Arne Duncan

Golden Reading Results in the Golden State

Eduflack Arne Duncan, PD, Reading First, SBRR

For the past few weeks, Eduflack has been heartened to hear that the Obama Administration and EdSec Duncan are behind a continued federal commitment to reading instruction.  Yes, we all know that there were severe implementation problems with Reading First, and that such problems have led many a RF critic to demand the defunding of the program and the dismantling of our promise to do what works when it comes to reading, empowering every child with the gift of literacy.

Anyone who has read this blog for more than a week or two knows about my commitment to scientifically based reading.  A few weeks ago, I laid out a basic plan for how the Obama Administration can use the best of Reading First, while learning from its failures, to build a better federal reading effort.  You can see the full thought here — blog.eduflack.com/2009/01/27/whats-next-for-federal-reading.aspx  
I’ve spent much of the past three years or so talking about the need to save RF.  Many times, I’m asked why.  Look at the IG investigation, I’m told.  Look at the IES study.  Look at the fights scientifically based reading research has caused.  Why would we want to save this?  For one simple reason.  It works.  And our kids are too important not to invest in what is proven effective and not to ensure that our teachers are using the very best instructional methods and have access to the most effective PD (rather than the hot flavor of the month or what a salesman is selling on that particular day).
Last fall, the U.S. Department of Education released a study that showed the effectiveness of Reading First.  Contrary to the IES study, this Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development (OPEPD) study demonstrated real results of evidence-based reading in RF and non-RF classrooms alike.  We’ve talked about the data in Idaho and Ohio and other states that have benefited from an influx of federal reading money and a commitment to proven-effective instruction and professional development.  Now we have even more to talk about.
For those doubting Thomases out there, take a look at the latest research out of the great state of California.  Released more than a month ago, the California Reading First Year 6 Evaluation Report hasn’t gotten much attention (particularly here in our nation’s capital).  But it is worthy of the spotlight.
This is not just a water droplet in the great pool that is education improvement.  This study looks at data involving 157,951 students; 16,442 teachers, coaches, and administrators, 850 schools, and 110 school districts across California.  What did the good researchers out on the West Coast find?  Among the conclusions:  
1) Reading First has had a significant impact on student achievement in California.
2) The Reading First effect is meaningful.
3) Reading growth remains significant.
4) The Reading First effect generalizes across student performance levels.
5) Reading First significantly impacts grades 4 and 5 performance.
6) The Reading First effect generalizes to English learners.
7) Implementation of Reading First principles remains adequate but could be higher.
8) Principal participation and teacher program evaluations are strong predictors of achievement.
9) The Reading First program has led to the development of a sustainable, well-integrated structure and process of providing reading/language arts instruction in California.
10) Most special education teachers use their district’s adopted reading/language arts curriculum.
11) Schools have not yet begun to implement Response-to-Intervention (RtI)
The full report can be found here: www.eddata.com/resources/publications/RF_Evaluation_2007-2008.pdf       

</div><div><br></div><div>So”>

So why is this important, other than the obvious that with so much RF money spent in California that it is good to see it has been put to good use and has provided?  It provides us with some valuable lessons as we consider how to build the next generation of federal reading instruction efforts.
First, evidence-based instruction works.  It has had an impact across California on virtually all student demographics, including special education and ELLs.  And despite the findings of IES, it is effective with the later elementary grades (as evidenced by its impact on California fourth and fifth graders).
Second, we have clear room for implementation improvement.  California achieved these results while acknowledging that fidelity to the principles could be better.  One can only imagine the true, measured impact if every one of those 850 schools had adopted RF completely and with absolute fidelity.
Third, educators are the key to effectiveness.  Principal and teacher involvement is a predictor of achievement.  There was a reason that up to 25 percent of RF money was intended for professional development.  It was to ensure those involved teachers put the full power of the research to use in their classrooms.  When they do, the results follow.
Fourth, RtI — seen by many an education profiteer as the next great profit center — still has not taken hold in California.  And if it hasn’t taken hold in Cali, it will be slow to truly go to scale across the nation.
Finally, we need federally supported reading instruction based on the core principles of proven research and effective, content-based professional development.  OPEPD showed us that the heart of RF was having a lasting, positive impact on our schools, whether they receive RF money or not.  Data from states like Ohio and now California show the power that evidence-based reading can have on student achievement.  Now is the time to build on those successes, documenting best practice, continuing to train teachers, and getting our classrooms the instructional materials and resources they need to teach reading effectively.
Yes, Reading First is dead (and deservedly so because of its implementation problems, perceptions of programmatic favoritism, and the opportunity for profiteers to sell snake oil under the guise of research).  But now is the time to open up that last will and testament, see what the law has left for policymakers (federal and state), teachers, and students, and use that inheritance to build a better, stronger, more effective program for our nation’s classrooms.  Our work is not done until every child is reading at grade level.  And we still have a long way to go before we get there.  Thankfully, California and others are leaving us the trail markers to help us get to our ultimate destination.

