Year: 2009

Tapping 21st Century Skills

Eduflack High School, STEM, technology, Workforce

We’re still into the first week of the new year, and it looks like 21st century skills is quickly becoming my white whale for 2009, supplanting my doggedness on Reading First and SBRR last year.  Eduflack was prepared the let the issue sit after some of yesterday’s back and forth.  I had my say, and I acknowledge the learned opinions of those who disagree with me on said say.  But then the Christian Science Monitor has to go and tickle my interest again this morning.

CSM’s Stacy Teicher Khadaroo looks at how teachers are making the necessary adjustments to prepare their students for the challenges and opportunities of what is before them.  The full story can be found at: <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0108/p03s03-usgn.html
What”>www.csmonitor.com/2009/0108/p03s03-usgn.html
What really got me, though, was the graph that accompanied the article, looking at the issue of what “creativity” means to superintendents and the business community.  The crux of this is, according to CSM, that “creativity is key for a 21st century workforce.”  What’s startling about the data is how our school leaders and our business leaders see the issue of creativity so differently.  Asked to rank issues on a scale of one to 10, what came in as number one for the business community (problem identification or articulation) ranked ninth with superintendents.  The supes’ top concern (problem solving) only scored in the top eight with our business minds.
Why is this significant?  Like it or not, our schools are preparing our future workers.  These numbers demonstrate there is a real disconnect between the learning priorities set by our schools and the expected outcomes of our employers.  It is no wonder so many business leaders I speak with say that a potential hire with only a high school diploma simply doesn’t have the skill sets needed to thrive in today’s challenging economy.  They’re looking for different things than many K-12s are prioritizing.
Let me be clear.  I am not suggesting that our business leaders should hijack the decisionmaking process in K-12, nor should our public schools be transformed into glorified trade schools serving merely as a pipeline into the workforce.  What I am suggesting is the need for greater collaboration in all areas of the learning process.  School districts need a better understanding of the skills and knowledgebase that local employers are seeking and need to better understand how to offer that within the confines of their current curriculum and state performance measures.  They need to look at innovations that open up new content and that offer the tried-and-true in ways that better engage and better inspire today’s students.  
Businesses need to move beyond simply sponsoring the sports teams and placing ads in the yearbook and become true learning partners.  How can they offer internships to students, opening their eyes to potential careers?  How can they offer externships to teachers, helping them see how their instruction links back to the opportunities that will be available to their students?  How can they help more students see the relevance of school, supporting teachers as they try to boost student achievement and avoid growing drop-out numbers?
It is trite and overused, but sometimes it really does take a village to raise a child.  It definitely takes a wide range of stakeholders to effectively educate them.  And until key stakeholders like superintendents and the business community share a common view on needs and priorities, we will continue to struggle between good intentions and missed opportunities.
   

Wahoowah, But What Is “Value?”

Eduflack higher ed, Workforce

In today’s economic climate, there is growing worry about cost.  This is particularly true in higher education, where we have witnessed cost increases that far exceed the explosions seen in other industries (even healthcare).  We tell every student they need a postsecondary education to succeed in the new world economy, but we usually fail to address the cost issue, figuring new loans will simply take care of the problem.  Students are looking for real value and real savings.

Today, USA Today offers up its Best Value Colleges for 2009 under the headline of “Getting the most bang for your college buck.”  
Eduflack”>www.usatoday.com/news/education/2009-01-07-best-value-colleges_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Eduflack is incredibly proud his alma mater — the University of Virginia — is the top public institution in the nation.  He was surprised, though, to see eduwife’s Stanford University listed in the top 10 for private institutions.
Why?  A Stanford education doesn’t come cheap.  Four years out at the Farm will run you north of $150K or so these days.  Same is true for most of the institutions on the top 10 privates list, universities such as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and CalTech.  Even the top private — Swarthmore College — come with a nearly $49,000 a year price tag (while providing an average grant of $30K).  So how does that make it a “best value,” particularly if you are paying sticker price?
Princeton Review’s Ben Zelevansky defines best value as “a list of schools that provide the best balance of a strong education and a reasonable rate of attendance.  The bottom-line cost for families is our concern here.”
He may be right.  But it is hard to swallow that a “best value” college education is pricier a starter house in many of the communities a graduate may soon enter into.  Even at my proud alma mater, I recognize that U.Va. costs more than your average public university.  Quality costs.  Virginia has taken major steps to expand its access and its financial aid — including its AccessUVA program — but it is hardly a great find in the bargain bin.
I recognize that “best value” does not mean the lowest cost, nor is it intended to.  The selection criteria include academics, costs, and financial aid.  Perhaps, though, we also need to look at return on investment to determine “best value.”  How many of these students go on to graduate or professional schools?  How many are gainfully employed within three months of graduation?  How many are employed in the field in which they studied?  How many are giving back to their alma mater — financial or otherwise — demonstrating they value the impact their school had on their lives?
Best Value Colleges for 2009 is a great start, but families across the country need to dig deeper into the data and really understand how their postsecondary dollars are being spent and whether they have a chance of receiving the return they are seeking. Value is ultimately in the eye of the beholder.  More data sharpens that eye.  

