PR

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.

25 Things

Eduflack Achievement gap, PR, SBRR

By now, most have probably heard about the “25 Random Things About Me” effort that is circulating around the Internet.  It is essentially a modern-day chain letter, but one designed to provide greater insight about the people we deal with on a day-to-day basis.  The concept is simple, once you’re tagged, you are to reveal 25 random things about yourself.  You are also expected to “tag” 25″ colleagues on the Web to do the same about themselves.  An interesting concept, particularly if one believes that information is key to forward movement.

Although I was tagged on Facebook (and will be tagging back through the social networking forum), I thought I would share my list, giving readers a better sense of the unique personality behind this blog.  So without further ado, here are 25 random things about Eduflack:
1) I am the son of educators, and am reminded of it each and every day.  My mother was a high school English teacher (10th grade) and my father is a presidential historian, author of more than a half dozen books, and retired college president.
2) As a child, I grew up in six states and one foreign country (NY, NJ twice, MA, NM, WV, and Japan) as my father moved up the higher education administration ladder.
3) In 1984, I canvassed door-to-door for then-Senator Al Gore.  Did the same for Bill Clinton in the 1992 primaries, Bill Bradley in 2000 and Obama in 2008.  Somewhere in between Gore and Clinton, I went through a “Republican phase,” thanks in large part to Family Ties and Alex P. Keaton.
4) In high school, I was an International Science Fair Winner and the 1991 West Virginia Science and Engineering Fair Grand Prize Winner for a social/behavioral sciences project on the effects of verbal conditioning.
5) At the age of 21, I had the honor of serving as Managing Editor of The Cavalier Daily, one of the top collegiate newspapers in the nation.  At the University of Virginia’s CD (an independent newspaper, mind you) I managed a staff of 150 and turned out 16 pages or so of well-written news each and every day.  That meant 80-hour work weeks for no pay and no college credit for an entire year.
6) At the age of 22, I was named press secretary for U.S. Sen. Robert C. Byrd, the senior senator from West Virginia and the once and future chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.  One cannot describe how much I learned about government, politics, and community from Senator Byrd.
7) As a senior press aide to U.S. Sen. Bill Bradley, I helped manage Bill’s retirement announcement in 1995.  That meant calls from everyone from Meet the Press to SportsCenter to Saturday Night Live.  George Magazine’s JFK Jr. even called me himself and provided me his cell number for an upcoming piece.
8) My greatest professional highlight was shepherding the National Reading Panel from infancy into the cornerstone of federal education policy.
9) My second greatest professional moment was helping Senator Bradley pass the “drive-through” deliveries bill, ensuring newborns and their mothers received at least two days of hospital care before being discharged.
10) My third greatest professional moment was stopping the U.S. Department of Treasury from allowing foreign companies to print U.S. currency paper.  Our dollars have been, are, and always should be printed by Crane & Co. in western Massachusetts.
11) I have written speeches and opeds for cabinet secretaries, U.S. senators, congressmen,and Fortune 500 CEOs.  There is no greater challenge and no better high than findings an individual’s “voice” for an effective speech.  A life goal is to write, just once, for the President of the United States.
12) Despite a career in politics and public relations, I am a classic introvert.
13) My wife, Jennifer, is the only true love of my life.  And I knew after our first date that I would one day marry her.  It took me two and a half months to convince her of that fact.
14) I am the proud father of two children, Michael and Anna.  Both are adopted from Guatemala, and they are full birth siblings born 17 months apart.  They are now the center of my universe and what drives me in all corners of my life.
15) I am a bit of a clothes horse.  When it comes to everyday wear, it is Tommy Bahama and Nat Nast.  When its professional time, I’m all about Italian suits and Brooks Brothers shirts (I know it isn’t the ideal mix, but it works for me).
16) I subscribe to nearly 20 magazines and publications, and read each and every one of them.  I even get USA Today delivered to my home.  And if I am spending the day in the office, I gather information from nearly 100 websites and blogs daily.  I have a long favorites list and use each and every one of them to stay on top of things.
17) I have owned four Ford Mustangs in my life.  A 1981 Mustang that was my first car, a 1966 Mustang sold to buy post-wedding furniture for our home, a 1998 Mustang, and my current 2006 school bus yellow Mustang convertible.
18) I desperately want to own a motorcycle, as my Teamster grandfather once did.  But my mother and wife have conspired against me to block that dream.
19) I am an eBay addict.
20) I am a rabid New York Mets fan, due in large part because my die-hard Yankee fan of a father took me to Mets games as a kid because it was easier and safer to go to into Queens than it was to go into the Bronx.
21) To badly paraphrase from Bull Durham, I believe in scientifically based education research, national education standards, 21st century skills, and strong, legitimate efforts to close the achievement gap and improve our schools.
22) My life dream is to move to a small town and run its local newspaper.  I recognize print is dying, but with a good advertising director, I’m certain I can make it a success. 
23) I am the oldest of three siblings.  One sister is an investigative attorney for the City of New York.  The other sister is a professional jazz singer in the city that never sleeps.  Although we come from the same stock, the three of us couldn’t be more different.
24) There is nothing I enjoy more than a terrific, high-quality pen (green or blue ink) writing on good, heavy cardstock.  I’m still searching for the ideal pen ( a 20-year pursuit), but the note cards from Levenger meet my paper requirement.  And I take all my notes on index cards, no notebooks or legal pads for me.
25) I have written Eduflack for just about two years now, and it continues to provide me true joy and professional satisfaction.  There is nothing more cathartic than writing about issues you care passionately about.
Of course, it was pointed out to me that I did not reveal anything terribly embarrassing, so I will go ahead and add an unnecessary 26th thing.  As a child, I had a horrible stutter, and hated anyone to hear.  It was only made worse by having a wicked bad Boston/New Jersey-blended accent (the result of our moves).  Terribly amusing now that I spend much of my time speaking for a living.

