Late last week, telecommunications giant AT&T announced it was investing $100 million into solutions to our nation’s high school dropout problem. The funding is to be directed into four key areas — school grants, job shadowing programs, research, and dropout-prevention summits. Education Week has the full story at http://www.edweek.org/ew/2008/04/17/34att.h27.html.
Of course, AT&T isn’t the first to dial into this conference call. The Gates Foundation (through Microsoft money) first placed the call years ago. Since then, it has been joined by groups such as the Dell Foundation, State Farm Insurance, and Boeing. All have signaled the importance of a rigorous and relevant high school experience. All have put their money in to solve the problem, as they see it, and offer improvements to a long-neglected secondary education system.
What AT&T is proposing to fund isn’t breaking new ground. Gates has become the king of school grants. Local company after local company have long offered shadowing programs in partnership with their local high schools. States like Arkansas and Indiana have conducted successful dropout-prevention summits over the last year. And anyone who is anyone is funding “research.”
But this announcement is indeed significant. Why? It is all about the end game and all about the outcomes. Some folks don’t like to hear it, but today’s high schools are necessary prep zones for tomorrow’s workforce. We hear Gates and others talk about relevant and rigorous curriculum. What does that mean? It means high school courses relate to student interests and future career paths. It means that high schools are equipping students with the skills –critical thinking, reading, computational, teamwork, etc. — to succeed in the postsecondary environment of their choice and in a meaningful career.
At the end of the day, this is all about the workforce. Does anyone truly think you can get a good job without a high school diploma? In an industry like telecommunications, can AT&T put a high school dropout to work without having to significantly invest in worker training and education?
Like many employers, AT&T is looking down the road, anticipating what happens as Baby Boomers prepare for retirement over the next decade. At the same time, they’ve watched their industry evolve, with even blue-collar jobs requiring more knowledge, more know-how, and more skills. They know the sorts of employees they need in the coming years. And they know that high school dropouts can’t fill the need.
Let Eduflack be clear, this is not a criticism. In fact, I wish more companies would think and act with the same interest that AT&T does. Over the years, we have seen significant movement happen in K-12 education, and much of it is driven when the business community joins forces with K-12. Public-private partnerships have been invaluable. And the recent philanthropic investment from corporate charities provide resources that simply cannot be offered from other entities.
Business knows what it needs from our future workforce. They know the costs of recruitment and training. They know the skills they are seeking. And they see that they just aren’t getting what they know they need.
In most circles, we talk about the need of corporate America to adapt. They adapt to the global economy. The adapt to the eco-economy. They adapt to population shifts and increased regulations and higher costs and greater competition. They adapt because they need to. It is the only way to succeed … or just to survive.
Those lessons of adaptation can also be adopted by our high schools. In most communities, our high schools still operate under the model that worked 50 or even 100 years ago. Then, a third of students dropped out and found a job or joined the military. A third graduated high school and moved into the workforce. And a third graduated and pursued a postsecondary education.
Today, we now those numbers can’t hold. According to the U.S. Department of Education, 90 percent of new jobs will require postsecondary education. That means a high school diploma. And that means a high school experience that is both relevant and interesting to all students, not just those looking to go to college.
So kudos to AT&T and those who have come before it for investing in their futures by investing in our high schools. They clearly are putting their money where their mouths are. Now it is up to our school districts and high schools (particularly those now tagged as dropout factories) to answer that phone call and take meaningful action. And don’t worry, AT&T is picking up the charges.
Students
What’s Wrong with Boston?
The writers of Boston Legal are at it again. A few months ago, the plot line went after NCLB. This week’s episode (thank you, DVR) centers its attack on the American high school. Now, we have a mother suing her late daughter’s high school, alleging that the rigors of high school were responsible for her daughter’s “driving while drowsy” death.
Like the NCLB episode, we have a Boston high school full of overachievers. This time, lawyers are attacking the high school experience because kids are working too hard. They are taking too many AP courses. They are involved in too many extracurriculars. They all want to be tops in their class, and they all want to attend Harvard.
While I still want to find this Boston high school that seems to be all white with a 100% graduation rate and every kid moving onto postsecondary education, I just have to let it go. But there was one line that was truly disturbing.