Take Me Home, 21st Century Teachers

Eduflack Achievement gap, High School, STEM, Students, technology

Twenty-first century skills seems to be the topic of the day again today.  Over at Fordham Foundation’s Flypaper, Mike Petrilli takes a vastly different point of view from dear ole Eduflack, boiling down the issue of 21st century skills to making our kids tech savvy (http://www.edexcellence.net/flypaper/index.php/2009/01/the-conceit-of-21st-century-skills/#comments).  I agree with Petrilli.  Today’s students don’t need any help at all figuring out how technology works.  My two-and-a-half year old son is already more skilled on the iPhone than the eduwife, knowing perfectly well how to turn it on, get it out of sleep mode, and flip through the pages to get to his favorite game (the one with the rabbit eating the carrots and dodging the cans, for those in the real know).

And Robert Pondiscio over at Core Knowledge blog comments on my earlier posting about the real dangers of sacrificing content in the name of 21st century skills. Again, I agree with Pondiscio’s premise and point.  But one can teach the finer points of the War of 1812 beyond the chalkboard and mimeographed pages.  Content still remains king, but we also need to take a careful look at delivery.
We’re seeing the shift in our assessments, as bubble sheets are giving way to computer-based exams.  We’re able to use technology to determine student reading levels.  And states like Florida and Alabama are now requiring virtual education as part of their curriculum, with the latter now requiring virtual education as part of graduation requirements.  That, my friends, is 21st century skills, gaining the content knowledge we’ve prized for decades through new channels and new technologies.  Imagine the difference of studying the Civil War from a classroom in Minnesota, using a tattered grade reader and a chalkboard, versus learning it in a virtual environment with students who live around the block from the very battle sites you are studying, where you can access Brady photographs and clips from Ken Burns’ Civil War series.  That learning 21st century skills.  It’s all in the delivery.
This week’s Education Week has another interesting take on 21st century skills.  Stephen Sawchuk has a piece on how teachers in my former home state of West Virginia are adapting their practice to better meet our 21st century world.  And Sawchuk has one paragraph that helps sum it up:

Business leaders and policymakers more and more say those higher-order, critical-thinking, communication, technological, and analytical skills are the ones crucial for students to master as they enter a service-oriented, entrepreneurial, and global workplace.

I appreciate the sentiments recently offered by Petrilli, Pondiscio, WaPo’s Jay Mathews, and Andy Rotherham.  This is a real discussion that those committed to education improvement should be having.  How do we continue to adapt and improve classroom curriculum to ensure rigorous, relevant courses that hold a student’s interest?  How do we ensure the core content areas we all know are important –the reading, literature, math, science, and social sciences — remain in the curriculum and are effectively consumed by our students.  Current student performance scores show that the old way of delivering such content isn’t working with every student.  If we are going to close achievement gaps, boost performance numbers, and improve graduation rates, perhaps we need to rethink how we are delivering the content.  Some may call that a semantic matter of packaging, but I see it as a core part of 21st century skills.  21CS is about how we deliver content, not what we are delivering.

What’s Wrong with 21st Century Skills?

Eduflack High School, Math, Science, STEM, Students, Workforce

Recently, there seems to be growing momentum against the notion of 21st century skills in our K-12 classrooms.  Some find the term just to be a little too trite for their tastes.  Others believe it moves away from the classically liberal arts education, like literature and history, that K-12 was designed for more than a century ago.  And still others think that it is code for turning our high schools into trade schools.