A “Develop”ing Interest in Teachers

Eduflack Achievement gap, Arne Duncan, AYP, ELL, NCLB, PD, Teacher Education

“We must do more with the talent we have,” said NSDC Executive Director Stephanie Hirsh.  “Nothing is more important than teacher quality,” EdSec Arne Duncan said.  “We must close the yawning achieving gap in this country,” said Stanford Professor Linda Darling-Hammond.  With the statements of all three, we were off to the races on the issue of teacher quality and professional development this morning.

The setting was a briefing hosted by the National Staff Development Council, unveiling their most recent research (led by Darling-Hammond and her School Redesign Network) on the state of teacher development.  The takeaway was simple.  The current state of teacher professional development is severely lacking, particularly as federal and state requirements and expectations continue to grow.  Earth-shattering, no.  But the findings serve as a strong insight into what may be coming down the pike.
If anything, the past era in federal education policy has been one about research.  The need for data.  The definition of good data (and of bad).  And the most stringent of means by which to go about collecting it.  The new era seems to be one of successfully applying that research so it gets to the rank-and-file policymaker and practitioner.  What do we do with data once we have it?  How do we use it to effectively close the achievement gap?  How do we use it to improve student and teacher performance?  How do we use it to grow, to improve, and to generally do better?
Yes, the research data was mostly qualitative.  Yes, we still have a lot of unanswered questions about the correlations between strong teacher PD and student achievement.  But NSDC provided some interesting points to get this new discussion on teacher development started, and they were points heard by the EdSec, by CCSSO chief Gene Wilhoit, and by the many who are looking for details into how to train, retain, and support good teachers in every classroom.
The full report can be found at www.nsdc.org/stateproflearning.cfm.  The highlights, at least according to Eduflack, include:
* “Drive-by” or “dump-and-run” professional development doesn’t cut it, at least not in this time of accountability.  Meaningful PD must be ongoing, content-based, and embedded as part of the learning day.
* According to the data we do have, the right PD can improve student achievement.  
* That said, we need to improve the linkages between teaching and student learning.
* We need experimental research into teacher professional development, particularly in subjects other than math and science.
* Our students are slipping in international measures, in part, because of our professional development opportunities.  Our competitors — particularly those in Southeast Asia — are just investing more time, effort, money, and thought into high-quality PD that has a direct impact on student learning and performance.  They are taking advantage of our water-treading for the past decade.
* We need to increase both the quantity and the quality of PD offered to teachers, particularly those who are entering the profession.
* At the end of the day, improved professional development (particularly in-service) is key to achieving our educational goals.
Information is nice, using it effectively is even better.  As CCSSO’s Wilhoit pointed out, the challenge we face is how do we move from good ideas to better practice?  Particularly as it relates to state policy, how do we take these data points and build a better teacher development and support network, a network offering the ongoing PD, measuring its effectiveness, and ensuring that all teachers are getting the support and professional learning opportunities they need to do their jobs well?
Some good ideas were offered by the experts this morning, including:
* We need to create levers and investments in Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education act to support the features of effective professional development
* We need to invest in rigorous studies of professional learning in relation to student achievement.
* We need to participate in OECD studies of teaching, teacher development, and student learning.
As always, Eduflack has a few other ideas to add to the mix:
* When it comes to PD, all means all.  All teachers (and principals for that matter) need ongoing, content-based, job-embedded professional learning opportunities.  No exceptions.
* We need to align learning goals (as measured by state assessments) with teaching goals.  Every teacher should not only know what is expected of their classes on the state tests, but they should be given the tools and training to deliver.