In attacking the rigor of the high school, the mother’s lawyer asks why do we need to offer AP courses at all? Those are college courses, she says, they should be offered in college and not in high school. Of course, the school’s principal agrees, and placed the blame on the students. If we didn’t offer all those AP classes, the principal says, kids would just go to a different high school that would meet their needs.
Eduflack doesn’t know which is more ridiculous, the cavalier notion of school choice or the disdain for AP courses. Let’s leave the former alone, knowing it is an absurd statement without any ground in reality. The latter is just as frustrating, seeking to place blame on a solution, rather than a problem.
Just last week, we saw that more students are taking AP classes than ever before. Whether they secure a four or five on the exam is irrelevant. These students are able to experience college-level instruction before they get to college. They get to learn if they are up to the rigors of a college-level exam. They get to explore new subjects. And they get the opportunity to earn college credits or exemptions from college requirements.
No one is saying a high school junior or senior should be taking five or seven AP courses each semester. But if they have the interest and the ability, they should be allowed to push themselves and see what they are capable of. They should be given the opportunity to succeed, rather than given the an excuse to fail.
Many can say we are where we are in public education because of low expectations. A decade or two ago, students were lucky if they could take two or three AP courses during high school. Today, schools can offer dozens of such courses. That’s a good thing, not a reason to attack well-meaning high schools.
Maybe the writers for Boston Legal should go in and take a real tour of real Boston’s public schools before they use them for another plot line or as a punchline to another joke. Those TV junkies will remember a great little Fox drama called Boston Public, set in a Beantown public high school. If memory serves, those writers seemed to get what public education was all about. Maybe they can offer a little primer to James Spader and company. Or we could just keep education on the news pagers, instead of the TV reviews.
Let’s Make Dropping Out Illegal!
By now, the numbers are ingrained on the souls of most education reformers. Nearly a third of all ninth graders will not earn a high school diploma. In our African-American and Hispanic communities, that number statistic rises to nearly 50 percent. Imagine, a 50/50 chance of earning a high school diploma of you are a student of color. The statistic is so staggering, there must be something we can do.
In today’s USA Today, we have the dueling editorials on a potential solutions — raising the drop-out age. The line of thinking here is that if we raise the age a student must be in order to drop out of high school to 18, we can turn this crisis around. Think of it. Require, by law, every kid to stay in school until they are 18, and the drop-out rates will dramatically shrink.
Of course, 17 states already have such compulsory school attendance laws, with one more going online next summer. Do we believe that those states — which include California, Louisiana, Ohio, and Texas — are not struggling with dropouts? Are grad rates not an issue in LAUSD or New Orleans or Cleveland or Houston? Of course not. Those cities are facing the realities of drop-out factories, just like most major urban centers, even if drop-outs need to be 18 to officially leave school.
If we know anything about teenagers, it should be that mandates don’t change behavior. A 17-year requirement doesn’t keep the average 10th grader from seeing an R-rated movie. A 21-year age requirement doesn’t keep seniors from taking a sip of beer or a slug of Boone’s Farm. We have underage driving. We have illegal drug use. Kids will go after what they want, regardless of the prohibitions or the consequences. The challenge — and the opportunity — is to convince them to make a good decision. We don’t chain them to their high school desks, we need to demonstrate to them that they want to stay and they need to stay.
So how do we do that? Last month, I made reference to some focus groups I did with students on the value and need for high school. Robert Pondiscio and the folks over at the Core Knowledge Blog (http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/) hoped they would soon learn a little more about Eduflack’s experiences. So here goes.
Back in the fall, I spent weeks meeting with eight, ninth, and 10th graders from a state that is pretty representative of the United States. Strong and not-so-strong urban centers, along with booming suburbs, and struggling rural areas. A strong commitment to K-16 education, yet major industry leaving the cities and towns that have long depended on it. Educators and business leaders committed to improvement, yet students not sure what opportunity would be available to them.
My goal was to learn what low-income students thought of their high school offerings and their opportunities for the future. I didn’t spend my time in the suburbs or with the honors or college prep students. I met with poor urban students, and I met with poor rural students. Most came from families where college had never been an option. And all came from homes with a very real fear that this generation may not be as successful as the generation before it.