So Eduflack asks the question, what’s wrong with 21st century skills?  We hear time and again that other nations are eating our collective school lunches when it comes to international benchmarks such as TIMSS and PISA.  We worry about how our kids stack up when it comes to math and science and such, worrying that more jobs may either be eliminated or relocated.  We wonder what jobs will be out there when they do graduate, and whether they will be competitive enough to secure those jobs.
In last year’s Quality Counts, EdWeek gave my home state of Virginia an “F” when it came to college preparedness of our students.  In my previous work with the Virginia Department of Education, I heard time and again from businesses in the Commonwealth that today’s high school graduates simply don’t have the skills necessary to fill today’s jobs, let alone tomorrow’s jobs.  Nationally, our high school drop-out rate is still about one-third, meaning one in three students never gains that diploma in the first place.  And for those who get through high school and do move on to postsecondary education, more than half of them need remedial English or math courses when arriving at their higher education institution of choice.
So, again, what is wrong with 21st century skills for our 21st century schools?  Better yet, what is wrong with defining what 21st century skills really are, at least as they relate to today’s K-12 students?
Reading, math, and science are all 21st century skills.  The ability to use technology is a 21st century skill.  Soft skills like problem solving and teamwork and critical thinking and such are 21st century skills as well.  The problem we have is that when we talk about 21st century skills, too many people think we are talking about skills newly discovered in the 21st century.  That just isn’t the case.  Yes, we are talking about core skills that have been around since Plato.  But that doesn’t mean the skills aren’t as relevant today as they were a millennia or two ago.  It just means we need to starting thinking about them and teaching them in new or different ways that make them more relevant in our 21st century world.
In recent weeks, I’ve talked with a good friend who is a former urban superintendent about the future of classroom instruction.  One of his top concerns is the belief that we are “un-plugging” our students once they enter schools.  Here at Eduflack, we’ve used the term “de-skilling.”  For many, this boils down to the issue of technology in the classroom.  When you have students living on computers and MP3s and instant messaging and cell phones, and you have a world and an economy that are equally reliant on the same, where is the logic of putting away all that technology between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.  and teaching reading, math, science, and social studies through 19th century delivery mechanisms?  
Concern on the issue is redoubled when we consider the changing face of the American classroom teacher.  Across the nation, school districts have been experiencing significant retirements and a new face on the teaching workforce.  Incoming teachers, particularly in our urban districts, have been brought up on computers and cell phones.  They’ve likely never used a card catalog, and many of them do not take a daily newspaper.  But that doesn’t mean they are informationally deprived.  They simply get their data through other sources, through 21st century sources aligned with their interests, their skills, and the world in which they live.
I am no shrinking violet when it comes to the advocacy for STEM education and the need to ensure every student is STEM literate.  For me, this isn’t just an issue for the future rocket scientists and brain surgeons of the world.  Even that student looking to work on the manufacturing line next to his father is going to need STEM skills in our new economy.  Every student benefits from STEM literacy, regardless of their future education, career, or life path.  That includes providing them the soft and the content skills that we define as 21st century skills.  More importantly, it requires a new way to deliver the content that, for decades, has been deemed essential learning.
What does all this mean?  Ultimately, when we talk about 21st century skills, we aren’t talking about new sets of content and new academic areas of study.  Sure, topics such as engineering still have yet to really be defined in a K-12 environment (and we clearly don’t have a praxis for secondary school engineering teachers), but we are still talking about core academics like reading, writing, math, science, and the social sciences.  At its heart, 21st century skills is about a new delivery system.  It is about moving beyond the chalkboard to the interactive white board.  It is about moving from the card catalog to the World Wide Web.  And it is about moving from rows and rows of single desks into groups of interactive, collaborative students progressing beyond rote memorizations into critical thinking and higher-level learning.  
Ultimately, it is about delivering our core education in a 21st century world through 21st century means.  An education more relevant and interesting for students.  An education more engaging and empowering for teachers  An education more applicable and valued in the economy.  If 21st century skills is a code, then it is simply code for skills that are relevant and outcome-based for all those involved in the learning process.  That is the sort of progress we should be investing in.

Yes We Can … Or Will We?

Eduflack Achievement gap, Arne Duncan, AYP, early childhood education, High School, NCLB, Obama

How committed are we, as a nation, to improving public education?  A decade or two ago, education ranked as a top issue in the minds of the American voter.  Yet this time around, education was an also-ran, a second-tier issue at best.  In survey after survey, we hear that America’s schools in general need improving, but not mine.  The common thought is that Rome might be burning, but my own neighborhood school is doing just fine, largely because I know the principal, I know some of the teachers, and my kid goes there.  And I wouldn’t send my child to a bad school, at least not intentionally.