* Every teacher in the United States should receive specific, content-based PD in reading instruction.  Reading is an issue that affects every teacher, whether you are ELA, math, social studies, or science.  With more than a third of fourth graders still reading below grade level, every teacher needs the knowledgebase to provide the interventions needed to get students reading and engage them in the written word outside of English class.
* We need to incentivize best teaching, through general performance pay provisions and federal efforts such as the Teacher Incentive Fund.  As part of such efforts, we need to document, share, and learn from best practice.  Those schools that are exceeding AYP expectations (particularly those rewarded for it) should be mentoring those schools that are struggling at it.  Such a learning loop should be required as part of any incentive program.
*  And while we are collaborating, we need to use what we know about social networking and online communities to build virtual networks for teachers to share and learn.  How do rural teachers gain best practices from other rural teachers?  What can urban teachers in Detroit learn from their brethren in Atlanta or Los Angeles?  How do we capture best practices so that we can literally see it (via video) happen in classes like ours with kids like ours?  As the teaching profession grows younger and more technologically savvy, such online communities are going to be core to professional learning and development.  Such social networking is the only way we can deliver high-quality, impactful PD at scale to all teachers, urban, suburban, and rural (particularly with our incoming federal investment in school technology).
* We need to focus high-quality PD on those who need it most, particularly schools in urban areas and teachers of ELLs and special education students.  They are the teachers who have fallen through the cracks the most severely, and they are the ones who can most benefit from it today.
* Such PD activities are a shared responsibility.  The feds set the priorities and lay out some of the funding to make it happen.  The states take those priorities and develop specific programs that align with federal expectations yet specifically meet state standards.  Then the districts become the implementers supreme, delivering the right programs to the all teachers, while feeding content and outcomes back to other districts, the state, and the feds to create an ongoing feedback and improvement loop for PD.
No, this isn’t rocket science.  We all know that a well-trained, well-supported, empowered teacher will be more effective than a have not.  We know that ongoing, content-based PD can have a direct impact on teacher quality and student achievement.  We know teaching can’t improve through a drive-by workshop at the start of the school year or a half-day seminar offered twice a year following a half day of teaching.  We know we can do it, we know some are doing it, we just need to figure out how to package it and deliver it to all.  
When it comes to PD, so much time is focused on the pre-service side of the coin, ensuring that every teacher entering the classroom is highly qualified and certified to teach the subject matter.  Two important traits, yes.  But the hard word begins after the certificate is awarded and the classrooms are assigned.  NCLB talked about and offered funding for PD (heck, up to 25% of the billions spent on Reading First was intended for content-based professional development), but little was done to ensure the funds were spent right, the programs delivered correctly, and the outcomes documented effectively.  High marks for intent, low marks for follow through.
EdSec Duncan, along with his colleagues on Maryland Avenue and the crew down on Pennsylvania Avenue, has made it crystal clear that teachers are the gateway to school improvement (and to our general economic and social strength).  “We must dramatically increase our investment in teachers, and do it systemically,” Duncan said today.  Amen.  We also must make sure that investment is delivering real return on investment.  That means doing the scientific research to demonstrate the real linkages between PD and student achievement.  That means content-based PD that is delivered in the appropriate context to meet the needs of today’s teachers.  And that means empowering teachers so they are leading in their classroom.
A new era is here indeed.  We just need to ensure we maximize the opportunities, transform good ideas into great policies, and ensure we are having a real, measurable impact.
   

Listening, Federal Style

Eduflack Achievement gap, Arne Duncan, PR

On this morning’s Today Show, Vanity Fair writer Maureen Orth discussed her March 2009 piece on the new leaders in the Obama administration.  EdSec Arne Duncan was included in the discussion, focusing on his desire to launch a national listening tour as he embarks on a major national initiative to improve our public schools.

