Year: 2007

The Ed Trust White Hat

Eduflack HQT, NCLB, NEA

If the latest movie reviews are any indication, westerns are back.  And they are back for a very simple reason.  They effectively tell a story.  We have a protagonist.  We have an obstacle to overcome.  Things seem bleak.  Then the hero rises to the challenge, saves the town and wins the gal.  If that were too hard for us to follow, we just need to know that the good guys wear white hats; the bad guys black.

In many ways, education reform is like that time-tested genre.  And we only need to look west to California to see what Eduflack means.

The setting — California public schools.  An old regular around the corral, going by the name George Miller, notices that his education town is lacking.  It’s missing those experienced or enthusiastic hands needed to lead in the classroom.  Without such teachers, Miller will never strengthen the schools and bring academic hope to those who had lost it.  The town may just fade away, the victim of another lost generation of students.

So Miller gathers his posse of Democrats and Republicans, advocates and business leaders, and draws up a plan.  We’ll bring those teachers to town the way we recruit good sheriffs or businessmen or such professionals.  We reward success.  We incentivize the job, paying more to those teachers willing to take on tough assignments and to those teachers who succeed when all said it was hopeless.  We recognize achievement, tipping our cap to outcomes, and not just inputs.

As Miller unveils his new plan to the town council, in rides the California Teachers Association, intent on thwarting Miller’s plans for improvement.  Topped in the black hats of the status quo, CTA calls Miller’s plan “unfair” and “disrespectful.”  Implementing it will destroy the town, driving teachers away and leaving our classrooms rudderless.    If there is money available for incentives, use it to give all teachers a raise, regardless of their effectiveness.

In the past, when CTA has ridden into town, community elders have acquiesced to the demands of the CTA.  One can’t risk standing against an organization as large and powerful as the CTA, particularly on an issue like teacher pay.  After all, if you cross these rhetoricians in black, their omens may come true and all could be lost.  Better to stick with the status quo than to raise the ire of the CTA and its supporters.

Out in the distance, though, approaches a white horse.  With six-shooters loaded with research data, the Education Trust has ridden to Miller’s defense, and to the defense of those inner-city teachers determined to make a difference and improve student achievement.  Performance pay works.  Our schools need change.  The status quo cannot remain.  Incentives boost student achievement and teacher satisfaction.  This should be the law.  And EdTrust will stay here until it the legislation is wearing its little tin star of “law.”

Will our reformers on the white horse succeed?  Will Miller find a way to incentivize teachers?  Or will the CTA keep its grip on public education in California?  We’ll all stay tuned for the next installment, as we wait to see who rides in to join EdTrust in this showdown at the performance pay corral.

South of the ELL Border …

Eduflack AYP, ELL, NCLB

With all of the policy talk on AYP and teacher incentives and such issues, it is easy to see how we can lose sight of an enormously important issue facing school districts — English Language Learners.  Take a listen at any large urban school, and you’ll hear dozens of languages spoken.  And Spanish is leading the pack.

When Eduflack’s mother came to the United States at the age of 5, she didn’t know a word of English.  At the time, the response from the public schools in New Jersey was to hand her a paintbrush, point her to an easel, and let her draw until she started picking up enough English to handle the rigors of Sayreville Public Schools.

That approach may have worked then, but we all know it won’t work now.  In many classrooms, if we followed that approach, we’d need a few dozen easels, and only a couple of school desks.  So what is a school district, or a teacher, to do when faced with the challenges of teaching a growing Spanish-speaking population?

There’s an interesting answer coming out of Oregon.  Following efforts being pursued by school districts in Washington, California, and Texas, the Oregon Department of Education has sought out a unique solution to this growing problem.  Oregon is now working with Mexico’s Secretariat of Public Education, gaining the textbooks, Internet sites, and interactive materials developed by our neighbor to the South to teach math, science, and history to its Spanish speakers. 

The story is here, courtesy of the Associated Press.  http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_091907_education_mexican_curriculum_.ede64566.html

Undoubtedly, some will have real problems with such an approach.  We hear we only need English-speaking classrooms, and anything else just grows the problem.  For these folks, the solution is more paintbrushes.

Our public schools, though, have an obligation to educate all students who come through their doors.  And if those schools can find a method to successfully teach their students the math and science skills they need to succeed in school, and are able to effectively measure such learning, they should pursue it.  And as we demonstrate effectiveness, we should be looking to replicate it in districts and schools that face similar student challenges.

No one is saying we give up on English language instruction.  That is a non-negotiable in our schools, even those where 100+ languages are being spoken.  But we can’t afford to wait for those skills to be mastered before we provide math, science, or social studies instruction.  It isn’t an either/or solution.  And the Oregon Department of Education recognizes that.

