ESEA: It’s Finally Here (sorta)

The day has finally come.  This afternoon, Senate HELP Chairman Tom Harkin (IA) officially unveiled his draft of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  The bill offers the sexy title “Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011.”

The highlights: Adequate Yearly Progress is history.  Race to the Top and i3 are woven into the tapestry of ESEA.  HQT is gone, replaced by a plan to better evaluate teachers.  
Alyson Klein over at EdWeek’s Politics K-12 has a great summary of the bill and why we were offered what was released today.
Even in advance of the release, civil rights organizations expressed concern about the ESEA draft, worried that the death of AYP provides the potential for turning back recent accountability measures and expanding some already dreadful achievement gaps.  You can see the full letter sent by six civil rights orgs today to Senator Harkin here.  That drumbeat is likely only going to get louder as the language is further sliced and diced.
One big question remains — Is it necessary?  At this stage of the game, NCLB is known mostly for its testing provisions, and most of those remain in the draft.  Replacing AYP with another tool and funding RttT and i3 on an annual basis are steps the EdSec can take, with or without a new ESEA (as long as he has a congressional checkbook to support the latter).  And we won’t even raise the issue of how this fits with House Education Chairman John Kline (MN)’s piecemeal approach to reauth.
So while this finally puts a flag in the edu-ground for Harkin and Senate Democrats, no one should be rushing to schedule a bill signing any time soon.  And if we truly want to get it on the calendar now, there are probably some lovely openings in the spring of 2013 just waiting to be booked.  That sounds about right for an ESEA reauth signing.
But we have to start somewhere, don’t we?
 

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Teacher Eval?

For the past year, we’ve seen the topic of teacher evaluation quickly evolving into a West Side Story-like knife fight.  With dramatic flourishes and emotional highs and lows, the status quoers and reform community have been circled each other on how to effectively evaluate teachers. 

Amid all of the snapping and jazz hands, most teachers walk away with a “satisfactory” rating, as anticipated by the current systems.  And while some may say teachers can’t (and shouldn’t) be effectively evaluated, and we should just trust that all teachers are doing the best jobs possible, we know that simply isn’t the case.
Today, the good folks over at Education Trust released Fair to Everyone: Building the Balanced Teacher Evaluations that Educators and Students Deserve.  In is policy paper, EdTrust issues the call to eliminate current “drive-by evaluations” and instead focus on evaluation systems that “provide specific, timely, and actionable feedback against clear standards of professional practice.”
Noting that teacher evaluation systems can vary across states and districts, EdTrust focuses its recommendations on two primary components that should be found in any eval system worth its salt:
1) Multiple visits by well-trained observers who evaluate teacher practice based on a clear set of performance standards
2) Measures of teacher impact on student learning, such as multiple years’ worth of value-added data
By focusing on value-added measures (and EdTrust’s descriptions of how value-added works is particularly valuable to those new to the discussion), EdTrust helps spotlight that there is real science behind effective teacher evaluation, but such effective evaluations require a comprehensive approach that ultimately benefits the schools, classrooms, teachers, and students involved.
So it begs a few questions.  What states and districts are doing it right?  What specifically can we take from their experiences — good, bad, and ugly?  How do we drive more to adopt those best or even promising practices?  What obstacles are keeping us from embracing the sorts of teacher evals that can make a difference?  And how do we demonstrate real ROI, particularly for the teacher and students involved?
As is typical, the questions are easier than the answers.  But clearly, we must do something.  With The New Teacher Project citing data that only 43 percent of teachers agreeing that the current evaluation systems help teachers improve while nearly three-quarters agree that “how much students are learning compared with students in other schools” is a good indicator of success of a teacher, too many of the current teacher eval systems simply aren’t getting to the heart of the matter.  EdTrust again provides a compass.  Now we have to begin to chart a course.

“Trust”-ing Ed Accountability

At this point in time, only the truly cockeyed optimist believes that ESEA reauthorization will be moving any time soon.  After missed deadlines, political roadblocks, budget showdowns, and the enacting of executive authority, it seems a safe bet that honest to goodness, comprehensive reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act won’t be a reality until 2013.