I planned for the worst. I expected students to justify, or even respect, dropping out. How good union jobs could be found without a high school diploma or how gangs and other outside influences made school a lesser priority. But what I heard during this experience gave me hope, and made it clear we can improve high school graduation rates simply by boosting relevance, interest, and access.
What did I hear? In general:
* Students understand and appreciate the link between high school and “good” careers.
* For virtually all students, dropping out is not a productive option. For many, they don’t even think you can get a fast food job today without that diploma.
* Students know relevant courses such as those found in STEM programs are key to obtaining meaningful employment after school.
* They are eager to pursue postsecondary opportunities while in high school. They may not know anyone who has taken an AP or dual enrollment course, but they know it has value.
* Students want more career and technical education offerings. They know these are relevant courses that link directly to future jobs.
And what more did Eduflack learn? The greatest obstacle we face is awareness. This isn’t about requiring kids to stay in school. This is about opening opportunities and helping them see the choices and the pathways available to them. Today’s high schools are not one-size-fits-all. And that’s OK. Today’s students want to know what’s available to them and what aligns with their aptitudes and their interests. They want a consumer-based educational experience.
Parents still play a key role in this little dance, as does the business community. Students expect their parents to push and guide them. They may not always listen, but students know they need their parents with them as they head down those pathways. With businesses, students just want to learn about the opportunities. What is needed to become a physician assistant or a manager at the local manufacturing plant or a graphic designer. Today’s students do have career aspirations, but most of them have never met someone who holds that job nor do they know what is needed to achieve such a position. Now is the time for businesses to educate their future workforce.
I’ve done similar focus groups across the nation over the last decade, and the findings have been remarkably similar. Students have a far better sense for their futures than we give them credit for. They know it will be hard. They know they’ll need help. But they know there are multiple pathways available to them. They just need their teachers and parents and priests and community leaders to see it to.
These kids aren’t dropping out of high school because it is too hard or because they are finally old enough that they can stop going to school and stay at home and watch TV all day. They leave because they don’t see the relevance. They don’t see how the classes they are taking crosswalk to their career or life goals. They don’t believe postsecondary education may be possible for them. They don’t believe they have the ability to gain access to those multiple pathways.
Raising the drop-out age won’t change that. If we want more students to stay in high school, earn their diplomas, and pursue postsecondary education, we need to inspire and motivate them. We need to give them hope. We need to demonstrate that high school is the first step toward a happy and successful life. It needs to be relevant. It needs to be interesting and engaging. And it needs to lift up all students, not talk down to them with mandates and lowered expectations.
The Call Heard Round the District
By now, things are starting to settle on Fairfax County, VA’s great snow day voicemail saga. It’s the same old story. Disgruntled high school student calls school district COO at home. Leaves message. COO’s wife returns the call with some choice insults for student. Said student posts voicemail on the web for all to hear and turn into their favorite ringtone. Media adds fuel to the fire by giving it prime real estate on the evening news and the front of the metro section.
Over at Municipalist (www.municipalist.com), they have done a good job of chronicling the saga, as well as examining it from a communications/new media perspective. This coverage includes thoughts from yours truly, who finds the whole story both interesting and a little frustrating.
Eduflack’s full post follows, but it is worth the visit to Municipalist to see some interesting commentary. Of course, I was wrong of one thing. The student violated school policy (using a cell phone during school hours), and is visiting detention for the violation. So I have been shown the school policy he violated. Otherwise, it is still on point, a week after the offense went public.
“Like it or not, we are entering a new frontier in public education. Parents are now checking assignments and progress on the Web. Teachers give students their email and IM addresses that are accessible at all hours. Today’s students process information 24-7, and their engagement knows few boundaries.
One of the greatest challenges our schools face is getting the learning process to match how students communicate and how they interact. If we don’t get our information from one source, then we simple move on to the next. And that’s exactly what Dave Kori did. He wanted his voice heard. He called the office, but no response. So he called a listed phone number and gave voice to his concern. If any of us had access to the home number for Bill Gates, the CEO of US Airways, or the owner of our favorite sports team, we’d probably do the same thing.