Regardless of how many dollars end up in the economic stimulus package for public education (and Eduflack assumes that the U.S. Senate will scale back some of the U.S. House’s cockeyed optimism), now is the time for action.  As we discussed last week, that action which will have the most impact cannot be a one-way discussion, it requires an open tent that incorporates the multiple viewpoints and multiple organizations and individuals who are committed to the larger view of improving the quality and outcomes of public education, particularly in those communities that have struggled to get the resources, the teachers, and the academic gains necessary to ensure all kids are getting the opportunity promised to them.
Listening tours can be important, particularly if they evolve into full-fledged dialogues.  Listening is the first step, but the EdSec needs to engage with key stakeholder audiences, understanding why they believe what they believe, knowing what it will take to change both thinking and behavior, and discovering what is necessary to bring together a loud, enthusiastic, and diverse chorus singing of ED’s commitment to closing the achievement gap and improving all our public schools.
So as Secretary Duncan begins planning for his tour, I recommend he take a look at the listening tour model we implemented as part of the National Reading Panel’s early work.  The model is a simple one, one that takes into account geographic differences and the wide range of stakeholders necessary to bring about lasting education improvements.
First, look at the geography.  Make sure you’re hearing from the diverse corners of the United States.  That means visits to New England, the mid-Atlantic, the MidWest, the Southwest, and the West Coast.  It means spending time in the “key” stakes, the Pennsylvanias, Ohios, Floridas, Texases, and Californias of the world (I assume you know Illinois pretty well by now).  But it also means visiting other states that are often left out of the process, like Alabama, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Arizona, and Idaho, for instance.  All offer us some key thinking on education reform, both for our urban centers, our suburban bases, and our rural communities.
Second, at each of these whistle stops, bring together multiple audiences.  When the NRP went out into the field, we ensured each regional hearing included specific stakeholder testimony from teachers, teacher educators, researchers, community organizations, business leaders, school administrators, and policymakers.  All of these are important to your mission.  But you need to clearly distinguish between primary and secondary audiences, those who will move your agenda themselves and those will support the movement.  As you move beyond the Beltway, be sure you are talking with classroom teachers, state policymakers (the governors, the chief state school officers, and those who are advising them), business leaders, and parents.  
Why?  Successful advocacy is all about a squeeze play that leads to real change.  We recognize that improvements come at the district or school level, as local education leaders implement the programs, approaches, and interventions necessary to improving our schools.  Such change comes from influence at the top, where governors (who are becoming even more important to ed reforms as they must now determine how best to spend the educational block grants provided them under the stimulus package) and the business community (that has specific thoughts about what changes are needed from our schools to improve classroom learning and meet future economic opportunities).  This is complemented by pressure from the grassroots, with educators and parents calling for the sorts of changes and improvements they’ve been hungry for for far too long
Listening, yes.  Dialogue, absolutely.  Engagement, a necessity.  Hopefully, ED will make this a meaningful exercise designed to build public support for the changes that are coming, while gaining necessary input to make those changes even stronger and more valuable.  Headlines are great.  Long-term, systemic school improvement is even better.

Some Monday Morning Reading

Eduflack Arne Duncan, charter schools, higher ed

This is shaping up to be one helluva week for Eduflack, with lots of organizations trying to figure out their “message” and how it fits into the future of public education in the United States.  Obviously, business before pleasure.  So postings this week, at least the typical Eduflack postings will likely be lighter than normal.

That doesn’t mean I’m not keeping my eye out.  So each day I’ll try to post links to some of those articles that are catching my eye, just the sort of thing that would trigger a response (or at least a deep, rich consideration of one.
The EdSec’s Discretion
Over at Education Week, Alyson Klein has an interesting piece on EdSec Arne Duncan, including a discussion of the discretionary funds he’ll have available to him in the near term.  The EdSec’s discretionary funds have long been one of the best opportunities for true innovation and reform in public education  Glad to see the EdSec is already thinking about what he can do to stimulate new thoughts and bold ideas in our K-12 systems.
Progress
Down in Texas, the University of Texas System named Dr. Francisco Cigarroa as chancellor of the Lone Star State’s higher ed system.  The significance?  Dr. Cigarroa is the first Hispanic to preside over a major university system, according to this AP piece (hat tip to <a href="http://www.ednews.org).
<span style=”font-weight: bold;”>Talking Change
Over at the Center for Education Reform, they’ve launched a new website “Mandate for Change,” looking at a range of issues those seeking to improve public education should consider.  Topics include federal accountability, charter schools, and teacher quality.  Essay authors include NPR’s Juan Williams, National Association of Manufacturers’ John Engler, and former USA Todayer and EWA Prez Richard Whitmire.
Teaching on the Hardwoods
Like him or hate him (and most fall into that latter category), former Indiana and Texas Tech basketball coach Bobby Knight is one terrific coach and an even better teacher.  After a hiatus, he may be heading back to the ranks of college educators, as the University of Georgia looks for a new basketball coach.  It’s always refreshing to see those coaches who prioritize teamwork and the college degree over one’s chances to be a lottery pick.