We know from student performance data, though, that many of our schools are not doing just fine.  Students in all grades are still struggling to master basic reading and math skills.  A third or so of all ninth graders won’t complete high school four years later.  And only a third of those same original ninth graders will end up earning some sort of postsecondary degree.  We promise our children a world-class education, but we are still delivering as if it is class in a 19th century world.  This shouldn’t be a fight about status quo or not.  We all should agree there is room for improvement in our early childhood education and K-12 systems.
Over at USA Today this morning, the editorial writers riff off of will.i.am’s “Yes We Can” to spotlight the dire educational situation for African-American boys.  The graduation gap between black and white males is staggering.  Sixteen percent in Texas, 18 percent in Georgia, 21 percent in California, 22 percent in Florida, 26 percent in Pennsylvania, 30 percent in Ohio, 36 percent in New York, and a whopping 42 percent in Illinois.  In most of the states analyzed by USA Today, less than half of African-American males graduate from high school, and the number usually hovers in the 30-percents.
The full editorial can be found here: <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/index.html#entry-60921352
USA”>blogs.usatoday.com/oped/index.html#entry-60921352
USA Today uses the will.i.am song as its lead-in because it was a popular motivator in the 2008 elections, driving generations and demographics of voters to the polls (and to volunteerism) for the first time ever.  The video created for the song (and the Obama campaign) was viewed on YouTube nearly 15 million times, serving as a rallying cry for a significant portion of the American populace that felt their voice had been ignored in the past, and now was their time to stand up, speak clearly, and bring about real change in their community and their nation.
Step one was accomplished.  The “Yes We Can” president was elected.  Now comes the hard work.  Moving from “yes we can” to “yes we will.”  Current economic times make it difficult to say yes to a host of new education initiatives, programs, and efforts designed to make good on what millions of Americans committed to.  But it also provides a real opportunity for those committed to change to come together, set some common goals, and build community commitment to long-term improvement. 
Case in point, the Forum for Education & Democracy.  Until today, the Forum was known mostly as a convener, bringing together leading stakeholder voices to focus on “equitable access to quality schools for all American families.”  Today, though, the Forum launches down a new path of advocacy, looking to transform Obama’s mantra of “Yes We Can” into real school improvement.
Launching a national advocacy campaign, the Forum has begun a petition drive calling on the Obama administration to focus on four key commitments when it comes to school improvement:
* Every child deserves a 21st century education
* Every community deserves an equal chance
* Every child deserves a well-supported teacher
* Every child deserves high-quality health care
The national online petition is complemented by a new website — www.willwereally.com — and a new YouTube video featuring the ideas and, more importantly, some of the students, who can be affected by a new national commitment to public school improvement.  The video in particular (found on the home page) is worth checking out.
I’ll admit, there is a lot of wiggle room in the four key issues the Forum is putting out there through its Will We Really effort.  As a community, we still haven’t defined what a 21st century education is, nor have we come to consensus that 21st century skills should be the focus of our K-12 system.  We all agree that every community deserves an equal chance, until that means taking resources from my community to help another.  And we all believe every child deserves a well-supported teacher, until that discussion turns to boosting pay for good teachers and the new taxes that come along with it.  Like most in education reform, the real devil is in the details.  How do we capture these mission statements into actionable policy?
That is a question that will be left to EdSec in-waiting Arne Duncan and his presumably able team of leaders over at ED.  It is a question that will be left to our governors, state departments of education, mayors, and superintendents.  It is a question that will be left to the influencers — the Forum for Education & Democracy included — who are lining up to recommend new programs, new policies, and new ideas for a new administration.  And it is a question for the hopefully millions of parents, students, and Americans that will sign onto the Will We Really petition and remind decisionmakers of our national commitment to these fundamental principles.
For Eduflack, the answers are found in a few places.  First and foremost is the research.  How do we better collect, analyze, and apply data on our students and their achievement?  That data determines what is lacking in classroom instruction today and how to deliver a 21st century education.  That data helps us see what supports today’s teachers need, and how educators can learn from and lean on one another.
The second is ROI, or return on investment.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  We cannot change simply for change’s sake.  We must bring forward meaningful improvements that boost student achievement, get better teachers in the classroom (and keep them there), and convince every student that dropping out is never a viable alternative to earning that high school diploma.  We must start early, recognizing that high-quality early childhood ed programs ensure that disadvantaged youth have that equal chance to achieve.  And we must invest in instructional programs that get students performing at grade level and exceeding expectations.  Like it or not, we’re still talking about ensuring that no child is left behind.  Will We Really is just looking more at the whole child, and not just the quantitative performance measures of NCLB.
The achievement gap highlighted in USA Today should be a national embarrassment.  In 2009, graduation rates between African-American and white males should be nearing equity, not approaching 30 or 40 percent.  And we haven’t even looked at the gender gap issues.  Does anyone really want to see the numbers as to how black males measure up to white females?  Of course not.  
We’ve moved far beyond the issue of whether we can or not.  It is now an issue of whether we will.  Can we rediscover education as a national priority?  Can we clearly see the linkages between a high-quality K-12 education and economic opportunities?  Can we acknowledge we have no choice if we want to remain an educational and economic leader?

Become a Teacher in Six Easy Lessons?