What does this approach say to the education reform community?  If we are going to have every student in our public schools achieving in the classroom, we need to explore multiple pathways, solutions, and ideas to get us there.  As we opine on best practices and modeling, we need to realize that those best practices are not limited to our schools of education or the lessons learned in the lower 48.



And the Prize Goes To …

Eduflack AYP, Broad Prize, Chancellor Klein, NCLB

When talking school improvement, we often hear that an individual school or even a school district may be beyond repair.  Wrong teachers.  Wrong curriculum.  Wrong buildings.  Wrong students.  Sure, we may hear that, but it is just the wrong thing to say.

If you look at public education across the United States, there is not a single district, school, or student we can afford to give up on.  It may be hard.  It may take time.  It may require suspending previous thinking.  But Eduflack would like to believe any school can be turned around with the right culture, knowledgebase, commitment, curriculum, measurement, and feedback loop.  Don’t believe me?  Take a look at the Broad Prize.

Nearly impossible to miss, yesterday the Broad Foundation awarded the New York City Public Schools with the annual Broad Prize, the sixth urban school district to win the prestigious award.  A $1 million pot speaks volumes about the impact of the Prize, but what does the Prize tell us about urban school reform?

If you look at NYC — along with past winners like Houston, Garden Grove, Long Beach, Norfolk, and Boston — you see a collection of urban school districts that, a decade or two ago, we were ready to complete give up on.  We see districts that many, especially those who knew them best, said were beyond repair.  Spurred by a desire to improve and encouraged by the prize across the Broad finish line, these school districts did the impossible.  They made real change.  They reinvented the school culture.  They demonstrated real student achievement.  Simply, they got the job done.

And this year’s winner?  Chancellor Klein and company have much to be proud of, even without the oversized Broad check.  In reading and math, NYC outperformed other New York districts serving students of similar income levels.  African-America, Hispanic, and low-income students showed great improvement in reading and math.  The city has made real strides in closing the achievement gap.

This isn’t a revolution.  By definition, a revolution has a finite end.  Instead, NYC and its fellow winners have started a movement.  An ongoing process of improvement and success designed to continue to gain momentum.

What lessons can we learn from the Broad Prize, aside from the notion that school improvement is a universal possibility?  Interestingly, the Broad Prize can serve as a teaching tool for those who are weighing the future of NCLB and AYP.  Much has been written, spoken, and shouted about the issue of multiple measures.  Is there one — and only one — way to effectively measure student achievement?  Or are there a number of factors that must be taken into account when evaluating the success of a school or classroom?

If Broad is any indication, the true measure of school improvement requires multiple measures.  Looking at quantitative and qualitative data, analyzing a range of topics and issues, taking all facets of the school and the operating environment into account, Broad makes its decisions.  It is a complicated process.

It’s one thing to give an award to the urban school district that simply shows the greatest year-on-year improvement in student achievement.  It is something completely different to recognize that there are a number of factors — some immeasurable — that contribute to the overall success of a school district.

It’s enough to give even the strongest of data-driven decisionmakers a little something to think about.

“All We Are Sayin’ Is Give NCLB a Chance …”

Eduflack NCLB, NEA, PR, Reading First, Spellings

What a way to start the week.  As Eduflack was trying to re-engage into the world after less than a week of family vacation, there is the New York Times oped calling on Congress and the U.S. Department of Education to resist the National Education Association and its attempts to weaken No Child Left Behind.  Today, we get the Washington Post editorializing that we cannot weaken NCLB, and they complement it by dedicating two-thirds of their op-ed page to essay-ettes on the virtues (or lack thereof) of the nation’s K-12 law.

That’s a lot of column inches dedicated to the protection of NCLB.  Heck, it is a lot of words dedicated to national education policy.  And it was just the sort of rhetoric that caught many by surprise, and had some downright fall out of their chairs.

Yes, we expect folks like NEA’s Reg Weaver and Fairfax County, Virginia Supe Jack Dale striking out against NCLB.  But did anyone expect the growing chorus of support for NCLB?

No, we didn’t expect it, but we’re thrilled to hear it.  Finally, the talk is about NCLB. Finally, the buzz is about the strongest possible interpretations of student achievement.  And finally, the focus is on effective measurement and evidence-based decisionmaking.

In doing so, we have taken a major step in the messaging and PR surrounding NCLB.  This is no longer a yes/no decision.  The voices of support have broken through the white noise, and we now see that NCLB (and its accompanying subsidiaries like Reading First and Highly Qualified Teachers) will remain the law of the land.  The rhetoric is not about gutting the law.  Instead, we are talking about improving it.

