knows what the law may be deal with it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTE: This article most definitely is NOT a copyright infringement! It was written by Dr. Lauren Morando Rhim with LMR Consulting. Dr. Morando Rhim is a faculty research associate in the Department of Special Education at the University of Maryland. Prior to joining LMR Consulting, Morando Rhim was an independent consultant specializing in charter school research and evaluation. Her primary areas of research are market-based reforms, school choice, and the inclusion of children with disabilities in these reform initiatives. She has conducted substantial work on two projects investigating issues related to special education in charter schools. She was part of SPEDTACS, a federally funded technical assistance project designed to assist charter schools increase their capacity to deliver special education. She was previously a part of Project SEARCH and directed the UMD subcontract during years two and three of the study. As a member of the Project SEARCH team, Morando Rhim conducted state-, district-, and school-level research. She has published numerous articles about charter schools and spoken at national and state level conferences about charter schools. And she ASSURES me that "I wrote the article and it draws very heavily--and references--the language in the U.S. Department of Education regulations." I have looked at the article that is supposedly infringed, and none of the language is identical. Of course some of the language is SIMILAR, because they both deal with the same thing. To say this is copyright infringement is like saying an article about the U.S. Constitution that mentions "certain inalienable rights" infringes another article that says the same thing. User:Clonus44444 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.247.237.33 (talk) 12:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Would Teapot and TexasAndroid care to point out which passages in this revision of the page are copyvios of {http://www.eed.state.ak.us/stim/pdf

/SIG_Overview_AK_Presentation_February_2010.pdf}. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC) :Well this one for starters? The “turnaround model” in which the LEA replaces the principal and rehires no more than 50% of the staff, gives the principal greater autonomy, and implements other prescribed and recommended strategies. The “restart model” in which the LEA converts or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, charter management organization, or education management organization. The “school closure model” in which the LEA closes the school and enrolls the students in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. The “transformation model” in which the LEA replaces the principal (except in specified situations), implements a rigorous staff evaluation and development system, institutes comprehensive instructional reform, increases learning time and applies community-oriented school strategies, and provides greater operational flexibility and support for the school.[5]

Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Humble apologies, my mistake...there are no blatant copyright violation that I can see now. Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:56, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

• • "Turnaround": Article says: The “turnaround model” in which the LEA replaces the principal and rehires no more than 50% of the staff, gives the principal greater autonomy, and implements other prescribed and recommended strategies. the web document says; Use locally adopted “turnaround” competencies to review and select staff for school (rehire no more than 50% of existing staff) and Turnaround or restart schools could receive waivers to permit the school to “start over” under NCLB’s school improvement timeline and waive the choice/SES NCLB provisions.
  • "Restart": article says: The “restart model” in which the LEA converts or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, charter management organization, or education management organization. web document says: Restart model is one in which an LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an education management organization (EMO) that has been selected through a rigorous review process. A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school. A rigorous review process could take such things into consideration as an applicant’s team, track record, instructional program, model’s theory of action, sustainability. As part of this model, a State must review the process the LEA will use/has used to select the partner. Agree that this is a close paraphrase, could be sorted by rewriting.
  • school closure model - web document School closure occurs when an LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. article The “school closure model” in which the LEA closes the school and enrolls the students in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. Yes needs a rewrite
  • ''The “transformation model” in which the LEA replaces the principal (except in specified situations), implements a rigorous staff evaluation and development system, institutes comprehensive instructional reform, increases learning time and applies community-oriented school strategies, and provides greater operational flexibility and support for the school., the web document says Teachers and Leaders - Replace principal, implement new evaluation system, developed with staff, uses student growth as a significant factor - Identify and reward staff who are increasing student outcomes; support and then remove those who are not; Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff - Instructional and Support Strategies - Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs - Provide job‐embedded professional development designed to build capacity and support staff - Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction - Time and Support - Provide increased learning time(for staff and students); provide ongoing mechanism for community and family engagement; partner to provide social‐emotional and community‐oriented services and supports - Governance - Provide sufficient operating flexibility to implement reform; ensure ongoing technical assistance Looks like a concise summary to me.