As is typical in our 24-7 communication world, the problem was not with the action, but it was with the reaction. Had Candy Tistadt simply deleted the message or ranted about it to her friends, no big deal. But she couldn’t let a call from a “snotty-nosed little brat” go. And her reaction is what got the whole tsunami going. She used the wrong message with the wrong audience, and it is only exacerbated by the fact that she wasn’t even the recipient of Kori’s call in the first place! She injected herself into a public debate, when she wasn’t even invited to take the podium.
Should the school district punish Kori? Of course not. Show me one law or school rule he violated. He called a public official at a phone number that is both public and easily accessed by anyone who may want it. And while he may have been overly casual in his language or even addressed the topic inappropriately, immaturity is hardly a crime.
It’s laughable, though, to think that Kori’s action are, as Fairfax Schools spokesman Paul Regnier suggested, harassment. Dean Tistadt is a public figure, like it or not. He got a phone call from a concerned citizen, who identified himself and left his phone number. That seems to be the sort of responsibility we want high school students to demonstrate, not what they should be reprimanded for.
At the end of the day, the school district would have been wise to have stayed out of the issue altogether. By commenting on the situation and throwing around terms like harassment, the district only raises the temperature of the whole situation. We need to choose our fights, and this is one that the schools just can’t win. This boils down to an issue between a teenager and the wife of a public official. Do we really want Superintendent Jack Dale or his spokesperson to get in the middle of this? Of course not. Their attention should be on far more important issues facing the district and the community.
We preach that today’s students need to be responsible and innovative. They need to solve problems and be resourceful. They need to stand for what they believe, and they need to advocate for those issues. Imagine if Kori put his organizational and advocacy skills to work for an issue that mattered. A snow day is hardly standing up for civil rights or equal education, but it is a start.”
Grading the Schools
Back in November, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg released a report card grading all of the city’s public schools. It was a bold move at the time, though the impact of grading the schools took a few months to come to a boil. Now we are seeing it, as New York parents are now taking exception with the grades their neighborhood schools received.
That should come as no surprise. As Eduflack has written previously, we all want to believe our own schools are doing just fine, even if the system around it may be falling apart. We believe in our teachers and our administrators, taking solace that our child is receiving a top-notch education, regardless of the conditions around us.
When Bloomberg announced the grades, he did so in an attempt to do something about underperforming schools. And we can’t do anything about such schools if we don’t first identify them. So he issued them grades, grades based on student achievement. After all, shouldn’t we measure our schools based on how well they do their primary job — educating our kids?
To be expected, the critics are now hitting back against Bloomberg and his report cards. It took a little time, but we are now hearing the hollow refrains of high-stakes testing, teaching to the test, and abandoning “non-essential” courses like art, music, and the like. Such grading must be unfair because it doesn’t align with our popular thinking.
Let there be no doubt, we should be grading our schools. Every parent has the right to know if their school is achieving and if their school compares with the school across town, across the state, or across the country. Every student has the right to an effective education, and education as good as any other student is getting. Every superintendent has the right to know how his schools compare to each other, and which are getting it done and which need additional help, support, and direction. And every taxpayer has the right to know that our tax dollars are going to effective education and demonstrable student achievement.
So how do we measure that? What’s the most effective rubric to get the job done? And more importantly, if Bloomberg’s way is wrong, what is right?
It all comes down to whether we grade the process or the outcomes. Measures like parental involvement, per-pupil expenditure, class size, teacher experience, tutoring programs, transfers, grade promotion, and such are all good process measures. But we can check the box on all of those and more, and still be left with a failing school. it is frustrating, yes, but true. We can do it all “right,” and still not demonstrate results. What good is that?
Which gets us back to the Bloomberg formula of outcome-based grading. It sends a strong message to virtually every stakeholder audience in a school district to say we measure our schools based on student achievement. Our schools (and our teachers) succeed when our kids do. How we get there is important, sure, but our primary objective is where we went. Did our kids learn what is necessary to succeed in school and in life? If not, our schools aren’t doing as good a job as they should. There is room for improvement.
