Month: August 2007

“Reading” the Research

Eduflack NCLB, PR, Reading First, SBRR

The early ballots on beginning reading programs are in, and the results are quite interesting.  For those who missed it, the What Works Clearinghouse released its review of the research behind a significant number of beginning reading programs.  EdWeek’s Kathleen Manzo has a good piece on the topic — http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/08/15/01whatworks_web.h27.html.

Following months of criticism regarding Reading First and how programs were chosen or how programs were discouraged from implementation, the WWC’s information is bound to further confuse the issue.  WWC has looked positively on the research behind Reading Recovery, a program that bore the perception of being on the RF black list.  Programs that have benefited under the RF program, like Voyager, posted mixed results.

So what does it all mean?  As Eduflack opined back in March, there is a big difference between WWC and RF.  http://blog.eduflack.com/2007/03/21/can-reading-recover.aspx  And these reviews only strengthen that view.  Knowing all this, how exactly does an ed reformer talk about doing what works in reading instruction, when it seems we have no idea what actually works?

First, it is clear that the WWC (and by extension, IES) is doing its job.  WWC was not designed to hand out gold stars to off-the-shelf basals.  It’s goal was to review and evaluate the research behind what was put in the classroom.  It’s done just that.  Slowly but surely, WWC is helping to change the educational culture, placing a far greater emphasis on the research base.  And they mean real research, not what many pass off for “research” these days.

Second, it demonstrates there is no magic bullet when it comes to reading instruction.  If a school is looking for a quick fix, and believes that one publisher is going to meet all of its reading instruction needs, it is setting itself to be severely disappointed.  Some are strong in alphabetics. Others in comprehension.  And some on general reading achievement.  If you want to get kids reading, you need to understand the specific needs of your classroom or district, and apply the appropriate evidence-based interventions.

Third, this demonstrates there is a notable difference between scientifically based reading research and pre-packaged programs.  Sure, many publishers simply attach the National Reading Panel research to their products, slapping a “research based” sticker on it.  But what NRP actually did is identify those specific research-based components necessary to reading success.  Strong skills in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.  All are necessary.  All come with research-based principles for effective teaching.  WWC is measuring whether those research-based principles are found in the products we use, and whether we can provide that they are effectively conveyed and student achievement is demonstrably measured.

Where does that leave us?  It’s clear we still need a better understand of research, how it is gathered, and how it is evaluated.  And it needs to be good research.  We need to learn the questions to ask about products, understanding whether there is a real research base or whether there is simply some snazzy wrappings to distract us from the lack of evidence.  And we need to continue to push forward on this evolution to a research-based classroom.

At the end of the day, this should not be a debate about Open Court or Trophies or Voyager or Reading Recovery.  The name shouldn’t matter.  We need to really look under the hood, taking a close look at what the program is built on and what results the program is getting.  Our end game is getting all kids reading and boosting student achievement.  That doesn’t come from a logo, a catchy slogan, or a collection of smiling child photos.  It comes from an evidence base.  Like it or not, WWC is getting us a little closer to it.

Droppin’ Out

Eduflack NCLB, PR, President Bush, Spellings

Eduflack is shocked, shocked, to hear that there is no U.S. participation in the upcoming 12th grade TIMSS.  That’s the big news that Newsweek “broke” late last week (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20205125/site/newsweek/).  Influencers like Ed in ’08 have commented on it this week.

Of course, Eduflack reflected on the implications of the United States dropping out of TIMSS two months ago (http://blog.eduflack.com/2007/06/11/opting-out-timss-style.aspx), following a Sarah Sparks article on the issue in Education Daily in early June.  We said it then, and we’ll say it now — It sends the wrong message at the wrong time. 

At a time when we are talking about increased rigor in the schools and the ability to compete for jobs across the world, comparing our science and math abilities to like-minded students in China, India, and Germany is a needed tool.  