But that doesn’t mean we cannot focus on some of the key issues embodied in the reauthorization fight.  Chairman John Kline (MN) and the House Education and the Workforce Committee are trying to pick off specific policy topics, one by one, with the most recent action coming on charter schools.
In Getting it Right, Ed Trust reiterates the need for true accountability in K-12 education, whether such efforts are established through congressional reauthorization, administration waivers, telethon or local bake sales.  In refocusing our attentions on accountability at a time when so many states are struggling with meeting AYP, Ed Trust reminds us that good intentions are not enough in public education.  We need to get it right, close the gaps, and do what it takes to have every child succeed (or get out of the way).
Among the reccs coming from Ed Trust:
* Fix what the current law got wrong, including a better balance of federal, state, and local responsibilities.
* Preserve what current law got right, especially its laser-like focus on raising student achievement and closing gaps.
* Build on the real-world lessons of high-improving schools to establish challenging, yet realistic, goals for states.
In her letter releasing Getting it Right, Ed Trust President Kati Haycock noted:
In preparing for our second reauthorization in 2001, Ed
Trust looked hard at lessons learned from leading states and our work in
schools and districts. We also probed the limited data on student achievement
patterns that were available at that time. This research and preparation
suggested that the law’s provisions in two particular areas needed improvement:
accountability, on the one hand, and teacher quality and assignment patterns,
on the other. In the former category, which is the subject of this paper, we
sought to end the widespread practice of sweeping the underperformance of
certain groups of children under the rug of school-wide averages, ensuring to
the extent possible that the law held schools accountable for improving the
performance of all their students.

These are important words from an organization, and an executive, that were instrumental in moving the current ESEA into practice, particularly in historically disadvantaged communities that ESEA had long ignored.  Despite all of the chatter in recent years on the problems with accountability, the call to roll back current accountability provisions and the like, Ed Trust is clear that the debate is not more or less accountability.  The real issue, if we are concerned with our kids and the achievement gaps that separate them, is the quality of our accountability.
Whether the future of ESEA is one governed by congressional reauth or executive edict, accountability must remain front and center.  Federal and state, local and school, classroom and parent, all must be held accountable for the quality and outcomes of our public education system.

The First Day of School

Today is a very special day in the Eduflack household.  This morning, the edu-son started kindergarten.  As we walked up North Oak Street toward his elementary school, he was getting a little apprehensive.  For weeks, we had been excited about going to the “hippo school” (the school’s mascot is a purple hippo).  We did a week of “kindergarten orientation” and went last week to meet his new teachers.  But as we walked up the steep hill, I could tell the previous excitement was giving way to some fear about the new.

All those worries evaporated once the edu-son entered his classroom.  Warm hugs from the three teachers who will be manning classroom three this year.  His own hook and cubby to house his new Captain America backpack.  And a seat at the “Lego table” where he immediately started the building process before class even began.
Before this morning, we talked about what the edu-son wanted to learn now that he was in kindergarten.  His expectations were specific and direct.  He wanted to learn to build a robot.  He wanted to learn about outer space, penguins, and sharks.  And he wanted to learn how to make pizza.  After all that, he wanted to learn math.  Sounds like a full academic year.  I just hope his teachers are up for the challenge.
I’ll admit, I was a little misty eyed when I dropped my son off this morning.  He didn’t quite understand what the big deal was (and certainly didn’t know why dad had a tear in his eye).  But as I watched him start his public school career today, I am reminded of a blog post I wrote nearly three years ago, when we brought our daughter home from Guatemala.  At the time, I reflected on my educational hopes and dreams for the edu-daughter (and by extension, my son, who is 18 months older).  
At the time, I laid out 10 tenets for the education I wanted my children to experience.  Three years later, they seem even more appropriate:

What is my vision for my children?  Let me nail Eduflack’s 10 tenets to the electronic wall:

* I want every kid, particularly mine, reading proficient before the start of the fourth grade.  Without reading proficiency, it is near impossible to keep up in the other academic subjects.  And to get there, we need high-quality, academically focused early childhood education offerings for all.

* I want proven-effective instruction, the sort of math, reading, and science teaching that has worked in schools like those in my neighborhood with kids just like mine. 

* I want teachers who understand research and know how to use it.  And I want teachers to be empowered to use that research to provide the specific interventions a specific student may need.

* I want clear and easily accessible state, district, school, and student data.  I want to know how my kids stack up by comparison.

