Month: February 2009
Recovering and Reinvesting in RF
By now, educators must have be living under rocks to have not heard about the enormous sums of money soon coming to school districts. In the next month and a half, the first installment of nearly 80 billion dollars intended to prevent pending cuts to local K-12 education and allow for real school improvement is expected to flow. How Title I and IDEA expenditures will be spent is pretty clear cut, following existing distribution formulae and providing a booster shot to those schools already receiving such funds. The big ticket item — the State Stabilization Fund — is still working through the details.
Recovery and Reinvestment Act was custom written to ensure that our federal reading investment (currently through Reading First, previously through the Reading Excellence Act) continues and that no school cut its reading programs or its reading investment, particularly those struggling schools previously identified as RF schools.
Presidential Rhetoric, Education-Style
The education game is on. During last evening’s Presidential Address to Congress, President Obama dedicated significant time in his hour-long speech to the issue of education. Such a commitment is typically unheard of in typical State of the Union addresses. Often, a president will throw in a few sentences about education, one about the importance of teachers, one about the value of a college education, and then he will move onto to other issues more adept at capturing the hearts and minds of the American people.
ational benchmarks (as NGA, CCSSO, and Achieve have recently called for). The Administration has been dipping its toe into the national standards pool, and the financial commitment to improve state data systems is a good step forward. But the rhetorical nod to a single expectation for student achievement in the United States would have been a powerful, defining statement.
Flagship University Vs. Local College
Across the nation, states have established flagship public universities to attract the nation’s best and brightest. These institutions bring in the top faculty, establish academic centers of excellence, secure significant federal dollars in R&D, and recruit the top students in the nation. All of this is done to ensure they can effectively compete with both the top public and private institutions, demonstrating a statewide commitment to education, innovation, and results.
cores, and stronger resumes, they are taking slots from over-achievers in NoVa.
A Responsible “No, Thanks?”
For quite some time, we have heard how the federal economic stimulus package was essential to stabilizing our nation’s economy… and our nation’s schools. Nearly $800 billion in new funding, with almost 10 percent of that designated for K-12 and higher education needs, is now being readied for implementation. In our K-12 schools in particular, we’ve heard how such funds are absolutely necessary. Without federal assistance, and without it fast, we run the real risk of teacher layoffs, school closings, and academic years put in jeopardy.
How Do We Disperse Ed Stimulus Dollars?
By now, we’ve all hear the numbers. Under the state stabilization fund, $53.4 billion for our governors. For Title I, $10 billion. Special education gets $12.2 billion. The School Improvement Fund, $3 billion. Head Start comes in a cool billion dollars. With $250 million for state data systems and $200 million more for the Teacher Incentive Fund. And then there are the subcategories.
The Measure of a Successful Graduate
This has been an interesting week for national education standards and firm performance measures. We celebrated President’s Day on Monday with AFT President Randi Weingarten making the case for national standards on the opinion pages of The Washington Post — www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/15/AR2009021501257.html. She makes a compelling case, a case that Eduflack and other have been making for quite some time.
Cutting Off Our Thumbs …
We all recognize that state departments of education are hurting. Even once they receive a significant financial booster shot from the federal stimulus to help pay for core instructional needs, states are still looking for places to trim, cut, or generally push back on. Usually, we think that such cuts should first be directed at those areas considered expendable, the sort of luxuries our schools want, but just can’t afford during these belt-tightening times.
Advocating for Meaningful STEM Education
Earlier this week, www.ednews.org ran a Commentary from Eduflack on how to advocate for meaningful STEM education, particularly at the state level. The article was originally found here — ednews.org/articles/33615/1/Advocating-STEM-Education-As-a-Gateway-To-Economic-Opportunity/Page1.html. Thanks also to Fritz Edelstein and the Fritzwire for spotlighting the piece.
By Patrick R. Riccards
Effectively integrating Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics (STEM) education and its impact on the economic opportunity into the culture is more important today than anyone ever anticipated.Our nation’s recent economic struggles, coupled with concerns about career readiness and 21st century jobs, have refocused our attention on infrastructure – both physical and human.At the heart of rebuilding our nation’s intellectual infrastructure is a STEM-literate society, and students equipped with the STEM skills needed to succeed both in school and career.
But implementing a STEM education effort isn’t as easy as it seems.To some, STEM is a retread of education programs offered decades ago or a recast of vocational education.To others, it is something for the future rocket scientists and brain surgeons, not for every student.To overcome these obstacles, states and school districts are forced to move into a mode of advocacy and social marketing, effectively linking K-12 education and economy and demonstrating the urgency for improvement to both.