Eduflack In the Top Eight?

Eduflack PR

When I started the Eduflack blog nearly two years ago, I did so for two reasons.  One, I thought there was a whole in the education policy discussion landscape about effective communication.  There was a real need to see how we effectively discuss education reform, looking at the messages, tactics, and issues of the day that are capturing the public attention and driving real improvement in the community.

Second, I did so from a purely selfish point of view.  I find writing a way to recharge the mind and look at old topics in fresh ways.  Spending all of my day talking about education and school improvement, it only helps my craft by spending my free time writing about it.
Sure, it always interests me to see the rankings on Technorati and to read articles about effective education blogs, as was recently developed by Mike Petrilli in Education Next — www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/34687864.html.  I know Eduflack is not a top-10 blog, but is nice to see how Eduflack ranks in Core Knowledge’s personal blog rankings or to know that this blog was a finalist for Ed in 08’s Education Blog of the Year back in the spring.
So imagine my surprise to learn this week that Eduflack has been named one of the top eight education blogs by the good folks over at DreamBox.  Their full posting is here — www.dreambox.com/blog/dreambox-ranks-our-top-eight-education-blogs/604/.  As for me, they wrote:
An expert on educational advocacy, marketing and communication strategies, Patrick Riccards articulates the ripple effect of education in intelligent prose that make you stop and think. Eduflack is particularly laudable for its ability to take complex educational issues and synthesize them down to easily understood ideas. One stand-out read is Eduflack’s ten educational tenets.

I’m always surprised to find out that folks other than family and friends actually read my ramblings and put up with my Moby Dick-like hunts on issues such as Reading First, national standards, and the need for more public engagement campaigns for education issues.  So I thank the folks at DreamBox Learning for reading the blog.  And more importantly, I thank them for the company with which they place Eduflack.  Now I just have to live up to the hype.
 

dbltop8-educationbloggers150.jpg

Failing to Meet Our Parents’ Expectations

Eduflack early college, Gates Foundation, High School, national standards, NGA, PR, Students

Earlier this month, we had the American Council on Education release data showing that today’s students are attaining less education than their parents.  At the time, I took that to mean that many students stopping at their BAs have parents with advanced degrees, the kids of BA parents are wrapping up at the associates level, and some children of college grads are settling for just a high school diploma.