* I want relevant education, providing clear building blocks for future success.  That means strong math and technology classes.  It means courses that provide the soft skills needed to succeed in both college and career through interesting instruction.  And it means art and music right alongside math and reading.

* I want national standards, so if my family relocates (as mine did many times when I was a child), I am guaranteed the same high-quality education regardless of the state’s capitol.

* I want educational options, be they charter schools or magnet schools, after-school or summer enrichment programs.  And these options should be available for all kids, not just those struggling to keep up.

* I want schools that encourage bilingual education, without stigmatizing those students for whom English is a second language.  Our nation is changing, and our approach to English instruction must change too.

* I want a high-quality, effective teacher in every classroom.  Teaching is really, really hard.  Not everyone is cut out for it.  We need the best educators in the classroom, and we need to properly reward them for their performance.

* I want access to postsecondary education for all.  If a student graduates from high school and meets national performance standards, they should gain access to an institution of higher education.  And if they can’t afford it, we have a collective obligation to provide the aid, grants, and work study to ensure that no student is denied college because of finances.

   
As we all experience the start of the new school year, aren’t these tenets that we should expect from all of our schools?   

Education: At Least We Aren’t the Oil Industry?

We regularly hear about what a noble profession education is.  We all can tell stories of those teachers who inspired us and those educators who placed us on the the paths of success.  We talk about how education is a top three policy issue, with voters making decisions based on education policy.

And then some new data comes out to throw that conventional thinking off kilter.  Two weeks ago, the latest Gallup/PDK Poll reported that only 17 percent of Americans give our public schools either an A or a B.  Yesterday, Gallup released its survey on how business sectors rate (either positive or negative).  And the results were a little startling.
The industry with the most positive view, according to the more than 1,000 surveyed, was the computer industry, followed by the restaurant industry.  The oil and gas industry had the largest negative opinion, beating out the federal government by just one percentage point (64% negative to 63% negative), though the feds had the largest gap between positive view and negative view (a 46-point spread).
And how did the education sector do?  Of the 25 sectors surveyed, education placed 19th, with Americans having a more negative opinion about education than they do about accountants, pharmaceuticals, the airlines, and even PR flacks.  Education posted a 35-percent positive/47-percent negative rating, placing it slightly above industries such as lawyers, bankers, and big oil. 
What’s more troubling, though, is the trend.  According to Gallup, in the last decade, education’s positive ranking have fell by 15 points.  In 2001, half of all Americans had a positive view of the education sector.  Today, it is down to a third.  Only three industries (banking, real estate, and the federal government) had larger declines in that period, and all three are seen as the major actors for our current economic problems.
Are our growing negative opinions of public schools, illustrated by both the PDK poll and Gallup industry survey, a result of declining test scores?  Of recent criticisms of teachers and the call for performance-based evaluations?  Of drum beats of dropout factories and sliding graduation rates?  Of ongoing stories of lowered state standards and rising numbers of schools failing to make AYP?  Of a head-in-the-sand mentality that our schools have never been better and resistance (or outright assault) on school improvement efforts is necessary? 
One thing is clear.  When only one-third of your potential customers have a positive view of your industry, you have a problem.  And when less than 20 percent of those you serve believe they are getting a good product (A or B level), you have a serious problem.  These trends are not a blip, nor are they something one can ride out.  
And let’s be clear about it.  This is not an NCLB problem, an AYP problem, a Race to the Top problem, or a teacher quality problem.  This is a public education problem.      

Advocating from the School Board Bench

In the era of No Child Left Behind, we’ve heard a great deal about how local school boards have no productive role in 21st century education.  Some see the power shifting toward the states and the federal government, with school boards simply left to rubber stamp what comes from on high.  Others, like the Fordham Institute’s Checker Finn, seem to think such boards are just a breeding ground for political wannabes or former district employees with an axe to grind.