We can quibble about what tests should be used to grade a school, whether there are multiple quantitative measures and such. We can dream of a national standard by which every school in the country is graded. We can even look to models like Quality Counts or Newsweek and US News & World Report’s top high schools rubrics. But we all should agree that our schools should be evaluated, graded, compared, and appropriately improved.
If you have a better idea for determining whether our schools are effective or not, I’m all ears. I’m sure there are folks far smarter than I who are exploring such issues at think tanks, NFPs, and universities across the country. But until we have a better way, shouldn’t we use the best way we have now? Let’s grade our schools, and let them figure out how to earn the extra credit and do the make-up work necessary so they all achieve.
Blame the Parents?
Who, exactly, is at fault for poorly performing schools? Based on what we read and hear and see in the media, there seems to be more than enough blame to go around. The feds are at fault for high-stakes testing. The state is at fault for inadequate funding. School districts are at fault for a host of reasons. And teachers are to blame for not teaching the right things or understanding the kids or lacking the qualification to lead the classroom.
It isn’t every day that we put the blame on another primary stakeholder in the learning process — the parents. For decades, we have seen moms and dads wash their hands of what happens behind the schoolhouse doors. They get their kids to school. It is up to everyone else to do the teaching and ensure the kids are learning, retaining, and applying.
That’s what makes today’s Washington Post poll so interesting. There are few that will come to the defense of DC Public Schools in general. Seven in 10 surveyed believe DC public schools are inadequate. Surprisingly, 76 percent say that parents are to blame. See the full story at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/20/AR2008012002386.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008012100219
Eduflack isn’t one who celebrates the blame game. But DC residents must be applauded for speaking truth. DCPS spends more dollars per student than most school districts in this country. They’ve implemented reform after reform, with few making a lasting impact. Teachers are run through a grinder, not knowing if they will even be paid month to month.
Over the weekend, DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee announced a new Saturday tutoring program to help struggling students catch up and succeed in the classroom. Of course, such programs are not mandatory. Saturday programs are optional, offering the potential for another great idea to be lost in the execution.
If we are truly going to improve schools like those in DCPS, we need and require increased parental participation. This means more than getting parents into the schools to complain to teachers and administrators about why their kids can’t do their homework or pass the test. True parental involvement has mothers, fathers, grandparents, and such involved in the learning process. They know what’s happening in the classroom. They ensure their kids are doing their homework. They identify learning experiences in the home or in the community. They take responsibility for their kids, and hold them accountable For maximizing their school hours.
Parents are our first teachers and our most consistent ones. Small kids will pattern their words and actions after what their parents do. We read because our parents do. We do our homework because our parents prioritize it. We bring home good grades because our parents encourage it. And if they don’t, we don’t care.
Many of the problems our schools face — rising drop-out rates, limited reading and math skills, truancy, etc. — can all be attributed, in part, to parent apathy. Eduflack has done a number of focus groups with eighth and ninth graders recently on dropping out. Student after student said they wouldn’t drop out because their parents won’t let them. THat’s parental involvement. It may come in the form of carrot or stick, but it makes a difference.
Parents are key to improving our schools, improving our community, and boosting student achievement. Thankfully, citizens in our nation’s capital now recognize that. Identification is the first step. The challenge now, is for DCPS to take this data and put it into action. If we ID parent apathy as a root of DCPS problems, what do we do to boost parental involvement? Once Chancellor Rhee answers that question, she may have a winning strategy for improving the schools, engaging the public and building support and interest for what is happening in each and every schoolhouse in the District.
Opting Out, TIMSS Style
We need to better prepare our students to compete on the world economy. Such is the driving mantra behind current pushes to improve our high schools and strengthen the links between secondary and postsecondary education. Our students need the skills to succeed, they need the math, science, and problem-solving skills to hold their own against other students around the world. They need the skills to gain good jobs in the United States. And they need strong math and science skills to ensure such jobs remain here in the United States. Math and science skills are necessary to keeping our economy strong and our future generations employed. All strong rhetoric, all believed by Main Street USA, and all pretty damned true.
That’s why Eduflack was a little disappointed to read a piece by Sarah D. Sparks in Education Daily a little more than a week ago, which reported that the United States will not participate in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, for physics and calculus.