Over the past decade, particularly over the past three or so years, it seemed pretty clear to Eduflack that there was universal agreement, at least among adults, that a high school diploma was a non-negotiable in today’s world.  I’ve even say that every student requires some form of postsecondary education — be it training program, community college, or four-year degree — if they are to compete and succeed in the 21st century economy.  We may say it, but the Education Trust’s latest report is enough to send a chill down my eduspine.
If you’ve missed it, CNN.com has the story — beta.cnn.com/2008/US/10/24/dropout.rate.ap/index.html.  The headline says it all.  Kids are less likely to graduate than their parents.  What the headline is missing, but the lede provides, is that we are now talking about HIGH SCHOOL.  Today, in 2008, teenagers are less likely to graduate from high school than their parents were.  And according to the EdTrust numbers, one in four kids is dropping out of high school, a number than has held steady for a half-decade now.
This story should be a punch in the gut to all of those who have been working on high school reform efforts for the past decade.  After all of the time and money and attention and effort that the Gates Foundation and the Alliance for Excellent Education and Jobs for the Future and the National High School Alliance and others have poured into improving the high school experience, we still haven’t convinced our young people that a high school diploma is a worthwhile goal.
Yesterday, we heard the EdSec talk about the importance of a common high school graduation rate, so we know where every state stands when it comes to handing out the diplomas.  Alliance President Bob Wise likened it to Fedex, providing us real-time data to understand where every student is along the continuum.  But according to EdTrust, even when we let each state set their own rates (and some set the bar awfully low), only half of states are hitting the mark.  Once every state adopts the NGA formula mandated by the U.S. Department of Education, state grad rates are likely to fall in the short term (and not just hold) in a great number of states.  It becomes hard to hide behind the data when you don’t get to set the data collection terms.
Don’t worry, I am not hear to rant (or to continue to rant) about what we need to do to make high school more rigorous or relevant or how to better capture data.  We have enough of that information from those individuals and organizations that have dedicated their work lives to the process.  One just has to look at a state like Ohio, both through its OHSTI and ECHS efforts, to see how you improve the secondary school experience.
No, the EdTrust data isn’t a clarion call for yet another round of ideas on high school reform or redesign.  Instead, it is a clear and unquestioned alert that we need to do a better job communicating with today’s young people.
Speak to many involved in high school redesign efforts, and they will talk about their work with school administrators, teachers, and state policymakers.  They’ll talk about the role of the business community.  Some may even mention a parent or a member of the clergy.  But when it comes to talking about primary audiences for high school reform, we often take students — the end user and ultimate customer — for granted.
All the reform and improvement in the world doesn’t mean squat if the student doesn’t see the value and importance of it.  And the only way we can effectively communicate that value is to communicate with the students themselves.
Are kids dropping out because class is too hard or because it is too boring?  Are they dropping out to pursue a job opportunity or because they want out of school?  Are classes fun and interesting?  Do they have career plans?  Are they getting classes that align with those career plans?  Do they know what it takes to secure the job they want?  What do they deem a good job?  Are they engaging with their teachers?  Are they using technology?  Do they see high school dropouts who are succeeding?  Who are they getting advice from?  What’ll it take to keep them in the classroom?
Over the years, Eduflack has done more than his share of focus groups with high school students.  Each time, I am surprised by how we underestimate them and their views on the value of education.  Often, these sessions are the first time a 15-year-old has been asked by an adult what their goals are and how they get there.  I’ve spoken with kids in some of the poorest areas in our nation, urban and rural, and I can tell you one thing — every kid knows dropping out simply isn’t an option.  They know it is a wasted opportunity.  And they know it means a future of struggle.
So what do we do about it?  As a nation, we have invested billions of dollars into high school redesign efforts, working to improve instruction, delivery, measurement, rigor, and relevance in our secondary schools.  We’ve made great strides.  But the EdTrust numbers and last year’s study on dropout factories tells us we still have a long way to go.  
We don’t need more redesign.  We need a better sales job.  We need state policymakers and superintendents to better understand what works, both to increase the grad rate and boost student achievement on the state exams.  We need teachers to better understand how to relate to today’s students, connecting lessons in chemistry or history or English to student interests and student desires.  But most importantly, we need to sell students on the notion that this is just the first major step down the path they want to take, that they need to take.
Students need to better understand that secondary and postsecondary education are requirements for a good job in this economy.  Students need to know dropping out is never a viable choice.  Students need to know the career and life options before them, and the education required to get them there.  Students need to be challenged, both in terms of curriculum and its delivery.  Students need choices and options, whether they be honor students or struggling learners.  Students need to value a high school diploma as much as their parents or grandparents do.
It is easy to lecture at a kid and tell them this is important.  It is even easy to inform them on why they need to stay in school and why they need to take their education seriously.  And it is somewhat comforting to know that we don’t need to overly worry about three out of every four students out there.  But for that remaining 25%, we need to take bold action to change their minds and change their behavior.  We need to get them to stay in school.  That doesn’t come by changing the drop-out age to 18 or mandating exit exams for all.  That comes from communicating the value and need of secondary instruction.  That comes from engaging today’s kids (and often before they get to high school).  It comes from selling kids on school and their future.  
We may think we are doing it, but the data shows we clearly are not.  Instead of communicating with students, we are speaking past them.  We need big change, at least when it comes to the attitudes of young people.  Without it, our schools, our economy, and our nation will never live up to the sta
ndard we set or the potential we have.

Engaging the Public on Math Reform

Eduflack Marketing, Math, NCLB, PR, Reading First, SBRR

When the National Reading Panel released its landmark “Teaching Children to Read” report in April 2000, the obvious question to follow was, “what’s next?”  The federal government releases studies like “Teaching Children to Read” all the time.  The report comes out, copies are distributed, and they usually end up in someone’s closet, on someone’s bookcase to get dusty, or as a doorstop in a state department of education.

