technology

Injecting Tech Into Assessment

Eduflack assessment, national standards, technology

As we all well know, last year the U.S. Department of Education awarded $350 million to develop new assessments to go with our Common Core State Standards.  Those assessment consortia — the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) — have been working to start developing the tests that measure the achievement of the student performance against the new common standards.

Since the beginning of the consortia effort, questions have been raised.  Recently, many have asked about the progress of the consortia, wondering if they will be able to deliver test to states for implementation in 2014.  But queries about technology have existed before the feds even cut the checks, with initial hypotheses (since proven incorrect) saying that PARCC wasn’t even interested in the adoption of new technologies in its assessment model.
To help focus on the issues of technology and CCSS assessment, the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) recently released Technology Requirements for Large-Scale Computer-Based and Online Assessment: Current Status and Issues, a discussion draft report currently available on www.assess4ed.net, a new online community supported by the U.S. Department of Education to explore RttT assessment issues.  
Among the issues posed by SETDA in the discussion draft:
* Striking the right balance in specifying technology requirements, while recognizing the heterogeneity of the technology in use in schools today and tomorrow;
* The specifications for test administration – including especially the length of the testing window – may have the single greatest impact on school technology readiness for computer-based and online assessment;
* Coordinating technology requirements, management, and related costs for assessment with other educational technology investments;
* Employing IT industry best practices to extract cost-savings via the shift to computer-based and online assessment;
* Creating processes and plans to both take advantage of future technology innovations and to take out of service obsolete technology;
* Architecting a system that can accommodate the trend away from seat time requirements and toward increasing online and blended (part-online, part face-to-face settings) enrollments;
* Striking and maintaining the right balance between comparability and validity in implementing next generation assessment systems;
* Providing meaningful opportunities for students and teachers to become comfortable with the assessment technology prior to implementation; and
* Coordinating work with state and district technology leadership.
Without question, Eduflack applauds SETDA for asking the right questions and pointing to the right issues when it comes to technology and the next generation of student assessments.  And the report is particularly useful in providing a series of charts and graphs on both CCSS and the states themselves.
As this Technology Requirements was issued as a draft for review and comment, I just can’t miss the opportunity to provide two comments (additions really) for the authors to consider:
* In addition to providing meaningful opportunities for students and teachers to become comfortable with the assessment technology, there is a real opportunity to position the ed tech standards (NETS) established by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) as a key component for linking technology, assessment, instruction, and learning. 
* While online assessments are important, they really only get us half of the way to our destination.  If we are serious about deploying meaningful tests that will serve our states and districts for decades to come, we must look at exams that are both online and adaptive.  Adaptive testing technologies are advancing rapidly.  Some states, particularly those in SBAC are already using online adaptive technologies to build a better testing mousetrap.  We need to learn from those states, constructing for the future of testing, not for its past.
Now is the time to speak up folks.  SETDA has put a valuable and intriguing marker down on the the discussion of technology and assessment.  Contribute to the discussion, both through the draft report and through www.assess4ed.net.  These are important discussions.  Speak now or forever hold your peace.

College Print Isn’t Dead Yet

Eduflack higher ed, polls, Students, technology

I’m not so far removed from my time at the alma mater that I can’t remember the highs and lows of college textbooks.  The excitement of the book list for new classes.  The dilemma of whether to buy new or used.  The challenge of lugging a stack of books back to the dorm.  And then the roulette-like feeling of finding out how much those textbooks were worth a mere three months after buying them (and knowing that the spines of many of them may not have been cracked during that time).