But as someone who actually serves on one of those local school boards, Eduflack can say there is a real role for local school boards to play in advocating for policies that can improve opportunity and success for all students.  There is a place to champion effective instruction and learning.  And there is a way to help build a better mousetrap to to address those directives coming from the feds or the state.
Don’t believe me?  I’m ok with that.  But you should believe Fred Deutsch.  Mr. Deutsch is a member of the Watertown School Board in South Dakota.  We actually became friends over this blog years ago, as he would provide insights on how my national opining here was playing out on the ground in his community in South Dakota.  And as I’ve learned over the years, he really is dealing with the very best and the very worst in local public education, with the latest being plans to cut back to a four-day school week in South Dakota due to budget shortfalls.
Despite those challenges, Fred has been a passionate advocate for school board member advocacy.  His work has been featured nationally, and he has led presentations to help local school board members find their advocacy voice.  And since I posed a question to EdSec Arne Duncan for his Twitter town hall today on what the role of local school boards should be in our post-NCLB, waiver environment, I thought it appropriate to highlight some of the recommendations offered by Fred:
* At the heart of school board advocacy is the belief that people that know best are those closest to the child
* Part of the job of school board members is to represent the best interests of our children to those that make the laws
* We must share our stories.  Legislators must understand how the decisions they make impact our children at the local level
* The “Foundation of Effective Advocacy” is to develop one’s “relationships, facts, and passion”
* Invest yourself into development relationships with lawmakers — but not just during session.  To win the advocacy game, we need to develop and nurture relationships throughout the year
* Understand the data
Deutsch also focuses a great deal on passion.  Passion: It’s what drives us.  It is what stirs us to action.  It overcomes roadblocks.  It persists through failure.  And it persists through crap.
For those who would like to see Fred Deutsch’s full PowerPoint, it can be found here.  The deck is also full of many useful links for finding information, with a distinct South Dakota flavor.
As local school boards prepare for yet another unpleasant budget cycle, Deutsch’s points are important ones for us to consider.  He paints a picture of a school board that is informed, engaged, and involved.  It is a snapshot of a board with a mission and with clear goals.  And it is a diagram of a school board that serves the community, the schools, and, most importantly, the students.
Important lessons to digest and employ.  And kudos to Fred Deutsch, the Watertown School Board, and the many school boards like it that serve to have a real impact on the learning and achievement of all students.  

PDK, We Have a Problem

It is that time of year again, time for the annual PDK/Gallup Poll on America’s thoughts about public education in our great nation.  And once again, the American people have demonstrated a clear schizophrenia when it comes to our classrooms.

When it comes to grading the schools attended by the surveyees’ oldest child, 79 percent of schools received a grade of A or B.  But for our nation as a whole, we only give 17 percent of our schools an A or B.
Seventy one percent of those surveyed have “trust and confidence in the men and women who are teaching children in the public schools,” yet less than one in five believe our schools are above average.  (So we trust the teachers, but don’t have any confidence in the outcomes, I suppose.)
Of those surveyed, 76 percent said we should actively recruit high-achieving students to consider teaching as a profession, but 70 percent of those surveyed said the ability to teach is a natural talent, with just 28 percent believing it can be developed in college.
The full PDK/Gallup survey can be found here, with USA Today’s write-up of the results here.  Among some of the other headscratchers:
* Fewer folks believe school districts have a harder time recruiting good teachers today (52%) than did in 2003 (61%)
* Nearly half of those surveyed (47%) believe unionization hurts the quality of public education, yet 52% side with the unions on collective bargaining issues
* People believe that “principal evaluations” are the most important criteria for determining if a teacher should keep his or her job (with student test scores coming a close second), but there is no explanation whatsoever of what a principal should be evaluating
* 74 percent of those surveyed want increased investment in school technology, but 59 percent oppose using technology to help kids learn at home (while reducing the number of hours needed in high school)
* Despite the emphasis on teacher quality, half of those surveyed would rather hire a less effective teacher than allow students to utilize online learning
Buried deep in the survey (and nowhere to be found in the PDK press release on the report), 74 percent favor public school choice, the highest level in more than two decades, and 70 percent support charter schools, the highest total ever in the PDK survey’s history.  
And the methodology?  Of the more than 1,000 surveyed, 62 percent of those surveyed did not have kids in school, while 29 percent were public school parents.  Sixty seven percent were over the age of 40.  Sixty two percent had a college education.
What do we learn from all of this?  On the whole, it seems folks are pretty happy with their local schools and their local teachers.  But they don’t know why.  They are frustrated with the quality of public education across the nation, but the give President Obama high marks for his education work.  We want technology, but we don’t want kids to use it outside of a 19th century classroom.  We like charters.  And we are basing all of this on a majority of surveyees that aren’t actually customers in this game.
At least one thing can make this local school board chairman feel good this morning.  According to PDK/Gallup, our opinion of school boards seems to be at an all-time low.
  