As loyal readers know, NRP was a passion project for Eduflack.  I was involved from the very beginning serving as a senior advisor to the panel and helping with everything from qualitative research to editorial.  For two years, NRP was my life, and I wouldn’t change a day of it.
During the NRP process, the we recognized that we needed to do more than just traditionally “disseminate” the findings.  Informing key stakeholders on reading research was an important step, yes.  But if the NRP was going to have the lasting effect it intended (and the lasting effect, I argue, it has) we needed to reach far deeper.  We needed to move beyond simply informing to engaging.  And we needed to move from engaging to changing behavior.  
Ultimately, we needed to change the way the education world dealt with reading instruction.  We needed to change how teachers taught kids to read.  We needed to change what parents asked about reading in the classroom.  We needed to change how school administrators made decisions on the programs they purchased.  We needed to change how local, state, and federal elected officials prioritized funding for reading instruction.  And we needed to change how the community at large, particularly the business community, addressed the issue and focused on reading.  Most importantly, we needed to change student reading ability, ensuring that virtually every student gained the research-based instruction needed to be reading proficient by fourth grade.
Such change is no small undertaking.  Following the release of the NRP report in 2000, we spent two years engaging in a range of communications and public engagement activities.  Conference presentations.  Interviews with the media.  Interactions with key stakeholder groups and influential individuals.  Armed with just the massive Report of the Subgroups, the Summary Report, and the NRP Video Report, we began the process of informing, engaging, and changing thinking.
After the tenets of NRP were included in No Child Left Behind (Reading First in particular), a new phase of engagement began.  The U.S. Department of Education created the Partnership for Reading, a joint effort led by all federal agencies involved in one way or another with reading.  This included ED, HHS, Labor, and NIH.  Together, these agencies pledged a shared support to promote a unified commitment to scientifically based reading instruction.
Through the Partnership (another project Eduflack played a leading role in), we were able to launch a national public engagement campaign to ensure that all audiences 1) understood scientifically based reading instruction; 2) knew why it was important; and 3) began implementing it in their schools, classes, and communities.  Originally, the work focused on a broad range of stakeholder audiences, including policymakers, the business community, school administrators, researchers, teacher educators, teachers, and parents.  During the two-year process, we winnowed down our audiences, seeing the key actors in getting SBRR into the classroom as both the teacher and the parent.
To accomplish this effort, we engaged in a wide range of communications activities, far more than those used following the NRP release.  Development of strong, audience-specific messages.  Creation of specific materials designed for specific stakeholders.  Media relations.  Public service announcement campaign (both print and radio, in both English and Spanish).  Conference presentations and exhibitions.  A speakers bureau.  Partnership development.  And any and all marketing and communications activities designed to spread the word about the need for and the impact of SBRR.
At the end of the day, I am proud of the results we accomplished.  Yes, we secured significant media coverage (millions of impressions worth millions and millions of ad-equivalent dollars).  But we also built a strong network of supporters and advocates.  Through a working partners group, we brought together organizations like NEA, AFT, AASA, and IRA (organizations not exactly friendly with ED or NCLB at the time) and joined them with NGA, NAESP, BRT, and the Chamber as a sign of shared commitment to scientifically based reading.  How?  At the end of the day, all of these organizations, regardless of their political leanings, shared a common belief that every child needed to learn to read and we needed to use instructional approaches that worked to get all children reading.
I don’t take this walk down memory lane to toot any particular horn or wait for an applause line for the hard work of all of the people at NICHD and ED who helped move this forward, from 2000 through 2005.  Instead, I reflect on this experience because of an article in this week’s Education Week.  In it, Sean Cavanagh reports on the current efforts underway to promote the recently released report from the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. The full story can be found here — <a href="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/10/10/08mathpanel.h28.html
The”>www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/10/10/08mathpanel.h28.html
The Math Panel is to be commended for its work, and it is especially noteworthy that they were able to pull together a conference earlier this month for policy folks and practitioners to focus on how to move the Panel’s findings into U.S. classrooms.  The NRP shared a similar goal, but those conferences quickly evolved into RF conferences after the passage of NCLB.
Cavanagh also focuses on efforts to print more than 160,000 pamphlets for parents on elementary and middle school math.  Again, a needed step.  For change to occur in our schools, parents must be effectively used as a lever for action.  Lasting change does not come without real, sustained action from the parents.
EdWeek also notes the work of the ED’s Doing What Works website (http://dww.ed.gov) to move the Math Panel’s findings into teachable moments for educators and professional developers.  (Full disclosure, Eduwife is managing DWW for ED).
But I also hope the Math Panel is thinking bigger, thinking bolder, and thinking more audaciously.  Yes, it is unfortunate that ED will soon change hands, and a new EdSec will have new priorities.  And yes, it is unfortunate that the Math Wars make the Reading Wars seem like Cub Scout jamborees.  But the findings of the Math Panel are too important to fall by the wayside come January 2009.  The need to equip all students with real math skills is too important for our schools, our community, our economy, and our nation for the Math Panel’s report to hit a dusty shelf come next year, forgotten for the “next big thing.”
Someone needs to launch a massive public engagement campaign to reform math instruction.  Building from the work, infrastructure, and results of the Partnership for Reading, someone needs to work with parents, teachers, and policymakers to focus on getting what works when it comes to math into the classroom.  And, ideally, someone outside of the federal government needs to make this their national priority, allowing such a campaign to move swifter and more nimbly than a government effort.
Interested?  I’m happy to give you my cent-and-a-half to get it off the ground.
 

Bringing Together Effective Education Communicators

Eduflack Marketing, PR

About a year and a half ago, I launched Eduflack because I saw there was a voice missing from the education reform debate.  Since I’ve built a career on the issue of public engagement, I have long believed that effective communications (and advocacy and public affairs and marketing) are necessary components of meaningful education reform.  Few were talking about how effectively we talk about education reform, so Eduflack was born.