This is hardly whole chunks of cut and paste, and I believe that US State documents like this are are public domain, so their use is fine.

Under U.S. law, laws themselves and legal rulings also form a special class. All current or formerly binding laws, codes, and regulations produced by government at any level, including other countries' governments, and the court opinions of any court case are in the public domain. [2] This applies even to the laws enacted in states and municipalities that ordinarily claim copyright over their work. The US Copyright Office has interpreted this as applying to all "edicts of government" both domestic and foreign. - see WP:Public domain#Other documents

. I think that this nomination should be delisted. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the template and left a note at the copyvio discussion. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

It is not in general the case that works of US State governments are in the public domain. Works of the US Federal government are in the public domain, and the actual laws and codes, as well as court decisions, of any US governmental body are in the public domain. Other works of state governments are subject to copyright, unless the state has disclaimed copyright or freely licensed its works in general. A few states have down this by law -- most have not. Not that "studies" and "legislative analysis" and similar works written to support state legislation but not themselves part of the actual statutes, are not exempt from copyright in general.

Note also that if one document closely parallels another, even though the exact words are not the same, it may infringe copyright as a derivative work, and that Wikipedia errs on the restrictive side in such cases.

Note further that if a text was written by someone other than the person who saved it to wikipedia, the author has a copyright, and permission must be granted by an email from the author or the author's verified agent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org clearly identifying the article or page in which the tex is being or will be used. DES ^(talk) 23:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Dr. Lauren Morando Rhim still has a severe conflict of interest, since it is to her financial advantage for as many charter schools as possible to grab these funds. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Saying that Lauren Morando Rhim has a severe conflict of interest would be a bit of a stretch; she is a consultant for a national nonprofit responsible for providing technical assistance for the U.S. Department of Education and -- based on the fact that the U.S. Department of Education developed this grant program and has been inundated with inquiries -- she wrote this article at the request of the nonprofit organization. Her name and her consulting firm are in no way connected with the article, and she was chosen because she happens to be an expert in the field. Saying that the article encourages charter schools to grab these funds, to her financial advantage, is like saying an article written by an anonymous oncologist encourages people to have abbormal growths looked at, thereby bringing him more patients. I know she has no axe to grind one way or the other, and has asked if the conflict of interest accusers might be assuaged if someone from the U.S. Department of Education was called upon to weigh in and confirm that the information contained in the article is an objective description of a large federal grant program. I don't know of any experts (except self-described experts/pundits) who are going to argue against this legislation, and I don't see how the subject is really up for debate; it's already been debated, and this is an objective presentation of what is now the law of the land. So what would it take to get the COI designation removed? Suggestions? Clonus44444 (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC) P.S. I was able to find one line of criticism -- from the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) -- and have added it to the end of the article. Clonus44444 (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC) On April 5, 2010 I also added a long criticism by the head of the NEA. Since the deadline for applying for the grants has passed, there is now no way that the original author -- who is never mentioned, nor is her consulting firm -- could benefit from writing the article. Clonus44444 (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Minor formatting issues

• bulleted lists should be done with wiki formatting (as this list is) not with html.
  •  Done DES ^(talk) 16:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
• Quote marks should be "straight" (a.k.a. "typewriter") not “curly” as per the relevant Manual of Style section.
  • Partly done. DES ^(talk) 16:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I h\ope these coments are helpful. DES ^(talk) 16:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Needs shorter intro

The intro section, that is, the text before the first section header, is now more than a screenfull of text (on most browsers). It should be cut down to half that or less, so that it is a reasonably brief overview of the article as a whole, with details lower down. DES ^(talk) 15:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I have shortened it somewhat but it is still too long. DES ^(talk) 16:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I have shortened it further by moving two paragraphs into a section called Lowest Performing Clonus44444 (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)