The Future of Education is in Transit?

Eduflack Arne Duncan, Chancellor Klein, CPS, DCPS, Michelle Rhee

When Eduflack first saw that the incoming CEO of the Chicago Public Schools is the current CTA president, I had two thoughts.  First, I wondered why I had the local Chicago teachers’ union name wrong, thinking they must have changed it to the Chicago Teachers Association.  And second, I thought how refreshing it would be, in this age of innovation, to tap a teacher leader as the new superintendent.

Then, of course, I actually read beyond the headline, seeing that Mayor Daley had selected the head of the Chicago Transit Authority to lead Chicago Public Schools.  How wrong I was on both counts.  The full story can be found here — www.suntimes.com/news/education/1398272,huberman-appointed-cps-chief-012709.article  
Now I’m not quite sure what to think.  In recent years, we’ve seen city leaders get creative in selecting superintendents.  The Broad Foundation is training a new generation of urban supes from the ranks of business and not-for-profits.  New York City tapped a lawyer and former U.S. Department of Justice official to head the NYC Department of Education.  Denver picked a former business leader and mayoral chief of staff for its top job (who has now moved on to become Colorado’s junior U.S. senator).  And Washington, DC selected a not-for-profit leader (albeit an education non-profit involved in teacher recruitment) to serve as its schools chancellor.  Such sea changes seemed to have worked for NYC and Denver, and we’ll know for sure in DC in another year or two.  In an age of school improvement, we’re all trying to think outside the box to find the best individuals to lead school transformation and improvement.  Sometimes, those individuals are found outside of the traditional K-12 environment.
We’ll all have to wait and see what Chicago’s Ron Huberman lays out as his platform and his agenda at CPS.  And we’ll need to see how much authority and input he truly provides Barbara Eason-Watkins, CPS’ chief education officer (and Duncan’s presumed successor, until the Huberman appointment).  But if the news reports are true, and Huberman’s priority number one is school security and safety procedures for team sports, it really raises an important issue of the role of urban superintendent and the priorities that come with the job.  And it shows just how important it is for non-educators to focus on the core academics when they take the top job.  NYC’s Klein and DC’s Rhee immediately focused on student achievement and taking whatever steps were necessary to boost student gains.  Denver’s Bennet went to work on teacher incentive pay.  Jumping into the educational deep end like Klein, Rhee, and Bennet did defines a superintendency and sets the tone for the school district moving forward.
Yes, it is important for a mayor to trust his superintendent.  Yes, school safety is a concern for just about every school district.  But can we really bring about school improvement and sustain progress on issues such as charter schools and alternative paths for principals and school closings and the like without the support and trust of the classroom teacher?  Will teachers line up behind a superintendent whose last experience in the public schools was likely when he graduated from high school?  Doesn’t a district like Chicago deserve a national search to bring in the best leader — from education or other ranks — available in the United States, whether they bear a Chicago zip code or not?  
As for the future of CPS’  school improvements, only time will tell.  The successes in NYC, Denver, and DC are likely the exceptions to the rule, and not the new norm for urban education.  I’m all for breaking the mold, but sometimes we have a mold because it is the best way to deliver the necessary product.  Yes, we have seen some cities choose non-traditional superintendents and thrive as a result.  No, one doesn’t have to have taught in a classroom to be a strong instructional leader.  Yes, we need to break the cycle of recycling the same school district leaders who seem to move from one city to the next, leaving little student achievement impact to show for it.  
But running an urban district is a complex challenge with little available learning curve.  We’ve heard so much lately about the academic progress being made in Chicago, and the instructional improvements being made across the city.  It just seems, when selecting a leader, that someone with familiarity with school funding, school choice, teacher professional development, instructional programs, student assessment, and such is more of a non-negotiable than merely a value-add.
I guess, at least, we can count on the CPS school buses running on schedule.
     