Since then, I’ve tried to focus (or tangentially focus) my critiques on the messaging, the strategy, and the communications surrounding education issues.  From time to time, as Eduwife likes to point out, I veer off the intended path, moving into more focused discussions of policy and wonkishness.  This is particularly true, as any loyal reader knows, of issues such as reading instruction, education research, and accountability.
Over the last few months, I’ve grown troubled.  And this is more than Eduflack’s general sense of cynicism, mistrust, and fear of things that go bump in the night.  What troubles me?  We preach so much about modeling best or promising practices in education policy, but we do almost nothing to put it into practice in education communications.
Over the past 15 years, I have worked on a great number of policy issues — healthcare, technology, workforce development and labor relations, finance, and federal appropriations to name but a few.  All those areas seem to have ways to bring their industry communicators together.  But not education.
For those involved in marketing, PR, communications, public affairs, design, or advocacy in the education sector, there is little to bring us together to learn or share promising practices.  Companies and not-for-profits will work with their PR agencies.  Those agencies know who their competitors are.  We all often see each other at conferences or events, and many of us read each others’ quotes in education publications or on blogs.  But there was nothing to unite us.
In the communications space, we have a number of membership organizations.  The International Association of Business Communicators and Public Relations Society of America are the two leaders.  Neither organization spotlights the education sector or considers it on level with issues such as healthcare, technology, tourism, or anything else.  Those in higher education will often turn to the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, or CASE.  But CASE is far more of a policy group, whose members just happen to be in the communications field.  Again, no true organization to bring us together.
So I’ve decided it is time to try and do something about.  Today, I am officially announcing the establishment of Educommunicators, an online community designed to bring together marketing communications professionals in the education sector.  I’ll be the first to say this is a work in progress.  My hope is that Educommunicators will evolve, over time, to meet the needs of its members.  For now, I see it focusing on a few key issues:
* Sharing information on key policy and industry issues, providing news from valuable third parties
* Spotlighting promising communications efforts, be they led by companies, non-profits, government entities, or PR agencies
* Recognizing those individuals who are doing good work in education communications
* Providing a forum for dialogue and discussion on policy issues, the media, and other issues important to members
* Sharing information on new hires, job opportunities, new clients/projects, and similar updates important to members
* Building a broad and deep network of education communications pros, a network akin to what EWA does for education writers or what AASA does for school district leaders
And if I get so bold, we may even start assembling a directory of those PR firms that specialize in education issues (and do a good job at it).  No one else is doing it, but there is a real need for such a directory in the education community.
How are we going to do it?  Today, we officially launch four different forums to form a network of information sharing.  The first is a website — www.educommunicators.com.  This site will serve as the core communication vehicle for the organization, and will likely see the most change over time.  Pages and topics will be developed based on feedback from membership.
The second is a blog — blog.educommunicators.com.  This blog will allow for regular updates on the issues of the day.
The third and fourth vehicles will tap the power of online social networking.  Educommunicators has launched a group on Facebook (Educommunicators) that are all welcome to join.  There is a similar group on www.linkedin.com (also Educommunicators) that will be open to all those who join it.
I pledge to do my best to share all information across the four platforms, so if you use one, you will still get the information everyone sees.  Of course, it also means that some of you may be getting multiple invitations from me, be it on Facebook, LinkedIn, or from my personal contact lists.
What am I asking for in return?  First, join Educommunicators.  There is no fee and no expectation here.  Sign on to the Facebook or LinkedIn groups or send me your contact information to info@educommunicators.com.  You’ll then be a founding member of Educommunicators and a piece in building this important online community.
Once you’ve bought into the concept, I hope you’ll participate in its development.  Share this post or the website address with any and all interested parties, suggesting they join as well.  Send me ideas for the blog or the website.  Let me know about your projects or the work you’re engaged in.  Alert me to new hires or new job opportunities in education communications.  Share any and all information that a fellow education comm pro would want to know.  And we’ll just take it from there.
If you want to go the extra step, I could always use writers for the blog.  I could also use some volunteers to serve as board members (of sorts) for the organization to ensure we stay true to a mission and core goals.  
Lots of opportunities.  Few obstacles.  All we need is participation.  So please join Educommunicators.  I need your help.  And you’ll benefit from the information and insights that will be gleaned from the process.  I promise.

Stronger American Schools?

Eduflack Gates Foundation, PR

Thanks to the folks over at This Week in Education, we learn that the Broad and Gates Foundations have decided to end funding for their joint Strong American Schools/Ed in 08 initiative.  When it was launched a year and a half ago, SAS leaders pledged to place education atop the list of policy issues discussed and debated during the 2008 presidential debate.  Since then, the mortgage debacle, greater attention on environmentalism (thanks to Al Gore’s Nobel), rising consumer costs, and now the latest financial industry crisis, education just hasn’t gotten the foothold it deserved in election politics.

