Monday, October 14, 2024
DE PERE — A Unified School District of De Pere (USDDP) board member has filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) over the methods the district is using to teach its youngest students to read.
Board member Melissa Niffenegger said she merely questioned what she called inconsistencies and that she noticed “red flags.”
What’s at issue is Wisconsin Act 20, the state’s new literacy law affecting how reading is taught in public and school-choice schools.
The state legislature passed it in early 2023 and Gov. Tony Evers signed it into law in June of 2023.
It went into effect in schools this fall.
It emphasizes what it calls science-based reading, which the Department of Public Instruction says includes phonological and phonemic awareness, phonics, building background knowledge, oral language development, vocabulary building, writing instruction, comprehension and reading fluency.
It requires schools to change their curriculum and teaching methods, and involves extensive teacher and administrator training.
Much of the mandatory training and curriculum are unfunded.
The new law bans a method called three-cueing, wherein a teacher might give cues in three areas — context, syntax, and letters or sounds — to a student struggling with a word.
Three-cueing has been around since the 1960s.
Instead of purchasing a whole new curriculum from a given vendor, the district is working with CESA 6 and using elements of several existing curricula to design a curriculum that meets the new law’s mandates.
No one curriculum contains all of the elements needed to meet the law’s requirements, USDDP Director of Curriculum and Instruction Kathy Van Pay said.
New curricula could cost up to $1 million for a district the size of USDDP, according to Superintendent Chris Thompson,
Three-cueing is part of the old curriculum but the technique isn’t included in the new rendition.
But Niffenegger reported to DPI that the district is using the three-cueing method.
“My job as a board member is to make sure we are 100% following the law,” she said.
At a board meeting Sept. 23, Niffenegger accused the district of not following state-imposed curriculum methods and some of its teachers of rogue instructional methods. She said they were breaking the law.
“Every teacher is out doing their own kind of thing,” Niffenegger said at that meeting.
Niffenegger requested to visit a third-grade class to observe the reading instruction in action.
At the Sept. 23 meeting, USDDP Board President Adam Clayton said the experience should be open to the whole board, rather than just a solo viewing for one member.
Board Member Matt Petersen asked if Niffenegger’s opinion would change if the visit failed to show her the proof she seemed to be looking for.
Niffenegger said it wouldn’t.
At that same September meeting, the board went over a draft list of board norms to serve as guidelines for appropriate conduct of board members.
Some members had requested standards following several incidents involving members’ social media and political activities over the past year.
The list of norms includes such things as maintaining a unified voice as a board, being mindful of social media and not misrepresenting one’s own opinions as those of the board.
Before that Sept. 23 meeting, Niffenegger implied in a social media post that Thompson and Clayton appeared to be trying to hide something by establishing the parameters.
USDDP Director of Curriculum Kathy Van Pay said she learned about the complaint Oct. 2 and that it had been filed Sept. 23.
Thompson said he questioned Niffenegger’s motives in making the DPI complaint.
She asked him if he knew the significance of Sept. 23: It was the day he and Clayton presented the list of board norms, she said.
“To use this as a tactic to get back at the superintendent by placing the district under investigation by the Department of Public Instruction is the wrong way to go about it,” Thompson said and reminded her that he had been asked by the board in early August to establish board guidelines.
But Niffenegger said the purpose of the guidelines was to put limits on her.
“This is our job as board members is to make sure that we are following the law. That’s what I’m doing. And if you aren’t going to take it seriously then, OK, I’m going to get DPI on you because you want to put restraints on me,” Niffenegger said. “You don’t want to look at facts. You don’t want me to ask questions.”
Principal of Susie C. Altmayer Elementary School Mark Kirst said he wasn’t confident that a visit from Niffenegger was in the best interests of his students.
Such requests are common, he said.
“The specific difference with this request is that it was made in conjunction with the requesting board member’s statement that her observations would not change her mind,” Kirst said. “This, after public social media posts by the board member identifying individuals by name and expressing dissatisfaction with our school district. These actions have eroded staff confidence that the visit will result in the productive give-and-take of ideas.”
Van Pay said Niffenegger did not seem to understand the curriculum or the law and that her accusations were baseless.
In an emotional statement, Van Pay noted that she’s been with the school district for more than 20 years, and her own children attended school there.
“I have known De Pere as a parent, PTO member, an administrator and a resident,” she said, adding that she has dedicated her heart and soul to helping make its schools outstanding.
“I have never before been told at a public meeting that I or the school district was not following the law, but on Sept. 23, 2024, I was and the district was, without evidence,” Van Pay said, choking up.
Van Pay has more than three decades as a teacher and administrator and has received several awards, including one from the Herb Kohl Educational Foundation last year.
USDDP Superintendent Chris Thompson said he expects to learn more about the DPI investigation in the coming weeks.