I’d like to believe NCES and NSF and others that we don’t want to compete against a B-list international pool and that our educational resources, both financial and human, are better spent in other areas.  But at a time where we are all abuzz about student achievement and multiple measures and global competitiveness, it is the wrong message to just say “no” and close the door.  If not TIMSS, offer a better solution.  Any alternative will do. 
    

Those Lazy, Hazy Days

Eduflack ACT, Marketing, NCLB, PR

In media relations, you learn quickly that if you are looking to dump a story (meaning you need to distribute it, but either don’t want it prominently covered or don’t want too many folks reading it), you either drop it on a Friday afternoon or distribute it on the week between Christmas and New Years.  Little fuss, little muss, and little will be remembered in the coming days.

In the education world, though, it seems that August is often where good stories go to die.  I’ll admit, now is the time when Eduflack’s top concern is whether the Mets can hold off Philly and Atlanta to win the NL East.  Then when you factor in the Edufamily, education reform comes in a strong third (still better than education’s priority in recent voter polling data, which puts it no higher than fifth).

Looking at this week’s Education Week and www.edweek.org, we see a number of interesting stories.  But as it is mid-August, what impact will they have on those down at the shore or those already preparing for the start of the school year?  Earlier this summer, we asked where all of the good stories had gone?  Now we ask, if those good stories come, but come in mid-August, do ed reformers notice them?

Here’s just a sampling of attention-worthy stories:
* NSBA’s survey on social networking and students
* Annual ACT score release
* Current efforts to turn around the Recovery District in New Orleans
* The future impact of NBPTS, and the impact and quality of future NBCTs

The timing of public announcements is a tricky thing.  For the ACT scores announcement, for instance, this is an annual release, and the education media know to anticipate it.  So there is little risk.  For others, August is a double-edged sword.  While readership may be down from the norm, the chances of coverage are dramatically increased.  If we look to the ed reform calendar for September and October, there are already dozens of report releases, conferences, forums, and events.  And that doesn’t even include the communications push from both sides on NCLB reform.

So what’s an educause supposed to do?

Cast a wide net.  Many believe the game is won with an article in Education Week.  Yes, it is an important win, but it isn’t an all-defining act.  We don’t truly understand and appreciate an issue until we have heard it four or five or seven times.  Repetition is key.  We need to hear the same story from different sources and through different channels.  Supplement the EdWeek piece with some regional daily news coverage, postings on multiple websites, emails to your database, and outreach to the blogsphere.  Do it over the course of  few weeks.  Multiple touches, multiple stories, multiplying success.

We’re already starting to see that with NSBA’s study, and ACT has become a master at segmenting its story for national, regional, and statewide significance.  In a field that is so big on modeling, hopefully others can pick up some pointers from those orgs that successfully release their reports or promote their events.

August doesn’t have to be a graveyard for well-intentioned education stories.  But to avoid the tombstone, one needs to work harder and work smarter.  A good story, a broad net, and an integrated outreach strategy can make the difference between a one-hit-wonder and a Hall of Famer.     

Reform is More Than a Four-Letter Word

Eduflack AP, higher ed, NCLB, PR, SBRR, STEM

OK, I’ll go first.  My name is Eduflack, and I’m an NCLB-aholic.  That was never my intention.  It just seems that every time I look for information on education reform and how we can improve the schools, I’m sucked in by the flashing lights and attractive packaging of NCLB stories.  Even when I try to get away from it, someone is offering me a taste of NCLB.  Some HQT here, some accountability there, and a whole lot of SBRR just about everywhere.  I admit it, I’m hooked.  And I like it.

And as much as I am an unapologetic supporter of the law and its goals, I also realize there is far more to education reform than NCLB.  Some of those topics — like high school reform and STEM — are already being discussed as additions to NCLB 2.0.  But there has to be more to school improvement than our federal elementary and secondary education act.