Eduflack AFT, NEA, Teacher Education

Most of us don’t bother to read the countless spam emails that enter our inboxes.  We view them like we do commercials, hoping to avoid as many as possible on our way to the content we want.  Not Eduflack.  I like commercials because they provide me insight into what key audiences and the public at large are thinking.  And I will check out some of the bulk emails I receive (I’m not foolish enough to click on any of the links, but I’ll look at the email content) to get a sense for where the industry, particularly the education industry, thinks money can be made.

My attention was really captured this weekend by an email with a compelling subject line — “Want More Vacation Days?  Become a School Teacher.”  The subject matter was what you would expect, a company called Eclipse Media Online looking to hook me up with the ideal online degree program to get me in the classroom quickly and racking up those vacation days.  I was promised I could “Get [my] Teaching Degree Online!  In My Spare Time From Home!”
Such claims are nothing new.  We’ve heard them from online institutions and diploma mills on daytime and overnight television for decades now.  What was so disturbing, though, was how the job of K-12 classroom teacher in 2009 was described.  A summary can’t do it justice.  Let me give you the full text:

Teachers play an important role in fostering the intellectual and social development of children during their formative years. The education that teachers impart plays a key role in determining the future prospects of their students. Whether in preschools or high schools or in private or public schools, teachers provide the tools and the environment for their students to develop into responsible adults.

Teachers act as facilitators or coaches, using classroom presentations or individual instruction to help students learn and apply concepts in subjects such as science, mathematics, or English. They plan, evaluate, and assign lessons; prepare, administer, and grade tests; listen to oral presentations; and maintain classroom discipline. Teachers observe and evaluate a student’s performance and potential and increasingly are asked to use new assessment methods. For example, teachers may examine a portfolio of a student’s artwork or writing in order to judge the student’s overall progress. They then can provide additional assistance in areas in which a student needs help. Teachers also grade papers, prepare report cards, and meet with parents and school staff to discuss a student’s academic progress or personal problems.

Many teachers use a “hands-on” approach that uses “props” or “manipulatives”to help children understand abstract concepts, solve problems, and develop critical thought processes. For example, they teach the concepts of numbers or of addition and subtraction by playing board games. As the children get older, teachers use more sophisticated materials, such as science apparatus, cameras, or computers. They also encourage collaboration in solving problems by having students work in groups to discuss and solve problems together. To be prepared for success later in life, students must be able to interact with others, adapt to new technology, and think through problems logically.

Honestly, I don’t know what part of this email I should find most offensive.  Teaching as a gateway to increased vacation days?  Teaching responsibilities defined as playing board games and reviewing artwork portfolios?  Instructional materials described as “props” or “manipulatives,” like teaching is no different than selling a time share to young people?  Or the fact that some people are going to get this email, click through, write their tuition checks, and believe they are on the path to becoming high-paid, highly vacationed, effective teachers, all from the privacy of their bedrooms and the comfort of their well-worn bunny slippers.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.  There is are few jobs as difficult as teaching, particularly in today’s high-stakes, high-expectation, high-criticism environment.  As the son of two educators (my mother a retired high school English teacher, my father a political scientist by trade and college president by path), I like to believe there is a little more to the profession than these sorts of emails put forward.  I see nothing about the countless hours my mother put in at night, on weekends, and during the summer grading, preparing, and planning.  I see nothing about the supplies she purchased or the emotional, intellectual, and sometimes financial support she provided her students.  I see nothing about breaking up fights or having to deal with parents who couldn’t accept that their kids simply failed to do the work.  I see nothing about the constantly changing PD expectations, the certification procedures, and the graduate degree requirements.  I see nothing about the notion that you are expected to work for 200 straight days, with no vacation or sick time intended to be taken during the school year.  And I see nothing about the second jobs and seasonal employment so many of my mother’s colleagues had to take to pay the bills or to actually use a few of those well-earned vacation days.
I know, I know, I shouldn’t get so worked up about a spam email that was never really intended for me in the first place.  But I know that teachers — and their training, recruitment, and retention — is a major issue for states and school districts today, and is going to be a major policy concern for the federal government and the U.S. Department of Education in the coming years.  Having worked for an online college of education, I know it isn’t as simple as the marketing campaign makes it seem (no matter what those institutions on the other end of the email want to believe).  And I know if we are really going to focus on student achievement and school improvement, it is all about putting good, well-trained effective educators in front of a classroom, and not merely a warm body who responded to an email campaign at the right time.
Teaching is hard.  Effective teaching is both an art and a science.  It requires the right person, the right motivation, the right training, and the right ongoing development and support.  The AFT and NEA have invested a great deal of intellectual and financial capital into promoting teacher professionalism, the nobility of the profession, the real challenges of good teaching, and the believe that not everyone is cut out to lead a classroom.  If we have individuals choosing teaching as a profession to increase their vacation time, we have far more important issues in public education that we recognize.  What’s truly scary is that folks are getting rich marketing “teaching” as a career path anyone with a computer and an interest in board games can and should pursue.  