There is agreement on the need to assess student learning.  Now we just need decide on the merits of a single measure versus multiple measures.  There is agreement on quality teaching.  Now we just need to decide on the merits of training and pedagogy versus classroom results.  There is agreement on evidence-based instruction.  Now we just need to distinguish between the good research and the bad.  And now there is agreement that effective education is based on student achievement.  Now we just need to determine how to bring that new focus to every state, school district, and classroom throughout the nation.

One thing’s clear, it is going to be an interesting fall.  Yes, there are still many cards to be played in this game.  But if we start peeking at the hand that’s been dealt, the odds of NCLB 2.0 fulfilling the wishes of folks like WaPo, EdTrust, and others are looking stronger by the day.
 

Eduflack’s 2007 Seventh Inning Stretch

Eduflack Uncategorized

The temperatures are heating up again in DC, the Mets are now only two games up on the Phillies, and we may actually see NCLB reauthorized this calendar year (if George Miller and Buck McKeon have anything to say about it).  So instead of getting too giddy or too anxious about any of these or similar developments, Eduflack is going to rest the ole pitching arm for the next week as he and the family take a little time away to rest, regroup, and recharge.

Postings will resume September 10.  Let’s Go Mets!

An Intriguing View from the Trenches

Eduflack NCLB, Presidential campaign, Students

Typically, Eduflack comments on what is appearing in the media.  What does it say about education reform activities?  How successful is it as a communication vehicle?  How does it contribute to the overall push to improve the quality of education for all students.

We hear a lot about student data.  This week brought us the debate on what a dip in SAT scores really means, and the Miller-McKeon bill offered the idea of multiple assessments to determine student achievement.  You know where I stand — there should be one national standard that all students are measured against.  It is the only way we can ensure that every student, regardless of hometown or socio-economic standing, has the skills and opportunities to achieve in the 21st century workplace.

So when the following piece came across Eduflack’s inbox, it piqued my interest.  It was written by Hayes Mizell, the former director of the Program for Student Achievement at the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation and former school desegregation advocate in South Carolina during the 1960s and 1970s.  While I may not agree with all of his points, it is a commentary definitely worth a read.

Why?  It is written from experience in the trenches.  It gives a different voice to an issue that is widely debated.  And it provides a call to action that isn’t seen too often in our middle-of-the-road commentaries.

So I offer the following from Mizell:


“Resting in their heavenly repose, South Carolina’s civil rights pioneers of the 1930s and 1940s must be scratching their heads. A prominent African-American state senator, also a Democrat and minister, says many of his generational peers are longing for the days of racially segregated schools. Another minister says most African-American children ‘fared better when we were segregated.’

These leaders are understandably frustrated. Too many children are not reaping the academic gains that African-Americans hoped would follow public school desegregation. On last year’s state achievement test, more than 40,000 African-American students in grades three through eight scored ‘Below Basic’ in English/Language Arts. An average of 60 percent of all African-American students in third through eighth grade performed at the Below Basic level in science.

There is some good news. Thousands of African-American students are performing well, scoring at the highest levels, “Proficient” or “Advanced,” on the state test. However, thousands more have the unrealized potential to do so.

Proposals to solve students’ academic problems abound, but many are simplistic. South Carolina has long favored such approaches in public policy. Human bondage would fuel economic development. Secession would free South Carolina of the federal yoke. Racial oppression and segregation would preserve ‘our way of life.’ Low taxes would attract industry. Providing a ‘minimally adequate education’ will secure the state’s future.

Now comes school choice. Some African-American leaders are tempted by the prospect of state financial support, one way or another, for constituents to choose private schools for their children. Perhaps they genuinely believe this will improve the education of the more than 275,000 African-American students in South Carolina’s public schools. It may be just as likely they are focusing on the relatively small number who attend or may attend private schools operated by some African-American churches.

There is no doubt some public school educators lack the cultural orientation, sensitivity, and pedagogical skills to educate some African-American students effectively. This is not universally true, however. Several months ago, the South Carolina Education Oversight Committee issued a report examining 26 ‘gap-closing schools.’ During four consecutive years, the schools significantly reduced the achievement differential between ‘historically underperforming students’ and the schools’ other students. Three of the schools had poverty rates greater than 70 percent.

What were the reasons for the schools’ success? The report concludes: ‘Not only do gap-closing schools maintain an instructional environment that supports high achievement, but these schools also create a positive school climate that fosters the attainment of high student performance.’ These conditions do not exist in every public school because local education leaders choose not to make the effort and take the risks necessary to develop and sustain them.