Leave it to Checker Finn and Diane Ravitch to remind us of what else is out there.  In a Wall Street Journal commentary yesterday (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118653759532491305.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries), the two focus on their desire to protect liberal arts education in the K-12 curriculum.  Their goal: to ensure we continue to teach history, civics, literature, and such subjects alongside our math and science requirements.

During a time when we are so focused on our “world is flat” economy and competition with India, China, and other nations around the globe, Ravitch and Finn’s piece makes one take pause.  They argue that to truly be competitive, students not only need technical skills, but they need to understand people, need to be thoughtful, and need to be equipped to question authority and ask, “why?” 

Ultimately, they raise the issue of whether it needs to be all or nothing.  Successful schools can focus on STEM and core subject assessments.  But they can also teach the Great Books and Western Civ.

For two individuals who are best known for their research, they deserve credit for personalizing their cause.  Citing the “academic” paths that made Steve Jobs, Alan Greenspan, and Warren Buffett successes helps most doubters see that it is not the academic major on the diploma, but what one does with their knowledge that really matters.  And their turn of the phrase, calling for “leaves and flowers” to be added to STEM, definitely leaves it mark. 

The great rhetorical challenge now is how one keeps focus on the NCLB building blocks necessary to provide the path to high-quality liberal arts education.  Or more simply, how do you say we are spending too much time and money and effort on NCLB, when the reading skills NCLB provides under Reading First are essential to any student understanding Shakespeare or the great philosophers? 

Regardless, with their think piece, Finn and Ravitch have definitely thrown the opening pitch in what could be a very interesting ed reform ballgame.  If they can continue to talk about it, outside of the context of NCLB, it could also be one that fills the stands. 

Why Ed Reform is So Important

Eduflack Uncategorized

Why is education reform so important?  To answer that question, all you need to do is look at the kids school improvement affects.  Case in point — a shameless plug for Eduflack Jr.

Eduflack-ito just completed his 15-month well visit.  At 15 months and 11 days, here’s the tale of the tape.  23 pounds, 8 ounces.  30 5/8 inches long.  18-inch head circumference (no Barry Bonds here).  Five or six spoken words.  Dozens of words of receptive speech, in both English and Spanish.  Now if only Mama Eduflack can teach him books are for reading, and not for throwing.

I know why we need to improve our schools, get more effective teachers in the classroom, and know how to measure exactly how our kids are doing.  Eduflack Jr.


“Pay Attention to Me!”

Eduflack NCLB, Obama, PR, Presidential campaign

Ed in ’08 is spending tens of millions of dollars to move education reform to the forefront of the 2008 presidential debates.  Richard Whitmire and the Education Writers Association are flooding the early primary states, calling on the presidential candidates to stand up and articulate their education platforms.  Strong resources, smart folks, proven tactics, and unwavering commitment.  All the components we say need to be in a successful PR campaign.

Despite that, education reform is still barely moving the rhetorical needle in the presidential campaigns.  We all agree a strong K-12 education is necessary for life success, necessary for a good job, and necessary to meet the challenges of the 21st century global economy.  Good education allows us to focus on issues like health care, jobs, the environment, public safety, and the like.  Education is the gateway to the issues that dominate both our worries and our hopes for ourselves and our families.

So why can’t we get those seeking our vote to talk about such an important issue?  Are they still formulating their opinions and policies on student achievement, assessment, teacher quality, and the like?  Or do they fail to see the benefit of speaking on what could be controversial topics to their political bases?

Eduflack would like it to be the former.  I’d love to think that ed policy advisors are in Chicago and New York and Albuquerque and Charlotte and Boston and New York and all cities in between, hard at work on ways to improve preK, ELL, teacher training, reading, and college preparedness issues.  I’d be thrilled to know that come the start of the school year, we will see new proposals for strengthening NCLB, for universal preK, for improving graduation rates.  I want to believe that ed reform train is coming quickly down the tracks.

But I’m not hearing the whistle and I’m not seeing the lights.  And that makes me worry the reason for this quiet period is the latter.  Democrats don’t want to offend teachers unions by talking about accountability and improving NCLB.  Republicans don’t want to talk about the federal role in education.  And neither want to talk about the financial costs, the political commitment, and the hard realities that come with meaningful school improvement.