Getting All Educationny at The Washington Post

Eduflack AFT, DCPS, early childhood education, Michelle Rhee, NGA, Students

We all recognize that 2008 was a relative no-go for education issues.  With political campaigns, mortgage bailouts, and economic crises, education improvement just failed to capture the hearts and minds of the American people, nor did it warrant the attention of the average newspaper editor.  Yesterday’s announcement that Denver Public Schools Chief Michael Bennet was a good start to the education year.  Today’s Washington Post is even better.  Not one, not two, but three articles in the A section of WaPo related to education and education improvement.

Exhibit A: On the national/state front, WaPo reports on efforts by a group of Democratic governors to secure $1 trillion in economic stimulus for the states.  Why the interest?  In addition to the money we’ve already been hearing about for school construction, this plan includes $250 billion “in flexible education spending to maintain funding for programs from pre-kindergarten to higher education,” Robin Shulman writes.  That means we have the majority of governors standing up, asking for the funds needed to provide our classrooms with the instructional materials, technology, and teacher supports necessary to get the job done.  As Eduflack has written here before, funding for books and computers and technology are often the first to go in a budget crisis, seen as non-essential while supes look to pay teacher salaries and keep the lights on and the buses running.  Our states need help to keep school improvement efforts, moving forward.  Now the governors are asking (as has AASA and AFT, among others).  The full story is here: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202277.html?hpid=topnews
Exhibit”>www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202277.html?hpid=topnews
Exhibit B: On the local front, Fairfax County (VA) Public Schools Chief Jack Dale is sticking to his guns and fighting to save the strict grading policy the school district has in place.  Parents have been leading a valiant effort to try and weaken Fairfax County’s current system and move to a 10-point scale (meaning an A is earned with a 90-100 score, versus Fairfax’s current 94-100).  In an era where we need tougher standards and measures to ensure all students are competing, making it easier for kids to get As is not the answer.  Watering down grading scales to ensure college admittance or to better chances at scholarships is not the answer.  It is far easier to go along with parent demands and the policies of neighboring school districts.  Dale is standing firm, recognizing that achievement and high standards are important.  The full story is here: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202430.html  And it has Eduflack wondering if we need a national grading scale to accompany those national standards our schools could benefit from.
Exhibit C: Education improvement, embodied in Colbert King’s latest and greatest.  Like many, King opines about Michelle Rhee and her efforts as top dog of DC Public Schools.  As we all know, the reigning 2008 Core Knowledge Blog Education Person of the Year has been getting a lot of national media attention, including the network evening news and a Time magazine cover.  But King asks a question that Eduflack has also previously raised.  Who ultimately pays the price for Rhee’s showdown with DC teachers?  I worry about her ability to work with the teachers she needs to enact her reforms after she tries to destroy their local union and their collective voice.  King worries about the long-term on DC’s students.  One has to appreciate Rhee’s zeal in moving forward with her improvement plans and doing what it takes to get them in place.  But one can’t forget the teachers who determine whether such efforts are a success or failure, nor can one ignore the impact on the students we are ultimately trying to help.  King reminds us of this, and his full column can be found here: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202078.html?hpid=opinionsbox1  
Lots of issues to get the intellectual juices flowing.  What does it tell us?  The real action on the education improvement front is likely to happen at the state or the school district level, evidenced by the Dem governors call for funding and Jack Dale’s fight to save his grading scale.  
And we are again reminded that personality can get in the way of good policy.  Rhee has built a real cult of personality around herself and her plans for DCPS.  That can be helpful in the early days of an administration, as you try to give some context and some understanding for reforms.  But it can get dangerous when we can’t separate the voice from the rhetoric.  We’ve learned that time and again in both politics and education.  The best of plans fail because we can’t separate a controversial personality from a terrific idea.

Putting the Schools In the U.S. Senate

Eduflack Achievement gap, Arne Duncan, charter schools, early childhood education, ELL, NCLB, STEM

If this is how 2009 is starting off, it is going to be a very fun and interesting year for Eduflack and the education improvement community.  Word out of Colorado this afternoon is that Gov. Bill Ritter has selected a replacement for U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, who is moving over to be Secretary of the Interior.  Over the past few weeks, a lot of names of been mentioned for the Senate seat, including those of sitting congressmen and the Denver mayor.  So why is Gov. Ritter’s selection so exciting for Eduflack?  Ritter has chosen Denver Public Schools Superintendent Michael Bennet to represent the Centennial State in the senior legislative body.