But I am also a 21st century consumer of information.  And I’m enough of a geek that the highlight of my week — so far — has been discovering that the 2011 AP Stylebook is available as an iPhone/iPad app (and is now proudly downloaded on my electronic devices, with my old, ratty 2001 edition of the AP writing guide now officially retired).
So Eduflack was quite surprised to see the info-graphic on the front page of today’s USA Today.  The question — What kind of textbooks do college students prefer?  The answer, determined by Harris Interactive speaking with more than 1,200 students on Pearson Foundation’s behalf?  Print textbooks are preferred by 55 percent of college students surveyed, with 35 percent choosing digital (tablet, e-reader, or computer).  We’ll forget about the 10 percent who have no preference, a now requisite number for most surveys, it seems.
In an age where we live on our smart phones, print textbooks are still by a sizable margin.  In an era of Kindles, Nooks, iPads, and netbooks, print remains king (at least in the eyes of today’s college students).  And a time when dollars are tight and college costs are rising, those expensive print textbooks still rule.
Maybe I’m alone in this, but I was incredibly surprised by the data.  I can understand such numbers coming from professors, many of whom want to see students purchase their teachers’ textbooks.  And I can see it from the colleges and universities themselves, who depend on college bookstores as revenue centers.  But just a third of today’s college students prefer digital textbooks?  Really?
So I pose a few questions for the two-thirds of college students choosing to diss the e-text?  Do you still subscribe to print newspapers?  How many slick magazines are delivered to your mailbox each month (assuming you still have a box receiving snail mail)?  When was the last time you bought an actual, paper book for leisure reading?  Do you still keep a printed phone book in your dorm or apartment (instead of using the web)?  Just curious, is all.
This survey response really has Eduflack scratching his head.  Is the problem that current electronic book experiences don’t stack up?  Are professors down on the e-book, and students are feeding off that?  Has classroom instruction not caught up to the times, as we still deliver 20th century instruction that doesn’t warrant 21st century tools?  Or do we just like that payoff for selling back those used textbooks at the end of the term for a fraction of the purchase price.
Someone, anyone, please help me out here.  What are the motivations for the college student, in the year 2011, having such a strong preference for a print textbook?  
  

Tech-Savvy Kids?

Eduflack technology

In 2011, what exactly does it mean to be tech savvy?  Over at USA Today, the front page boasts an info-graphic of a recent survey conducted by Research Now for AVG.  They surveyed 2,200 mothers in 10 nations, asking about the tech skills of children ages 2-5.

The data came back on five categories: 1) operate a computer mouse; 2) turn a computer on/off; 3) play a basic computer game; 4) make a mobile phone call; and 5) open a Web browser.  Research Now found that 69 percent of kids ages 2-5 are reported as being able to operate a computer mouse.  Fifty eight percent are playing a basic computer game, while just 25 percent can open a web browser.
All lovely cocktail party statistics (as if parents of kids in that age bracket have time to go to cocktail parties), but it begs an important question.  Are those the right measures for being a U.S.-based, tech-savvy kid in 2011?
While I am not a mother, I am the parent of two kids that fit that age bracket.  The edu-son will be five this April.  The edu-daughter is almost three and a half years old.  Both are fairly tech savvy.  So how do they stack up?
They are both pros at playing computer games, and both can make a mobile phone call (the edu-daughter has also made an emergency call in French, for what it is worth).  Neither has opened a Web browser because there has never been a need, but I’m guessing they could if it meant accessing the game or song they wanted.  Neither has turned a computer on and off because we only use laptops in our house, so they know how to wake them up.  And neither operates a mouse … again because we are using laptops with touch pads.
The issue of using a computer mouse seems so 1998.  My edu-kids are quite adept at using both the iPhone and the iPad.  They know how to flip between apps.  They know how to adjust the volume on whatever technology they are using.  They know how to scroll the screen.  And our edu-son even knows how to download his own apps (assuming we can’t stop him in time).  They’ve mastered the tablet and the touch screen.  They know how to flip through an electronic photo album, believing that is that is the only way to look at pictures.  They know how to use technology circa 2011.  So where is the credit in that?
Believe it or not, the edu-wife and I have had conversations about this very issue, following a discussion on age-appropriate ed technology she was having that day (yes, you can imagine how exciting it is in Eduflack’s house).  The issue of the computer mouse was issue 1.  Are we equipping our kids with age-appropriate technology when they don’t know how to use a mouse?  Should we set up a desktop computer so they know a mouse and a full-size keyboard and one of those CD-ROM drives that can double as a drink coaster?  Are we missing the mark in preparing them for the tech they’ll need when they enter school?
I’m willing to be proven wrong, but I answered a resounding NO.  We are using age-appropriate technology, based on the games and apps we let our kids have access to.  We are helping them by providing access to the latest technologies, instead of teaching them on the machines I first learned on.  We are using tech as it will be used, not as it has been used.  And yes, we are using technology to supplement what they are learning in preschool and at home, not supplant it.
So I want to see the tech-savvy kids survey that looks at the wee one’s ability to use a touch screen.  Or to toggle between apps.  Or to enter a password to get past the welcome screen.  Flipping a computer on is so War Games.
And for those of you worrying my kids are simply glued to the glow of a microchip powered screen, don’t.  Our trampoline still gets more use than the iPad, and next month I start my great “teaching” adventure as coach of my son’s T-ball team.  But know I’ll be tracking stats on my iPad …    