Thinking Big Ideas

What is the new normal in education?  What was the old normal?  What are the levers for improvement?  What is the role of the knowledge industry in such reforms?  Can we actually ask K-12 to do more with less?

For the past few days, these were the sorts of questions 150 or so of the nation’s leading education consulting groups, foundations, and issue organizations have been contemplating at the Knowledge Alliance’s Big Ideas Retreat 2011.  As one can suspect, particularly in the current policy environment, there were far more questions than answers.  But it was an interesting discussion of the major questions the space is facing nonetheless.

Over at Education Week, Big Ideas participant Sarah Sparks has some of her observations from the retreat.  And over at Twitter, you can check out live tweeting from the past few days, all with the #bigideas11 tag.
Rather than try to summarize the takeaways, Eduflack prefers to offer us some of my favorite ideas or quotes coming from the event’s panelists (a greatest hits list from my live tweeting over at @Eduflack).  They include:
  • How do we harness the power of technology while keeping focus on an equity agenda? (Mass. State Ed Chief Mitch Chester)
  • We are now at a point where we need to think about how we can do school differently.  And the answers come from the classroom. (DCPS Chancellor Kaya Henderson)
  • DCPS used to “lay down” and let charters “roll right over us.”  DCPS has now woken up (Henderson)
  • Teach for America “needs to have evidence of its efficacy.” (TFA’s Heather Harding)  
  • “Performance has now been defined in our sector.  It’s been defined by how students are doing.” (ED’s Jim Shelton)
  • With Race to the Top, “whether it will be money well spent or now, we will have to wait and see.” (Shelton)
  • We need to bring a scientific discipline to promoting local answers to education challenges. (IES Director John Easton)
  • We have to build a demand for change in education.  Supply isn’t the problem.  (Education Week’s Virginia Edwards)
  • Education research is only as good as how well we get it into the hands of educators to use it. (Edwards)
Despite how some of the comments may read, this was a group that was relatively optimistic about where public education was and could head.  While we tend to focus on the negative, plenty of folks wanted to focus on the positives.  While some may question whether real improvement can happen at scale, most acknowledged that real, lasting improvement was best left to the states and localities.  
There was also a great deal of talk about reinvesting in the notion of public engagement in public education.  How do we better involve parents?  How do we better involve practitioners?  How do we better involve students themselves?  How do we maximize social networking?  How do we change the rhetoric so it is more constructive?
What a refreshing line of thinking …

The ESEA Doomsday Scenario

After years of “will they/won’t they.” it appears the U.S. Department of Education is finally ready to move forward with its Plan B for reforming No Child Left Behind.  In a release sent out over the weekend for public consumption today, ED announced its intention to “fix” NCLB.  The announcement can be found here, courtesy of Politico.  Also note the Politico story on the matter.

Back in June, when EdSec Arne Duncan first raised the possibility of a regulatory Plan B for reauthorization, Eduflack was one of the few that actually saw it as a possibility/good idea.  Since then, little has changed.  Senate HELP Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (IA) is still primarily focused on the higher ed side of the education coin.  House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (MN) is still looking to break ESEA into small chunks that can be consumed by members of his committee.  And the education space, as a whole, is still demanding real changes to components of the current law, most notably the accountability provisions (the dreaded AYP).
So with Duncan long promising reauthorization before the start of a new school year (and Eduflack still believes such reauthorization can happen, before the start of the 2013 school year), the EdSec had to act.  And he seems to be acting from the best script he could find, using terms like “flexibility, reform at state and local level, bridge.”  And for good measure, Duncan and White House DPC Director Melody Barnes are even tying these moves to “America’s future competitiveness.”
In the public statement, Barnes even makes not of accountability flexibility provisions coming down the pike, with each and every state in the union having the opportunity to “apply” and “succeed” for states seeking “flexibility” with regard to accountability.
Suffice it to say, this morning’s announcement will likely not go over well with Congress.  Many will see this as an end run around our legislative branch, essentially giving the executive branch the power to make law, at least with regard to ESEA.  But we’ve been waiting on congressional reauthorization of ESEA since 2007.  It is now 2011.  If Duncan and company are prepared to live with NCLB as it is mostly written, and make a few changes to address specific issues or concerns from states and localities, it is their prerogative to give it a go.  It will then be Congress’ job to either codify those changes or reverse them.
Duncan is one again declaring “game on,” trying to make education a central focus of the Obama Administration’s domestic policy agenda.  While few can think that weakening the accountability provisions is a sexy issue that will capture the hearts and minds of voters, it is a move that is responsive to a particular constituency, demonstrates a real change from the previous administration, and shows some leadership with regard to education policy.  Only time will tell if such an approach is effective, both in addressing the growing challenges in our schools and as a means of jumpstarting some real K-12 action in Congress.
    