Many will remember that President-elect Obama was vetting Bennet for the EdSec position, with teams on the ground in Denver up until Chicago Public Schools CEO Arne Duncan was named Educator in Chief.  Now Bennet moves into a far more interesting position, becoming a U.S. Senator with hopefully a seat on the Senate HELP Committee.
For the life of me, I can’t remember a former schools superintendent serving in the U.S. Senate.  We’ve had educators and professors and college presidents, sure.  But there are few who can speak on issues such as urban education, equity, and school improvement like the Denver Schools superintendent.  Ritter’s announcement is a big win for public education, a big win for reformers, and a big win for the Senate as it plans for NCLB reauthorization.
In moving from the Rocky Mountains to Capitol Hill, Bennet brings an interesting portfolio of moving policies into action.  His background in city government and private business show a leader who can bring together stakeholders and recognizes the needs and roles all audiences can play in the process.  What can that mean for federal education policy?  Let’s look at two areas where Denver has led.
Issue One — Teacher performance pay.  Many would say that Denver’s ProComp program is the only truly successful teacher incentive program out there.  The President-elect has already gone on record in favor of performance pay for teachers.  Bennet is now in a position to take the lessons learned in Denver (both the positives and the negatives), and apply them on the federal stage.  If EdSec in-waiting Duncan is going to seriously look at teacher performance pay (particularly with ED’s EPIC program holding hundreds of millions of dollars for such efforts), there is no better ally and advocate on the Hill to lead the effort than Bennet.
Issue Two — STEM education.  Colorado has been a leader in Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics education, with the Colorado Department of Education and the Colorado Math, Science, Technology, and Engineering Education Coalition (COMSTEC) taking the lead.  Denver, and its public schools have been at the center of it all.  Working with the University of Colorado-Denver and the Governor’s Office, Denver Public Schools has been working hard promoting STEM education and linking STEM literacy with economic possibilities.  Bennet can immediately become a leading voice for the intersection between education and the economy.
Add to that Bennet’s exposure to student equity issues, charter schools, the achievement gap, ELL, and other such issues, and you have a real platform and real experiences to build upon.  The education community has been eager to have a practitioner in charge on Maryland Avenue.  Now they also have an experienced practitioner writing policy under the Capitol dome.  If Senators Reid and Kennedy are smart, they’ll quickly give Bennet a seat on the HELP Committee.  And Bennet should be tasked with moving the Obama education platform — and NCLB reauthorization — by focusing on the school administrators and the educators necessary for the success of both.
Bennet’s soon-to-be constituents in Colorado, along with the entire school reform community, will expect a lot from Bennet.  He’ll be expected to deliver and deliver fast, particularly with a 2010 special election staring him down.  He has the opportunity to hit the ground running and make a national name for himself as a seasoned voice for education improvement.  Is it asking a lot?  Sure.  But Bennet’s ability to navigate issues such as incentive pay, charters, early childhood education, and ELL show he’s up to it.  Welcome to Washington, Mr. Bennet!

Resolving in 2009

Eduflack Achievement gap, Arne Duncan, AYP, early childhood education, national standards, PD, SBRR, STEM

The start of a new year brings us a new page, a clean slate, and an opportunity for growth and redemption.  For whatever reason, we seen the beginning of a new calendar year as the one day in 365 to focus on improvement and ways we can better ourselves and the communities around us.  With such an outlook comes resolutions.  And while Eduflack likes to see himself going against the grain more often than not, that doesn’t mean I don’t see the value in setting some goals and publicly declaring some resolutions for 2009.