Eduflack waited to comment on this development to see how those who truly understand the policy implications reacted. And the response was as surprising as the announcement — deafening silence.
Why is the U.S. Department opting out of TIMSS? Two simple reasons. The first is cost. The second is lack of students. What is the United States lacking? Apparently, we don’t have a few million dollars to conduct the study and we don’t have the 16,000 students needed to comprise an effective sample size.
Yes, such reasoning seems quite questionable, particularly with everything we know about NCLB funding, the demand for greater assessments, and the rapid increase in science and math instruction thanks to programs like STEM, early colleges, and similar high school reforms.
At a time when the international team is looking to go head-to-head with the United States, we choose to sit on the bench. At a time when we tell our kids that they need to gain math and science skills to succeed in both college and career, we send then to the showers before they even have a chance to pitch the first inning. And at a time when we should be doing all we can to post impressive stats and demonstrate we are the world leaders, instead we choose to hide behind the stats on the back of our bubblegum cards, those numbers that defined us in years past.
But what, exactly, does this announcement say about us? Instead of dwelling on what we cannot do or where we see the failings, Eduflack offers up some talking points for Secretary Spellings on this important topic.
* Ensuring that our high school students are truly prepared to compete in the global economy must become a fiscal priority for us. We are, rightfully so, pouring billions and billions into elementary- and middle-school improvements and testing (including TIMSS for fourth and eighth graders), but the current federal commitment to high schools is but a fraction. We need to educate and train our students, particularly those in high school, in math and science, and we need to effectively assess those skills.
* We need to applaud those school districts that are taking the responsibility to prepare all students for the future. Early colleges and dual-enrollment offerings. AP and IB programs. STEM education. All of these are important steps our schools, districts, and states are taking to ready our kids for the challenges and opportunities of the future.
* The United States stands as the true home for innovation. And we’re willing to make the investment to keep it that way. Our future is too important not to equip our students with the math, science, and problem-solving skills needed to achieve, both in school and in life.
Yes, TIMSS is merely one measure of our effectiveness. It is a tool, like other assessments, to ensure we are on the right track. And it is one of the few we have to effectively measure our abilities versus our trading partners and our economic competitors around the globe. Not participating in the study reads like we are worried about our ability to compete and our ability to excel. If we aren’t ready for the big leagues, then we need to get back into training and prepare ourselves for true competition. You can’t win the big game of life if you’re unwilling to step onto the field.
College Costs How Much?
It’s that time of year again. Yesterday, the College Board released its annual Cost of College report. And like the years before it, the numbers aren’t pretty. Tuition and fees at public four-year colleges are up 6.6 percent from last year. At private colleges, there is a 5.5 percent increase.
At face value, that doesn’t seem too bad. But let’s take a look at increases over the past decade. For those going to private schools, tuition and fees have increased 72 percent over the last 10 years. And in our public institutions, those schools designed to provide ALL students with a postsecondary education, costs have increased nearly 100 percent since 1997. USA Today has the story — http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-10-22-college-price_N.htm?csp=34.
Only the price of a gallon of gasoline has experienced greater inflation that a college degree. Even healthcare costs haven’t increased, over the same time period, like college tuition prices.
What message does this send, particularly at a time when we preach that very student needs a postsecondary education? Is that college diploma 100 percent more valuable? Are starting salaries out of college 72 percent higher today than they were in 1997? Are we learning more in college today? Do we have greater access to full professors? Are classes smaller? Are offerings more specialized and relevant?
Of course, the answer to all of these is no. Prices are rising because they can rise. College endowments are at an all-time high; sticker price doesn’t haven’t to exceed inflation. More student loan money is available today than ever before. But we don’t need every student to max out to go to college. We do it because it is expected. We know college tuition will exceed inflation every year, and we have come to accept it.
If we are really going to sell today’s high school students on the notion that a postsecondary education is necessary for career and life success (and the data shows that it is), we need to also show that quality postsecondary education can be found at an affordable price. Not everyone needs a $160K college diploma to secure a good job. Not everyone needs to borrow six figures in student loans to get a meaningful college degree.