The A Word

Accountability (uh-koun-tuh-bil-i-tee) noun: The state of being subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.

At its face, accountability doesn’t seem like such a bad term.  It is good to provide information or report.  Additional explanation is always valuable.  And who can really be opposed to the idea of being responsible or answerable.  Yet, somehow accountability has now become a dirty word in K-12 education.  For many, accountability is either a punchline to a joke or an accusation to be hurled at one’s worst enemies.  For others, it is something we have to apologize for or be forced to defend.
The time has come to remove the scarlet letter from the chest of K-12 education.  Accountability should be viewed as a good thing, whether one is the most ambitious of reformers or the most ardent of the status quoers.  At a time when education dollars are at a premium and education needs are reaching all time highs, a little accountability is a good thing.  It allows us to prioritize, while focusing on return on investment.
The federal government should be held accountable for how it spends its share (currently less than 10%) of the costs of education K-12 students in our public schools.  Explain how those dollars are spent and the impact of that spend.  The days of U.S. Department of Education program evaluations simply determining if they cut checks and the checks were received by the SEA.  Federal accountability needs to focus on impact, both in terms of the students impacted and the quantitative outcomes.
The states should be held accountable for its policies, funding priorities, and overall operations.  All students should have access to a high-quality school.  Data must be used to compare schools in an apples-to-apples way.  State funding formulas must align with community and student needs and expectations.  The “right” assessments should be identified and implemented to ensure effective measure of both student learning and achievement.  The SEA should be focused on ROI, both for the schools and the taxpayers.  
The districts and individual schools should be held accountable for both their inputs (instruction) and outcomes (performance).  Instructional efforts must be scientifically based  Teachers should be qualified, motivated, and successful, with the right teachers in the right jobs and right schools.  Students should demonstrate proficiency, regardless of the yardstick being used.  And all students, particularly the historically disadvantaged, should be given options if their current schools aren’t making the cut.
Teachers should be held accountable, again for both their inputs and outcomes.  All students should be learning, and that learning be measured in a quantifiable manner.  All students must gain the skills and knowledge they need to succeed  Instruction should be based on best practice.  District/SEA/federal instructional goals should be addressed on a daily basis, and not just on those days when someone from the central office may be observing.
Students should be held accountable, both for their own success and the success of their schools.  They need to arrive on time, ready to learn.  Students must respect their educators and maximize instructional time.  All kids should be demonstrating proficiency (by international/federal/state standards) or at least demonstrate they are working toward it, and that proficiency must be measured quantitatively.  And students should have (and execute) remedies if they aren’t getting the quality of instruction they need.
Families need to be held accountable.  They must be engaged in their students’ schools. They should elect state and local officials committed to school improvement.  They need to ensure teachers and administrators are using research-proven instructional practices.  They must know how their students are doing in class, both from a qualitative and quantitative perspective.  And they should take specific action steps if their kids aren’t performing at expected levels.
And, of course, all of the wonks, the talking heads, the influencers, the advisors, and the chattering class needs to be held accountable.  Are we focused on student achievement?  Are we focused on equity?  Are we focused on student skills and knowledge?  Do we help hold all stakeholders accountable, why doing the same to ourselves?  Do we engage with both our friends and those we don’t necessarily agree with?  Do we have clear, shared definitions of success?
Accountability should be a badge of honor.  Being responsible and answerable is essential, particularly when we are talking about improving public education for our kids.  While we may disagree on some of the specifics, can’t we all agree that all those who touch the lives of young learners should be held accountable, both for the inputs and the outcomes?