We all recognize that education is not going to be a major player over the next month.  It won’t be a major focus of tomorrow’s VP debate.  It won’t drive the two remaining presidential showdowns.  It is unlikely it will be the topic of a campaign commercial or of third-party spending from PACs and special interest groups.  So the decision makes practical sense in our impractical political world.
What has SAS left us with?  First and foremost, it has provided a network for dialogue.  By SAS’ own statistics, the organization has hosted more than 800 meetings around the country to discuss the needs in public education.  They’ve placed articles and opeds in leading newspapers.  They’ve supported advertising campaigns.  And they’ve gotten both campaigns to think about education issues, at least to the extent where they have built strong education policy teams and are already thinking through transition issues.
When the books are closed on Ed in 08, it will have spent slightly more than a third of total funds originally intended for the effort.  By now, though, we all realize that money doesn’t buy results.  Thanks to the Puget Sound Business Journal, we know approximately $24 million has been spent on this initiative.   Instead of asking about the remaining $36 million, we should focus on where the money spent has gotten us.  More importantly, are we better off now than we were 18 months ago?
As education reformers, we have to believe that the answer is yes.  Beyond the quantifiable results that SAS will document in the coming months, the effort has demonstrated that there is interest in a national debate on the future of education.  We have demonstrated that people do care about the fate of our public schools, the choices we can make, the power we have to change and improve what is available to our kids and our communities.
Just as important, though, SAS has shown us the most important part of education reform — the need for clear goals and the need for a clear call to action.  If Ed in 08 had any shortcoming, it was that it refused to advocate for a particular position.  Yes, raising awareness is important, particularly when we are talking about raising awareness about the current state of the American public school system.  But awareness is just the first step on the road to success.
What SAS lacked, and what so many education organizations must now take up, is a clear call to action.  SAS informed.  It sought to build commitment for that information.  The lacking piece, however, was mobilizing the community to take specific action.  To change public thinking.  To change public behavior.  To change our public schools.
Moving forward, the Gates and Broad Foundations are left with infinite options.  They have made an unwavering commitment to improving the quality and outcomes of public education throughout the United States.  More than ever, those resources must be committed to programs that can be replicated and duplicated.  They must be committed to programs that can be adopted by school after school, district after district, and state after state.  They must be results-based, with an emphasis on data and accountability.  They must make a difference, both today and for the long term.
Now, we must look for ways to build on the work of SAS and Ed in 08, ensuring that we learn and move forward from what has been learned.  Ed in 08 must not be yet another initiative that is boxed up and put away, not to be looked at again.  Let’s tap the energy, the network, and the possibility to move from raising awareness to making a difference.

“The 21st Century Begins Now?”

Eduflack Bloomberg, Gates Foundation, national standards, PR, STEM

We are a nation of lists.  We love lists.  To do lists.  In lists.  Out lists.  Check offs.  Top 25s.  Up and comers.  Give us a list, and it is something that we can embrace.

This month, Esquire magazine (yes, thank you Chris Whittle for saving this pub a few decades ago) is running a cover story on the 75th anniversary of the magazine, focusing on “The 21st Century Begins Now.”  The magazine’s publishers lay out the 75 most influential people of the 21st century.  The selections are more photo than caption (typical for the magazine), and many of them are quite interesting.
What is most startling, though, is how small a role education seems to play in the 21st century (at least in Esquire’s eyes).  When Time magazine did a similar list last year, we saw names like Bill Gates, Wendy Kopp, and others.  Real names that have been involved in real education reforms — and, more importantly, improvements — over the past decade.  Since then, we’ve seen continued investment from Ed in 08 to draw attention to education issues, we’ve heard the phoenix story of New Orleans public schools, and we’ve seen new superintendents take over new districts with a zeal that hasn’t been felt in quite some time.  Now we have events like Aspen’s National Education Summit tomorrow, designed to harness the power, enthusiasm, and sense of urgency that has been brought to modern day education reform.
Esquire seems to turn a blind eye to the influence of educators, though.  We have actors and musicians, futurists and techies.  But it seems educators struggle to make the top 75 list.  Perhaps they’ve forgotten that education has the potential to be the great equalizer, or that it serves as one of the most significant civil rights issues of our time.  Maybe they’ve failed to recognize that better education today results in better jobs and a stronger economy tomorrow.  Whatever the reason, education got little respect from Esquire.
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg makes the cut, but it is all about organizational reform and environmentalism.  Michael Milken is one it, but for his work with FasterCures healthcare reform, and not his previous education efforts.   Recent TED honoree Dave Eggers is on the list, and he nobly talks about the importance of reading, even in the 21st century society.  Bill Gates, of course is there, with a chart of his July charitable giving — only a fraction of it went to education causes, though, showing the diversification of his efforts (health, poverty, microfinance, policy, and education).
That would be the full list.  Maybe we can add actor Will Smith to the educators list because of his recent good work with charter schools.  But at the end of the day, we have one person on the list — an author — who is full-time involved in education.  Two on the list with education experience, though you can find it on their bios.  And one who’s impact on education has been quite measurable, even if it is a small part of the overall philanthropic impact.
I’ll say it.  That simply isn’t enough.  If we are looking at the 75 most influential people of the 21st century, we need to be looking at those who are influencing the actual leaders of the 21st century.  Actors and musicians and politicians may be trendy choices, but are they affecting real influence?  And can we really project the influencers of the century, when most organizations lack the foresight to thoroughly develop a 10-year strategic plan?
That’s why Eduflack is going to assemble a list of the nine individuals with the potential to influence education reform over the next decade.  If nine is good enough for a baseball team, it is good enough for me.  Maybe we’ll add a bench and some role players, but for now, the focus is our starting nine.  And I’m looking for some nominations for my draft.
Who is going assume the HR lead in getting hundreds of thousands of teachers hired following mass retirements over the next five years?  Who is going to harness disparate interests and move us to national education standards?  Who is going to redefine science and research in the classroom?  Who will lead the change evolve the role of principal into instructional and institutional leader?  Who has the approach to close the achievement gap?  Who’s got the inside track to end drop-out crisis?  Who moves STEM from the fringe to a central movement?
Our all-star team is not intended to be a list of well-known urban superintendents or organizational CEOs.  We’re looking for thinkers and voices.  We seek innovators and defenders.  We want the known and those who need to and should be discovered.  Eduflack has had a lot of fun playing parlor games regarding who will become the next EdSec.  But at the end of the day, I know that real reform and real improvement comes from those on the front lines.  EdSecs can provide vision and leadership, and they may even be able to coach the ed reform team, but they will never be the one to win the game.  We’re looking for true game changers and game winners.
Perhaps the Aspen Institute summit will spotlight on some individuals and some ideas that deserve consideration.  Perhaps the lists from Edutopia and others will help educate.  Regardless, the hunt is on.  Who wants to join the search?