Eduflack looks at his 18-month-old son, and often wonders what college is in his future. Eduwife is a proud grad of Stanford University (BA and MA) and UPenn (Ed.D.). At this rate, Eduflack is looking at starting tuition and fees for Stanford’s freshmen of 2024 coming in at nearly $125,000 a year. It’s never too early to teach Eduson football or golf.
At face value, that doesn’t seem too bad. But let’s take a look at increases over the past decade. For those going to private schools, tuition and fees have increased 72 percent over the last 10 years. And in our public institutions, those schools designed to provide ALL students with a postsecondary education, costs have increased nearly 100 percent since 1997. USA Today has the story — http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-10-22-college-price_N.htm?csp=34.
Only the price of a gallon of gasoline has experienced greater inflation that a college degree. Even healthcare costs haven’t increased, over the same time period, like college tuition prices.
What message does this send, particularly at a time when we preach that very student needs a postsecondary education? Is that college diploma 100 percent more valuable? Are starting salaries out of college 72 percent higher today than they were in 1997? Are we learning more in college today? Do we have greater access to full professors? Are classes smaller? Are offerings more specialized and relevant?
Of course, the answer to all of these is no. Prices are rising because they can rise. College endowments are at an all-time high; sticker price doesn’t haven’t to exceed inflation. More student loan money is available today than ever before. But we don’t need every student to max out to go to college. We do it because it is expected. We know college tuition will exceed inflation every year, and we have come to accept it.
If we are really going to sell today’s high school students on the notion that a postsecondary education is necessary for career and life success (and the data shows that it is), we need to also show that quality postsecondary education can be found at an affordable price. Not everyone needs a $160K college diploma to secure a good job. Not everyone needs to borrow six figures in student loans to get a meaningful college degree.
Eduflack looks at his 18-month-old son, and often wonders what college is in his future. Eduwife is a proud grad of Stanford University (BA and MA) and UPenn (Ed.D.). At this rate, Eduflack is looking at starting tuition and fees for Stanford’s freshmen of 2024 coming in at nearly $125,000 a year. It’s never too early to teach Eduson football or golf.
How Safe Is My School?
For decades now, we’ve talked about school security. Metal detectors have become the norm in many urban schools, and we talk about arming teachers in rural and suburban schools to confront some of the school violence we’ve seen over the last decade. All the talk sends a core message — can our children learn if they aren’t safe?
Two decades ago, the movie Lean on Me told the real-life story of Joe Clark and his crusade to save a New Jersey high school about to implode. For those who don’t remember the Morgan Freeman movie, Clark almost lost his job after chaining the school doors to keep the drug dealers out, and was only saved when his test scores showed he had improved student performance where all hope was lost.
That was the 1980s. Clearly, we’ve learned a thing or two since then. Right?
Imagine Eduflack’s surprise, then, when it was reported in most Washington, DC media outlets this morning that DCPS was finally eliminating the chains on some of its high school doors, replacing them with honest-to-goodness state-of-the-art security doors?
Did we learn nothing from Lean on Me? Are we honestly saying that for all of the talk the past decade about improving DC’s schools and the increased concern for student safety, that no one thought that padlocks and rusted chains weren’t a priority issue that demanded attention?
Sure, there is scant evidence that a safe school directly results in increased student achievement. But it is common sense that an unsafe school doesn’t provide the learning environment kids need to succeed.
Two decades ago, the movie Lean on Me told the real-life story of Joe Clark and his crusade to save a New Jersey high school about to implode. For those who don’t remember the Morgan Freeman movie, Clark almost lost his job after chaining the school doors to keep the drug dealers out, and was only saved when his test scores showed he had improved student performance where all hope was lost.
That was the 1980s. Clearly, we’ve learned a thing or two since then. Right?
Imagine Eduflack’s surprise, then, when it was reported in most Washington, DC media outlets this morning that DCPS was finally eliminating the chains on some of its high school doors, replacing them with honest-to-goodness state-of-the-art security doors?
Did we learn nothing from Lean on Me? Are we honestly saying that for all of the talk the past decade about improving DC’s schools and the increased concern for student safety, that no one thought that padlocks and rusted chains weren’t a priority issue that demanded attention?