I urge, I dare, I beg the candidates to prove me wrong.  Senator Clinton, let’s continue talking about preK.  Senator Obama, I want to hear more about your after school/summer school plans.  Governors Richardson and Huckabee and Romney, let’s hear about the recent improvements in student achievement in your states.  Tell us the stories of what you’ve done and what you dream of doing to improve our schools and give all kids the skills, knowledge, and hope they need to be the successes we all want them.

We deserve Lincoln-Douglass style discussions on the future of public education in the United States, not a 30-second soundbite coming the night before the primary.  Step up to the stump.  We’ve kept it warm for you.
   

Shiny, Happy Teachers

Eduflack NCLB

We’ve all heard the urban legend of the North American school teacher.  They leave their profession in droves year after year.  Teachers are unhappy.  They’re disappointed about their pay and their work conditions.  Something, anything, needs to be done to improve the job.  That’s the only way we can fix this enormous problem and ensure that we have teachers in all classrooms.

For all those who believe in such legends, check out the latest study from the National Center for Education Statistics.  NCES looked at 1992-93 ed school graduates, and monitored them for 10 years.  What did they find?  A job satisfaction rate of 93% after 10 years on the job.  Yes, nine of 10 teachers is happy in their position.  http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007163

What’s more, only 13% of those who left teaching did so because of low pay.

This was no small sample.  NCES surveyed 9,000 teachers across the nation.  And they seemed to do a strong job disaggregating the data, looking specifically at minority teachers.  For those concerned with teacher quality, effective teaching, collective bargaining, and the like, it’s a good report to check out.

Eduflack waits with baited breath, though, to see how such a study will be received by the education status quo and by the educational talking heads.  These findings fly in the face of popular opinion, and many are going to resist accepting them as fact.  But what else is new?

Clearly, there is one main area of criticism the chattering class with sling at this NCES study.  For the most part, it is pre-NCLB.  We’ll hear that this isn’t representative of a classroom in 2007.  What about high-stakes testing?  What about greater accountability?  What about the push from the national on down breaking the backs and spirits of our teachers?

Such criticisms, of course, are hogwash.  Testing and standards and accountability are nothing new.  These teachers surveyed were hip-deep in the reading and math wars of the 1990s and in the growth of testing and such.  They know the good, the bad, and the ugly of being an educator in today’s environment, and they still give the experience a big ole gold star.

Sure, some will attack and some will ignore the study.  But these findings trumpet one key education communications lesson — national membership organizations do not necessarily speak for their individual members.  Such a lesson seems common sense, yes.  But when it comes to educators, when we hear from the NEA and the AFT, we take the organizational voice as the voice of the individual as well.  And that’s a big mistake.

Successful communication requires both a macro and a micro approach.   Yes, it is important to engage membership organizations like teachers unions.  But it is also important to reach those teachers who are being asked to do more and are being held accountable.  Identifying best practices in the classroom comes from the teachers that are driving student achievement, not necessarily from the union.  And lasting implementation of education reform requires buy-in directly from the end user — the teacher.  After all, we’re asking them to change their behaviors.  If we are trying to improve teaching and boost student achievement, we should be talking directly with the teacher and relating to their needs, beliefs, and experiences.

The NCES study reminds us of that.  Sure, many will continue to think that the rhetorical joustings coming from the NEA on NCLB and HQT and other issues is fine dinner theater.  But it shouldn’t be the end all-be all of the teacher voice in the debate.  Teachers react to their schools, their colleagues, and their students each and every day.  That’s how they gage their satisfaction and their success.  It’s not based on a CBA or on a legislative white paper or a stump speech at the national convention.

The larger question, of course, becomes how we make sure that teacher voice is injected into the current NCLB debate.  How do we get the teacher a seat at the table equal to the union rep?