The Future of Urban School District Leaders

Eduflack Arne Duncan, CPS, DCPS, Michelle Rhee, Obama, PD

At yesterday’s EdSec confirmation hearings, senator after senator went out of their way to praise the selection of Chicago Public Schools CEO Arne Duncan and how terrific it will be to have a real urban educator at the helm of the U.S. Department of Education.  At the beginning of the year, many folks (Eduflack included) praised the selection of Denver Public Schools chief Michael Bennet for the open U.S. Senate seat from Colorado, again applauding the notion that a true-blue educator would be involved in authorizing and appropriating federal education dollars.

As a friend pointed out this afternoon, though, all this talk about our top urban superintendents moving up to new, more powerful political jobs raises one large unanswered (and often unasked) question.  What is the impact on our urban districts?  At a time when our school districts are facing greater demands on their resources, higher expectations on their performance, shrinking budgets from their cities and states, and a more demanding economy into which their most successful students are now entering, what happens to those districts that lose great leaders?
This isn’t just a federal issue, either.  our states are seeing massive turnover in the chief state school officer positions.  For each of those open state chiefs, there are likely superintendents in that state (as well as those from others) who pique the interests of politicians, policymakers, and educators.
But let’s get back to our urban districts.  Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Denver.  All are facing brand new superintendents at their most important moments.  Same is true for districts like Prince Georges County in Maryland.  Other districts — Boston, Philadelphia, Newark, and the like, have supes in their first years.  It’s getting to the point where DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, on the job for a year and a half now, is quickly become a grizzled veteran in world of urban superintendents.
Yes, ED is fortunate to soon have Duncan at the helm, where he can bring his Chicago experiences and insights to bear on the national scene.  We can look at the improvements and the innovations and the ideas that have percolated in Chicago (and other cities) and paint them with a larger brush and allow them to have larger impact.  But as ED begins to fill out its other positions, how many cities will lose their top school administrator for the greater good?  I assume that a supe or a chief state school officer will take over at the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, but what about the other openings in ED’s Duncan era?
It raises a lot of questions in Eduflack’s mind.  Does one have to run a major urban school district to lead school improvement at the national level?  What about our rural school districts?  Who speaks for the small communities or the K-8 school districts when the focus is on urban turnaround?  How important is it for a senior-level ED appointee to have real K-12 classroom instruction experience?  How much of such experience is enough?  What’s the necessary balance between pedagogy and innovation at ED?  Does K-12 or higher ed experience truly matter when it comes to the knock-around political world that is Washington? 
We all know heading one of the larger school districts in the nation is a difficult job.  The stakes are high.  Turnover is frequent.  Districts churn through leaders, with many top districts recycling many of the same leaders again and again.  So how does one protect the gains in such districts, while preventing the brain drain that comes with turnover and current upward mobility?  And more importantly, what are groups like the Council of Great City Schools and AASA doing to ensure that incoming superintendents — in both our most urban and most rural districts — have the professional development tools, support, and guidance necessary to keep improvements moving forward and bringing about the sort of change that so many communities are crying out for?
 
Maybe Duncan is already thinking of that, and is going to adopt a superintendent-in-residence program at ED to help ensure that school administrators have the access to best practice that we are constantly trying to deliver to both principals and teachers.  Or maybe we figure that urban districts always manage to figure it out, and between CGCS and the Broad Foundation, we’ll keep those top jobs staffed, so no need to worry.
And while we’re off the topic, allow me this little rant.  By now, many have seen the screaming Internet messages warning that all of the top jobs at ED are going to go to educational innovators and free thinkers, and not those with distinct classroom pedagogical training or instructional experience.  I don’t want to address such rumors here because I don’t think they are worth the electronic ink.  And anyway, Sherman Dorn does a far better job discussing the silly fears than I ever could — www.shermandorn.com/mt/archives/002872.html  But I do want to address the larger issue.   What ED needs now, what ED always needs, is a team that is committed to school improvement and is committed to the child.  That commitment takes many forms.  We see it in classroom and district educators.  We see it in education researchers who have committed themselves to spotlighting best practice.  And we see it in innovators, idea-makers, and policy minds who look for new ways to solve the problems that ail our schools.  Before we condemn picks for jobs at ED, we should let President-elect Obama and EdSec in-waiting Duncan actually make the picks.  There may just be a method to their madness.  And we may be surprised how the individuals, the personalities, and the backgrounds selected complement each other and form a wide net of experience and action designed to real school improvement.  At the end of the day, we have to believe that Obama and Duncan (and their surrogates) are seeking to improve public education through ED, and not harm it.  So let’s let them give it a try.
I’ll step down from the soapbox and relinquish the rostrum.  More questions than I have answers today, I’m afraid.  But sometimes such questions result in really interesting answers and insights down the road.  
 