Sure, there is scant evidence that a safe school directly results in increased student achievement. But it is common sense that an unsafe school doesn’t provide the learning environment kids need to succeed.
An Intriguing View from the Trenches
Typically, Eduflack comments on what is appearing in the media. What does it say about education reform activities? How successful is it as a communication vehicle? How does it contribute to the overall push to improve the quality of education for all students.
We hear a lot about student data. This week brought us the debate on what a dip in SAT scores really means, and the Miller-McKeon bill offered the idea of multiple assessments to determine student achievement. You know where I stand — there should be one national standard that all students are measured against. It is the only way we can ensure that every student, regardless of hometown or socio-economic standing, has the skills and opportunities to achieve in the 21st century workplace.
So when the following piece came across Eduflack’s inbox, it piqued my interest. It was written by Hayes Mizell, the former director of the Program for Student Achievement at the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation and former school desegregation advocate in South Carolina during the 1960s and 1970s. While I may not agree with all of his points, it is a commentary definitely worth a read.
Why? It is written from experience in the trenches. It gives a different voice to an issue that is widely debated. And it provides a call to action that isn’t seen too often in our middle-of-the-road commentaries.
So I offer the following from Mizell:
“Resting in their heavenly repose, South Carolina’s civil rights pioneers of the 1930s and 1940s must be scratching their heads. A prominent African-American state senator, also a Democrat and minister, says many of his generational peers are longing for the days of racially segregated schools. Another minister says most African-American children ‘fared better when we were segregated.’
These leaders are understandably frustrated. Too many children are not reaping the academic gains that African-Americans hoped would follow public school desegregation. On last year’s state achievement test, more than 40,000 African-American students in grades three through eight scored ‘Below Basic’ in English/Language Arts. An average of 60 percent of all African-American students in third through eighth grade performed at the Below Basic level in science.
There is some good news. Thousands of African-American students are performing well, scoring at the highest levels, “Proficient” or “Advanced,” on the state test. However, thousands more have the unrealized potential to do so.
Proposals to solve students’ academic problems abound, but many are simplistic. South Carolina has long favored such approaches in public policy. Human bondage would fuel economic development. Secession would free South Carolina of the federal yoke. Racial oppression and segregation would preserve ‘our way of life.’ Low taxes would attract industry. Providing a ‘minimally adequate education’ will secure the state’s future.
Now comes school choice. Some African-American leaders are tempted by the prospect of state financial support, one way or another, for constituents to choose private schools for their children. Perhaps they genuinely believe this will improve the education of the more than 275,000 African-American students in South Carolina’s public schools. It may be just as likely they are focusing on the relatively small number who attend or may attend private schools operated by some African-American churches.
There is no doubt some public school educators lack the cultural orientation, sensitivity, and pedagogical skills to educate some African-American students effectively. This is not universally true, however. Several months ago, the South Carolina Education Oversight Committee issued a report examining 26 ‘gap-closing schools.’ During four consecutive years, the schools significantly reduced the achievement differential between ‘historically underperforming students’ and the schools’ other students. Three of the schools had poverty rates greater than 70 percent.
What were the reasons for the schools’ success? The report concludes: ‘Not only do gap-closing schools maintain an instructional environment that supports high achievement, but these schools also create a positive school climate that fosters the attainment of high student performance.’ These conditions do not exist in every public school because local education leaders choose not to make the effort and take the risks necessary to develop and sustain them.
All South Carolinians, not just African-Americans, should be enraged that too many children are failing to meet the state’s academic standards. Where this is persistently the case, citizens should organize to demand and support improvements in their local public schools.
At the same time, African-Americans are entitled to the same portion of nostalgia as any other segment of the population. After three centuries, they also have the right to seek or create what they consider to be the most effective education venues for their children. Their unique history, however, provides them a useful guide to discern what is false and what is true. Separation, withdrawal, and isolation are anathema to authentic education. They did not serve African-American children well when required by law. They will not serve them well if sought by choice.”
Definitely gives folks something to think about as the Ed in 08ers push for greater education-speak in South Carolina and as we continue to look at (or look away from) the achievement gap.
Eduflack By Patrick R. Riccards 