“Those Who Do Not Learn from the Past …”

Eduflack Gates Foundation, higher ed, NAEP, PR, STEM

We’ve all heard George Santayana’s famous quote (often attributed to others), that “those who do not learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.”  It is a poignant statement on the importance of understanding what has happened in the past, so we can learn and grow from it.

Personally, Eduflack prefers the words of baseball philosopher king Yogi Berra, who eloquently said that if we don’t know where we are going, we will never know if we get there.  Both are applicable to life, and both are certainly applicable to education reform.  In an our current era of “change,” we are all looking to do something different with the schools.  But for those who have been around the block a time or two, they are seeing reforms that are simply retreads of ideas past.  We put a new wrapping on them or give them a new name, but they are the same failed ideas, with no indication that we have learned from their participation in that first rodeo.
What does it all mean?  For the most part, it demonstrates that we have little sense for our current standing or what it has taken to get us there.  We still believe we have the best higher education system in the world, even though our college graduation rate has slipped from first place to 15th in 10 years.  We still believe our K-12 system has no match, even as schools in India and China manage to turn out more and more students to take our jobs.  And we still embrace an educational model that was developed nearly a century ago, a model built on the notion that 1/3 in college, 1/3 high school grad, and 1/3 dropout is acceptable, and the three Rs remain the king.
Put simply, we are getting by on our reputations, not on our current actions.  We often hear carbuyers talk about their desire to buy a Volvo because of its unmatched safety record.  Let’s forget, for a moment, that the safety record in question is now a few decades old and not applicable to the current models.  In education, we sell our superiority based on an outdated model and outdated comparisons, believing that tinkering around the edges today will make us stronger, and that no one can match what we really have to offer, because they couldn’t three decades ago.
Exams like NAEP, TIMSS, and PISA obviously tell us otherwise.  The growing national push for STEM (science-technology-engineering-math) tells us otherwise too.  But how do we really learn from our educational past, in a way that lets us strengthen our educational future?
On Monday, PBS will debut its “Where We Stand: America’s Schools in the 21st Century” program.  Hosted by The NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff, this program was developed to provide “an historic assessment of U.S. Schools in where we stand.”  Premiering at 10 p.m. on Monday, September 15, the program will tell the stories of a number of individuals and communities affected by the current state of public education, focusing on issues such as teaching foreign languages (like Mandarin classes in Ohio), addressing high-poverty, low-performance issues, and using STEM education programs to lift all boats and empower all students.
The program will address the issues in urban, suburban, and rural schools, recognizing our successes and our challenges are not limited to a sliver of our demographic.  More importantly, producers promise a “frank” discusses of public education’s strengths and weaknesses, an adjective that rarely finds its way into media coverage of education and education reform these days.  The show will focus on Ohio, as it is the microcosm of our nation, both politically and educationally.  
Kudos to PBS for taking up such a challenge and producing such a piece (and it isn’t even a John Merrow piece!).  And kudos to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for funding this effort, lending its resources to educating and teaching us, in addition to empowering us to change the classrooms.  Hopefully, “Where We Stand” will provide some important lessons for the reformers, the status quoers, and all those in between to learn from and model as we move forward.
Every GPS out there requires you to enter you start point in order to track your path.  Maybe, just maybe, “Where We Stand” can provide those many educators and policymakers lost out there in the wilderness with a reliable start point on which to plot a new course. 