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?

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.

Looking for a Chicago Education Miracle?

Eduflack Achievement gap, AFT, Arne Duncan, Broad Prize, Chancellor Klein, charter schools, NCLB

Eight years ago, the education community was all abuzz about the “Houston Miracle” and how then EdSec Rod Paige was going to take the magic that transformed the Houston Independent School District into a Broad Prize winner, federalize it into No Child Left Behind, and leave a path of school improvement and student achievement in its wake.

Nearly a decade later, we’re still waiting for some of that magic.  Chalk it up to poor implementation, increased criticism, a lack of faith, or even programs that didn’t work.  But those Texas improvements, carried out in theory with even more zeal by EdSec Margaret Spellings, are still a work in progress.  We still haven’t bottled what made HISD the success story it was in 2000-2001, and we likely never will.
Interestingly, we are not hearing the same claims about Chicago Public Schools and the real impact EdSec in-waiting Arne Duncan can have on our nation’s schools — until now.  Maria Glod’s piece in today’s Washington Post paints a picture of an urban school district of reform, innovation, and improvement.  Test scores up, achievement gaps closing, performance pay awarded.  The full story can be found here — www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/29/AR2008122902672.html?hpid=topnews  
Eduwonkette (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/eduwonkette/) has been telling a different story on Chicago and its data.  So have others on the blogsphere who look at the third-largest school district in the nation and wonder if it has come far enough and if it has accomplished enough to be sold as a success story.
Leading an urban school district is hard work.  The life expectancy for a schools superintendent is about three years.  Duncan has been there more than twice as long.  He’s worked with a strong union (the AFT affiliate in Chicago) and he’s managed to expand charter schools and implement a performance pay plan that seems to be working, at least according to WaPo.  And he’s mostly done it without drawing headlines for himself.
This past fall, Eduflack learned how strongly folks feel about NYC Public Schools and the alleged turnaround led by Chancellor Joel Klein.  I’ve remarked that the NYCDOE has demonstrated improvement.  Test scores are up.  Achievement gap is closing.  NYC kids are doing better against students upstate than they used to.  Such remarks brought a hail storm of attacks from those on the front lines in New York, those who believed that such statements were merely the PR work of a zealous schools chancellor.  Folks just didn’t want to believe that NYC schools and NYC schoolteachers had begun to turn the corner on student achievement.
The same could be said about Chicago.  Demonstrating eye-popping results in a school district of 400,000 is near impossible.  Incremental gains are the proof.  The case studies and stories offered by Glod and WaPo give us insight into the sorts of improvements Duncan and his team have brought to Chicago.  We know there is a lot more we need to learn about Duncan and Chicago.  But the data demonstrates an uptick.  And we all know that upward movement is better than downward.
But there is a larger issue here, one not raised during the Paige era and one that should be raised during the Duncan era.  The EdSec is not intended to be a superintendent in chief, the top supe in a nation of chief school officers.  He is meant to lead federal investment, policymaking, and thought leadership on education.  Yes, being a supe brings a unique perspective to that job, allowing very real experiences in boosting student achievement, closing the achievement gap, and negotiating collective bargaining agreements with teachers to educate and color one’s world view on education policy.  It demonstrates one understands the challenges facing today’s educators and today’s school leaders.  And it shows appreciation for practice and impact, and not just theory.
It is silly to think that Duncan is going to transform the nation into one larger version of Chicago Pubic Schools.  The CPS experience is helpful in showing us what Duncan thinks of issues like charter schools and performance pay.  It is useful in showing how well the incoming EdSec works with teachers, how much respect he shows them, and how much power he grants them in school improvement efforts.  And it helps determine whether he is an improver or a status quoer, whether he will go along with what has always been done or whether he will bring about real change for a real goal.
We shouldn’t be looking at Chicago test scores and ask how we replicate the experience nationwide.  Instead, we need to look at the innovations implemented by Duncan, the team he’s built, and the relationships he’s established with Chicago teachers, families, and community and business leaders and use all that information as a map for what is possible and where ED may head.  We look at the Chicago experience to measure Duncan’s character and set our expectations for the next four years.