Education improvement no longer happens in a vacuum.Call it communications, advocacy, PR, or social marketing, it all comes down to effective public engagement.For education reform efforts across the nation, ultimate success is more than just educating key constituencies about their cause and goals.True success requires specific action – implementing improvements in partnership with educators and other stakeholders to boost student success, close the achievement gap, and ultimately prepare every student for the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century workforce. Such actions require us to move from informing the public to building commitment for a solution, and, finally to mobilizing around specific actions.
Making stakeholders aware of a concern like the need for STEM education is one thing.It is quite another to move the public to the more sophisticated level of informed opinion necessary to reach consensus and generate a sense of urgency that ultimately leads to the action of investing in a K-12 STEM agenda.But this is how great education reforms move from simply good ideas to great successes.
Before we can get audiences to adopt STEM education efforts and embrace the portfolio of research and recommendations available to them, we must first make them aware of the issues at hand.The informing stage makes people aware of the issue, developing a true sense of urgency for change.
While many decisionmakers recognize that there are problems in meeting the coming workforce demands, many do not agree on what those problems may be or what actions might successfully address them.Unfortunately, too many people believe that there is nothing that can be done to fix these problems. Those states that are poised to become leaders in STEM education must convince K-12 and postsecondary education leaders, current and potential employers, state and local policymakers, and the public at large that there are solutions that will work, and solutions their communities can get behind and support.
Ultimately, we do this by showing the enormous need for reforms in “schools like mine, in classes like mine, with kids like mine.” By focusing on past successes and proven-effective methods, educators can demonstrate the critical role STEM plays in our schools, economy, and community, helping make key decisionmaking constituencies understand the serious risks they face simply accepting the status quo. Thanks to groups like the National Governors Association (and a number of forward-thinking states) and the National Math and Science Initiative, such efforts are well underway.
Next, we shift into phase two — building commitment.Once parents, educators, and policymakers recognize the problem, they are ready to commit to a meaningful solution.Transforming a general need for improvement into a public call to arms for STEM education requires understanding that these solutions are the right ones to improve efficiency and success.
Inevitably, some people will reject proposed reforms. Some will be reluctant to face and accept the trade-offs that come from choosing a specific plan of action. Opponents will try to poke holes in specific reforms. The best way to avoid this resistance is to ensure that everyone is involved in the process and that all of their concerns have been heard.
After moving beyond initial resistance, stakeholders begin to weigh their choices rationally and look to a variety of options for moving recommendations into practice.Decisionmakers need to feel that they have a range of choices and a reason to make them.Successful advocacy clarifies the pros and cons of each decision and allow time and opportunity for deliberation.In Colorado, for instance, STEM leaders are working with business leaders and the P-20 Council to explore opportunities and make specific choices to meet the state’s educational and economic needs.
With that, we are finally ready to move to phase three — mobilizing for action.Changing attitudes and informing the debate is not enough. STEM education succeeds when policymakers and community leaders are actively supporting its solutions.Once our target audiences are engaged because they believe in the merits of our position, they will need to know what we want them to do to help accomplish these goals.So it is important that our communications and organizing efforts include specific actions – ideally actions that are easy and feasible – that supporters can take to help reach overall goals.
If history tells us anything, we know the public may agree that reform efforts are valid and will produce desired results, but may not be willing to change their behavior or adopt specific recommendations.This is
temporary, though.Given time, incentives, and opportunities to consider their core values in light of challenges and needs, stakeholders can reach the final stage of full intellectual and emotional acceptance of the importance of improving education opportunity for all.Now is the best time to make sure that there is a role for everyone to play in education improvement, giving stakeholders the tools and information needed to move themselves and others from awareness to action.
Education is an industry as driven by emotion as it is by fact.As a result, too often, stakeholders decide that inaction is the best action, out of fear of taking a wrong step or alienating a specific group. That is why too many groups, causes, and reforms struggle to develop true public engagement efforts that affect real outcomes.That’s where the Inform-Build Commitment-Mobilize Action model comes into play, offering education leaders one of the most effective methods to implement meaningful education solutions. Applying this model to STEM efforts is critical and will offer long-term impacts on strengthening our schools, our community, and our economy.
(Patrick R. Riccards is CEO of Exemplar Strategic Communications, an education consultancy, and author of Eduflack, an education reform blog.)
Published February 9, 2009
With all of the talk about the federal economic stimulus package and its specific education provisions, there seems to be a common belief that education funds (particularly those block grants and discretionary moneys going directly to the state) have little impact on employment (or unemployment) across the nation. For those not involved in K-12 education on a day-to-day basis, we just can’t see that school districts would look to lay off teachers in the middle of an academic year. After all, who has the vision of a classroom full of students, lacking a certified educator at the front of the room?