First, our collective resolutions.  Looking across the education improvement community, I hope we can all resolve to:
* Be more proactive in our communication.  For too many organizations (U.S. Department of Education included), communication consists mostly of one-way discussion (media releases) and reactive activities in response to someone else’s one-way discussion.  We need to be proactive.  We need to build dialogues and discussions.  We need to set the debate and establish the vocabulary, and not have it dictated to us by a select few.
* Engage in innovative communication.  If 2008 taught us anything, it is that there are multiple channels and endless ways to engage on key issues.  Media releases and outreach to daily newspaper reporters are just the tip of the iceberg.  We need to better engage the online community, including websites and the blogsphere.  We need to add pictures to our words, using great technologies like Flip video cameras to provide real multimedia discussions.  And we need to use social media outlets to continue to build, cultivate, and expand the discussion.  That’s one of the reasons I started Educommunicators (www.educommunicators.com), and it is what I hope the community will evolve into in 2009.
* Better understand our audiences and know who can trigger real change.  Discussions of education improvement should not be limited to policymakers, particularly just to those at the federal level.  Discussions need to focus on a range of stakeholders — teachers, school administrators, school boards, CBOs, the business community, state officials (from the governor to the chief state school officer to the legislature), Congress, the new Administration, and the membership and trade groups that represent all of the above.  We need a large table, and many seats at it, if we are to bring about real change and real improvement.
* Better use of the data.  Unfortunately, research was used in 2008 primarily to punish rather than to inform and improve.  We use the WWC to spotlight those programs we believe don’t make the cut.  We use AYP scores to punish schools.  We use state tests to highlight the laggards and point out what our students aren’t doing or don’t know.  Research and data points should be our path forward.  They should chart the course, showing us our priorities and helping us measure our progress.  Data should be both diagnostic and inspirational.  
* Prioritize our policy asks.  We start the new year with an open book full of asks and wishes.  And we do so in an economic environment that discourages anything new and anything with a real price tag.  We cannot do everything, at least not now.  This year is about better using our existing resources and making sure our top needs are being met.  That means more effectively using existing Title II dollars to strengthen our teachers.  It means better using Head Start and other federal programs to improve early childhood education.  And it means using past Reading First and other Title I dollars to ensure that our school districts have the instructional materials and technology necessary to continue forward progress, even in a year of severe budget cuts.
* Recognize that the federal government cannot solve all.  We cannot forget that the feds are responsible for less than 8 cents of every dollar spent on public K-12 education in the United States.  ED has the bully pulpit to provide us leadership and vision, and needs to put it to better use each and every day.  But the real forum for improvement and work is at the state level.  As we look to 2009, we need to look at ways to better engage state governments, better help them navigate their budget crises, and build a better public education system to meet their community and economic needs, both now and in the future.
* Place outcomes over process.  Education improvement is not about specific programs or laws.  It is about outcomes, and it is about results.  It is about student achievement and forward progress.  Too often, we lose sight of that.  We worry about how we are getting there, instead of focusing on the end destination. NCLB was the perfect case in point.  In previous years, we were so hung up on the law itself that we lost sight of the equity and achievement it intended to bring.  It is all about the results.  We can’t forget that.
As for Eduflack, I have a few personal resolutions for this blog as well:
* I resolve to spotlight the success stories and the tales of positivity and progress.  It is easy to dwell on what is going wrong and lament the problems in public education.  We all need to do a better job talking up what has promise, and sharing best and promising practices so they can be modeled by others.
* I resolve to offer a broader national view of education improvement efforts.  Too often, my attention is seized by what is happening in the DC or the NYC media.  I need to do a better job focusing on what is happening across the United States, not just in my own back yard.  The real work, the meaningful work, is happening out there on Main Street USA.
* I resolve to step up my advocacy for issues I believe to be important to education improvement.  Successful communications is about advocating for change and helping stakeholders take the steps necessary to implement that change.  Eduflack should be one of the levers in such improvement efforts.  I’ve never been one to be afraid to speak my mind, question the status quo, and generally agitate the system.  This blog will continue to do just that.  But it will do it smartly and with purpose.  Eduflack will continue to push for STEM education, research-based reading, early childhood education, teacher training and PD, and national standards.  That’s just who I am.
* I resolve to amplify the voice of the virtually voiceless.  This blog is a megaphone for successful communication of education improvement efforts.  That means spotlighting issues not in the spotlight, highlighting organizations that may not be highlighted by others, and focusing on good actions, not just those who are responsible for them.
* I resolve to distinguish between reforms and improvement, with an emphasis on the latter.  In 2009, our top priority should be closing the achievement gap — the gap between Black and white, between Hispanic and white, and between rich and poor.  Our investments and actions should all point toward how we bring achievement and equity of learning to all students.
I also recognize my limitations.  Eduflack is essentially a one-man band, meaning the personal and professional can often get in the way of good blogging.  I have my priorities.  Family comes first, and my wife and two perfect toddlers will always come before a blog post.  I have my business, which allows me to pursue my passions of putting the critiques on this blog of how to effectively communicate and engage to work for organizations and issues that mean it most.  I usually look to avoid blogging about my clients and am always diligent about disclosing my relationships when I do focus on the good work of the good organizations I partner with.  That will continue.
I know that my blog postings are too long, often defeating the purpose of the medium.  That’s just me.  I’m trying to fully embrace Twitter in 2009 to streamline some of my thinking (you can find me as Eduflack), but my 2009 postings will cont
inue to read more like essays than quick dump-and-runs.  Again, that’s just me.  To quote the great sailor-philosopher, I am what I am.
Here’s to a productive, meaningful 2009.  A year when EdSec in-waiting Arne Duncan and company seize the full power of the ED bully pulpit.  A year where more people realize the intersection between school improvement and economic empowerment.  A year when data is better collected, better understood, and better used.  A year when public education truly improves, and not merely changes for change sake.  Here’s to a year of possibility and true public engagement on important education issues.  Here’s to 2009.