Fins to the Left, Teachers to the Right

Eduflack NCLB, PR

Over the weekend, Eduflack and his far better half ventured out to the Jimmy Buffett concert.  It was indeed time for the “Labor Day weekend show.”  The perfect opportunity to check out from the real world for a few hours, putting concerns about education reform out of mind for a short period of time and instead focusing on great music and modern-day pirates.

Imagine my surprise, then, that amid the shark fins, Parrotheads, and rivers of margaritas, I stumble across a sign welcoming me “to the education revolution,” a promotional booth for EPIC, or Educators for Progressive Instructional Change.  Sure, it stood out from among the grass skirts, leis, and tequila, but it nonetheless caught my eye (and what exactly does that say about me?).
EPIC is a non-profit “focused on empowering teachers to impact the process of education reform.”  Its goal seems simple enough, to provide teachers the information and professional development so that they can get involved in the policy process.  The mission is similar to many others “to create education reform that will empower teachers.  Our efforts aim to connect, inspire, and motivate teachers to become the focus of education reform.  The primary goal is to unite teachers as an indomitable force for education reform.”
How?  At first blush, much of the same old, same old.  A brochure that looks like so many that have come before it.  LiveStrong style bracelets that have long lost their power.  And promotion of a march on DC later this fall, as a show of support by and for area teachers.
Talking with EPIC’s founder and president, Myra Sawyers, Eduflack learned that EPIC (www.epicreform.org) is focusing on the DC area first, with plans to roll out activities in other cities (Charlotte, NC was mentioned) down the road.  Sawyers is quick to note that the group is not a PAC, but instead is a non-profit organization with no political mandate.
This mission, indeed, is a noble one, one that is desperately needed in 21st century public education.  We do need to treat good teachers with more professionalism and respect.  Teachers should be involved in the policy process, at the local, state, and federal levels.  And teachers must be empowered to be self-advocates, voices in the schools and the community that not only trigger reform, but bring about meaningful improvement.
Many things must be done, though, to move from well-intentioned to impactful. There are scores of organizations like EPIC that are created each and every year.  And each and every year, even more organizations like it fail.  They fail for many of the same reasons, and many of them focus on communications.
So how does EPIC learn those lessons and continue to build a strong non-profit organization dedicated to teacher empowerment?  By following five simple steps:
* Have a plan — A NFP is no different than a corporation or a political campaign.  The first step to success is having a clear business plan you can follow.  What are your goals? Who are you trying to reach?  How will you measure success?  What resources (human and financial) are available to you?  In the words of baseball philosopher Yogi Berra, if you don’t know where you are going, you are never going to get there.  The plan helps you see where you are going.
* Know your audience — We all want to be everything to everyone.  But success requires clear identification of your target audience.  More importantly, it means understanding the stakeholders who can make the most difference in the shortest period of time.  Who’s in a position to call for change?  Who can implement change?  Who has the resources to bring about change?
* Have a clear ask — Too many start-up not-for-profits see themselves as information-sharing organizations only.  They believe that if they get the information out, their work is done.  Success comes when you drive your audience to take a specific action.  And that only comes from a clear ask.  If EPIC is targeting teachers, what exactly do they want them to do?  Speak at school boards?  Visit state legislatures?  Write letters to the editor?  Figure out what actions are needed to bring change, then ask for those actions (and those actions only).
* Don’t go alone — It is hard to have lasting impact if you are a singular voice trying to break through the white noise.  Education reform success often comes through relationships, partnerships, and advocates. Find those groups and individuals that share a common vision and common goals.  Use their communications channels.  Build on their membership and recognition.  Establish a network of champions and advocates that can carry your message well beyond your own resources.
* Evaluate, adjust, repeat — Yes, it is essential to set clear, measurable goals from the beginning.  A good reform organization knows to constantly evaluate its efforts, establishing ongoing benchmarks of effectiveness.  A truly successful reform group knows to take that evaluation and use it to adjust its communications and advocacy efforts, constantly improving and strengthening its activities.  Such an ongoing feedback loop only strengthens the organization and ensures the maximization of resources.
And one final piece of advice for Ms. Sawyers and the education reformers like her. PACs aren’t the only groups that advocate.  Under the law, not-for-profits and 501(c)(3)s can be effective policy advocates at all levels of government.  Yes, there is a fine line between lobbying and advocacy.  But for groups like EPIC to be successful, they must become successful policy advocates.  Simply spotlighting the importance of teachers is no longer good enough.  Those organizations that leave a lasting impact are ones that guide us to improvement.  They are groups that make specific policy recommendations to improve the power of the teaching profession.  And then they leave it up to the legislators to codify and fund it.