All South Carolinians, not just African-Americans, should be enraged that too many children are failing to meet the state’s academic standards. Where this is persistently the case, citizens should organize to demand and support improvements in their local public schools.

At the same time, African-Americans are entitled to the same portion of nostalgia as any other segment of the population. After three centuries, they also have the right to seek or create what they consider to be the most effective education venues for their children. Their unique history, however, provides them a useful guide to discern what is false and what is true. Separation, withdrawal, and isolation are anathema to authentic education. They did not serve African-American children well when required by law. They will not serve them well if sought by choice.”


Definitely gives folks something to think about as the Ed in 08ers push for greater education-speak in South Carolina and as we continue to look at (or look away from) the achievement gap.
 

In Search of Relevancy

Eduflack NCLB, PR, Spellings

It’s been a busy week in education, what with SAT scores released, the Miller-McKeon draft dropped, and classes starting in school districts across the nation.  It can be a tough time to gain some meaningful news coverage this year, even if you are the educator-in-chief.

We’ve all commented on the incredible media coverage Margaret Spellings has received since becoming Secretary of Education.  She has been focused on issues, level-headed in her comments, and in control of the situation.  Even as Reading First scandals swirled and IG reports became best-sellers, Spellings knew how to stay on message, reframe the issues, and remain relevant.

But this week, Spellings has Eduflack scratching his head.  First, she’s up in Alaska, doing a day of NCLB “tours.”  While I understand the call to support a Republican Senator in trouble, are the votes in the Alaskan congressional delegation and the public opinion in our northern-most state really a pressing need for the U.S. Department of Education?  And if the goal was to focus on rural education issues, there are far more effective ways to draw attention the challenges of rural ed than leaving the lower 48.

And then there was the Q&A in today’s USA Today.  Spellings has always played well with USA Today, and the newspaper has always had a clear understanding of the intent of the law, the progress it has made, and the challenges Spellings and company face during reauthorization and beyond. 

Check out the Q&A, though.  http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/nclb-is-working.html?csp=34  It is an interesting read, sure.  But there seems to be a disconnect between the interview and the very real issues policymakers are dealing with on NCLB and related issues.  There was no sense of urgency.  There was no sense of the push to improve the law.  There was no unwavering commitment to improving the quality, delivery, and impact of education for all students.  It reads more like a coffee shop chat than it does a call to action to more than a million readers.

Could it be that the U.S. Secretary of Education has lost her relevancy in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act? 

Turning the Corner on NCLB?

Eduflack Marketing, NCLB, PR, Reading First, Spellings

For months now, one of the greatest parlor games in DC education policy sectors has been when No Child Left Behind will be reauthorized.  Depending on who you listen to, it’ll happen next month, this fall, or maybe 2009.  We’ve seen a number of “alternative” bills proposed, and we’ve heard the calls for outright elimination of NCLB.

A few weeks ago, we heard from Congressman George Miller on his views of NCLB.  Again, nothing earth-shattering there, other than the good congressman floated the trial balloon of multiple assessments in evaluating student achievement.  The rhetoric seemed to stick, if this week’s proposal is any indication.

I’ll leave it to the policy wonks to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Miller-McKeon “draft” for NCLB reauthorization.  From the cheap seats, Eduflack is glad to see key components of NCLB remain intact, is a little disappointed in the proposed perceived weakening of accountability provisions, and concerned about the future of full funding for Reading First.

No, what is really of interest is HOW Miller and McKeon are working this reauthorization, and what it says about the future of NCLB 2.0.

First, they are offering a bipartisan solution.  At a time when rhetoric and vitriol is at its best (or worst) on Capitol Hill, we’ve got a powerful Democrat and an equally powerful Republican joining together to offer a meaningful solution to a politically charged problem.  Just as NCLB was positioned six years ago, this is not a blue or red issue.  Providing all students with a high-quality education, an effective teacher, and opportunity is an American issue.  We entered the NCLB in bipartisan fashion, and we now enter 2.0 the same way.

Second, the two demonstrate they understand the challenges stakeholders, bomb throwers, and status quoers pose to meaningful legislation.  They opened the tent, leaving no voice out at this point in the process.  This week’s announcement is intended as the start of the dialogue, purposely released so all concerned can comment, criticize, and offer improvements.  Miller and McKeon may know well, but they admit that the views of others are equally important in improving the law.  They opened the lines of communication, versus cutting them off from the start.

