Feb 21, 2013 by

donna_garner[2.20.13 – In today’s article in the Waco Tribune-Herald, China Spring ISD officials claim that CSCOPE is what helped them to raise their STAAR/EOC test scores; however, please notice the many other school districts that used CSCOPE saw their scores go down. (Below I have highlighted the scores that are below the state average.)

Therefore, I do not believe it is accurate for China Spring ISD to attribute their success to CSCOPE when so many other schools that used CSCOPE fell below the state average.

From what I know about China Spring ISD, I believe they have been teaching Type #1 curriculum for many years; and that is why their school district scored well on the Type #1 STAAR/EOC’s.

Since CSCOPE is Type #2, districts that use it are setting their students up for lower STAAR/EOC scores.

If school district administrators want to raise their students’ STAAR/EOC scores, then they need to make sure their teachers are teaching Type #1 curriculum based upon the Type #1 curriculum standards (TEKS) passed by the elected members of the Texas State Board of Education.

To learn more about Type #1 and Type #2, please go to the following link:

To learn what information was extracted during the 2.1.13 Senate Education Committee hearing on CSCOPE, please go to the following link:

One other point of interest in today’s Waco Tribune-Herald article is to remember that the Education Service Centers (ESC 12 in Waco) market CSCOPE as a money-making scheme for them.  They have a vested interest in promoting CSCOPE to school districts so that the ESC’s will make millions of dollars that come from taxpayers’ pockets.  The person who is in charge of CSCOPE at ESC 12 used to be the curriculum director at China Spring ISD. Could this account for the “puff” statements about CSCOPE from the CSISD administrators?

At the bottom of this e-mail, I have posted an article written by Mary McGarr entitled “7 Questions Left Unanswered by CSCOPE.”  She raises some very appropriate questions. — Donna Garner]


STAAR test results are in, but local schools’ opinions mixed


Wednesday February 20, 2013

Excerpts from this article:

At a glance

Percent of third- through eighth-grade students passing STAAR reading and math exams, respectively:

State: 76.8, 72.8

Axtell ISD: 79.8, 74.2

Bosqueville: 82.5, 65.5 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Bruceville-Eddy: 84.2, 62.3 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

China Spring: 90, 87.7 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Connally: 63.6, 52.2 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Crawford: 94.8, 91.8

Gholson: 73.2, 68.8 —

Hallsburg (grades 3-6): 88.3, 87.8 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

La Vega: 73.6, 69.8 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Lorena: 85.8, 75.8 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Mart: 78.8, 77.5 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

McGregor: 74.7, 76 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Midway: 87.3, 84.5

Moody: 71, 61.2 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Oglesby: 68.8, 44.7 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Riesel: 76.7, 71.5 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Robinson: 81, 74.5 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Waco ISD: 61.8, 55.3 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

West: 78.2, 68.3 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

Valley Mills: 74.7, 67.7 – CSCOPE DISTRICT

…Last year, students in third through eighth grades took the first administration of the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, and high school freshmen took the first end-of-course exams.

In high school, grade-specific assessments are being replaced with 12 end-of-course (EOC) tests: algebra I, geometry, algebra II, biology, chemistry, physics, English I, English II, English STAAR tests are more rigorous than previous state tests, according to the Texas Education Agency.

“There are more steps involved, more thinking, more processing,” said Donna Trigg, education specialist III/supervisor for Education Service Center Region 12…

China Spring Independent School District officials were thrilled with the number of their students who passed the STAAR tests on the first go-round.

“That’s not to say we don’t have work to do, we just believe we’re headed in the right direction,” China Spring Superintendent Marc Faulkner said.

China Spring officials are basing their reaction to the scores on comparison between their district and other similar districts.

“They have traditionally been right there with us in (state test scores) and this year we were a little bit above, quite a bit above in some places,” China Spring ISD Director of Instructional Services Barbara Bowden said.

Bowden said China Spring owes its scores to a few factors, one being a change the district made in curriculum during the last couple of years.

“We looked at our data and noticed that TAKS math and science scores were declining. We determined we needed to make some changes,” Bowden said.

So, officials asked teachers to adhere closely to C-SCOPE for math in grades kindergarten through eight.

C-SCOPE is a curriculum support system closely aligned with the content Texas students are expected to learn…


“7 Questions Left Unanswered by CSCOPE”

from Mary McGarr


I treasure Mary McGarr ( ).  Mary served as a Katy ISD school board member from 1991-1996. She is brilliant and has the ability to delve very deeply into convoluted education organizations such as CSCOPE/TESCCC.

Here are seven important issues that Mary believes deserve to be investigated, and I totally concur with her concerns:

1.  The question of the ethics, propriety, and legality of a government funded enterprise, the proceeds from which are undetermined and the specific recipients of this largesse unknown, competing without bids, public scrutiny, or any of those other bothersome procedures for governmental contracts, that competes with the private educational software businesses needs to be addressed.

2.  Who, EXACTLY, (the name of the person or persons) came up with this scheme?

3.  Why aren’t we seeing the copyright information on this software product?  (If they have proceeded without one, that is also alarming. If they cannot get a copyright, they shouldn’t be in business.) Whose name(s) are on the copyright?  What is their compensation?  If they are governmental employees, how are they able to obtain an exclusive copyright for work they did while an employee of a government?  Is that legal?  What are the consequences for doing so if it is not legal?

4.  How was the decision made as to which employees at each of the involved Regional centers would be the ones to make the extra salary and be connected to this project? Are these specific employees receiving any other benefits that we don’t know about? It was determined at the Senate Education Committee hearing that these employees were receiving salary funds from both the Regional Service Centers (the State) as well as from CSCOPE. How is such a maneuver covered under law?  (I bet that’s not in the Texas Education Code!)

5.  Did Linda Darling-Hammond really write ALL the lesson plans, or might many of those lesson plans be pilfered by CSCOPE from the TEACHERS who wrote them and from whom they were stolen by CSCOPE without recompense?

6.  Why is the Legislature willing to give this bunch a pass with regard to the FACT that they set this business up ILLEGALLY, are still ILLEGAL, but since it is a fait accompli, it’s somehow OK? The process needs to start over from the beginning.

7.  Why is no punishment being delivered to those who have already lied, cheated, and bilked the public?  Any other vendor who has acted in this manner would be barred from doing business with the State.

This bunch, in my opinion, needs to have a restraining order filed against them until all these legal matters are resolved, and that could take YEARS!!!

Feel free to share.

Mary McGarr

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Related Posts


Share This

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.