Finally, they issued no ultimatums.  There is no line in the sand.  Just the commitment that we are continuing the law, and we are seeking to improve the law.  Opponents can’t shoot down this draft … yet.  And if one seeks to wait to criticize after the reauthorization bill is dropped, they are guilty of refusing to participate in the process.   You gotta play the game in the early innings if you expect to win it in the ninth.

Yes, there are still many miles to go on NCLB reauthorization.  And this draft still needs a lot of work before it is a true improvement in the law.  But if this week is any indication, Miller and McKeon understand how to marketing and promote their vision and their intentions.  A bipartisan approach, an approach that invites input and offers the time and space for continued improvement, is just what the current situation calls for.  These two congressional leaders have reduced the temperature a little on NCLB, and provided a tad bit of hope in what was once seen as a hopeless situation.

Expanding Our View

Eduflack early childhood education, PR

Typically, the education community focuses on its own universe.  Practitioners talk to practitioners.  Researchers to researchers.  Policymakers to policymakers.  Influencers to influencers.  Even flacks to flacks.  We rely on those who understand our position, have stood in our shoes, and know of what they speak.

It’s only been recently that we have seen the business community for more than just its checkbook.  In recent years, states, districts, and schools have seen the enormous role the corporate sector can play in improving instructional quality, boosting focus on results and the bottom line, and focusing our work in the classroom with the work our students may face after passing through the schoolhouse doors for the last time.

As a result, we’ve seen growing dialogue between educators and business, all in the name of the 21st century global workforce, global competitiveness, and relevant instruction.

This approach serves two core communications purposes.  The first is to get educators thinking about the end game — preparing students for the real world.  The second (and the one often overlooked) is it gets the business community thinking about and acting on the educational needs of their business, their industry sector, and their current and future employers.

Case in point, Jeffrey M. Lacker’s commentary in today’s Washington Post.  If you missed it, it was because it was in the Business section (a place where few educators dare to tread), and not in Metro or the A section.  Lacker is President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, and the piece in question was excerpted from Lacker’s presentation at the Governor’s Summit on Early Childhood Development in Virginia.  Check it out for yourself — http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082601079.html.

And why is this commentary so important to the communication of education reform?  First, it clearly examines public education through a private sector lens, exploring issues like human capital, skill differentials, and the rest.  More importantly, it expands the education-business continuum.  Instead of only focusing on high schools and skill acquisition, Lacker also cites the need to attend to and invest in early childhood education.  In its simplest way, you invest in a three- or five-year-old’s education now, and it will pay exponential dividends come high school or college graduation.

Too often, we think the concerns over the global economy can be fixed with last-minute interventions in secondary school.  But anyone who has been in a classroom knows that if we don’t equip our kids with the skills and educational building blocks from go, its gets harder and harder to achieve as you move through the school system.

Lacker’s right.  A children’s education is a smart investment.  And like all smart investments, we need to properly fund it, watch it grow and mature, and reap the benefits once it has run its course.  Lacker and the Federal Reserve may be onto something here.  Is anyone listening?

Looking for Ed Improvement in the Montana Sky

Eduflack NCLB, STEM, Teacher Education

In focusing on an issue like education reform, Eduflack never expected that he would be writing multiple entries about the great state of Montana.  In March, we talked about how pre-K advocates in the state understood effective communication and effective advocacy.  Now, we focus on Montana Sen. Max Baucus, and his effort to solve multiple education ails with his proposed Education Competitiveness Act.


The Billings Gazette has the full story — http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/08/20/news/state/24-tuition.txt.  The highlights are simple.  A big focus is making sure that kids are ready to learn when they start kindergarten.  But the more interesting focus is his commitment to provide full scholarships to any high school student looking to major in science, technology, engineering, or math.  The catch — those students would have to teach for four years after college graduation. 

Why is this so interesting?  Simply, it sends several powerful messages:
* It cements STEM education as a national priority.
* It places recruiting qualified teachers for hard-to-staff courses like math and science on the national education priority list.
* It makes clear that teaching STEM is just as important as learning it.  Being a STEM teacher is just as important as being a rocket scientist or a cancer curer.

What is also does is focus on solutions.  The Education Competitiveness Act is not about casting blame for the lack of teachers in rural communities or to bemoan the loss of U.S. jobs to competitor countries overseas.  It recognizes that economic success begins with educational success.  And educational success begins with the teacher.

Of course, this proposal is simply the latest to be thrown on top of the pile of education reforms, NCLB realignments, and other such legislation that Congress is using to keep the front doors propped up.  Soon, it may just be time to take a look at these proposals, take a look at the current laws, and actually craft a meaningful national K-12 education law focused on evidence-based instruction, improved student performance, and effective teaching.  An eduflack can dream, can’t he?