College-Ready E-Learning in the Sunshine

Eduflack 21CS, Online Education, technology

When it comes to education improvement, do little things happen in small packages?  Thanks to the past two years, we are used to looking for megadeals.  Race to the Top offered up four billion dollars; i3 another $650 million.  The Gates Foundation often drops tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars on the latest and greatest.  Even the recent News Corp. deal for Wireless Generation caught many by surprised, based solely on the size of the deal.

So why is Eduflack so taken by a couple of million investment that crossed the electronic desk?  Today, the Florida Virtual School announced a $2 million award from the Gates Foundation.  The project?  Florida Virtual School will use the funds to develop four college readiness courses in English and math.
In its announcement, Florida Virtual states, “the courses will emphasize 21st century skills such as authentic skill development, critical thinking, contemporary research opportunities and real world experiences.”     
Most who follow digital education know that Florida Virtual School is the king of e-learning.  So it should come as no surprise that it is trying to get out in front, developing the next generation of college-ready K-12 curriculum.  So why is a $2 million announcement so interesting?
1) It appears Florida Virtual is trying to get out in front of the Common Core Standards effort.  If Gates is funding this, it is a relatively safe bet that the courses developed will align with the new CC standards (particularly since Florida has to adopt them as part of its RttT win).  So after all the hand-wringing on how far behind we are in moving the CCSSI into practice, Florida Virtual is now planning to beta test its ELA courses by January 2012, with math coming the following year.
2) Surprise, surprise, but 21st century skills may not be dead after all.  With STEM coming forward a few years ago and the Obama Administration now pushing college and career readiness, most assumed that 21st century skills had gone the way of the dodo.  But by emphasizing curriculum based on such skills (with Gates money no less) it seems the softer side of instructional improvement — 21st century skills — may be back for a second policy go.
3) We are reminded that e-learning is not just about delivery.  Florida Virtual is reminding us that content remains king.  The leader in digital education continues to make clear that buying curriculum off the shelf is not how you build a world-class e-learning platform.  Florida Virtual is not just teaching it, they are building it.  Faculty will have ownership in it.  It will be relevant to the program and to its goals.
It is rare for Eduflack to truly embrace something, praising virtues instead of picking on failings.  But this is one instance where I want to accentuate the positive.  Julie Young, the President and CEO of Florida Virtual School may just be right here.  If done correctly and with fidelity, this effort could be “a win-win, especially for students.”
 

Your U.S. Education Dashboard

Eduflack accountability, technology

Sometimes (and rarely) I see the need to use Eduflack to pass along some interesting information.  No opinion.  No soapbox (OK, almost no soapbox).  No critique.  No snark.  This is one of those times.

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Education officially unveiled its United States Education Dashboard.  While such a tool is never going to grab the headlines, it is an important announcement and an even more important resource.
According to ED, the Dashboard seeks to present “indicators in … areas that are critical to improving educational results and achieving the President’s 2020 college attainment goal.”  These areas include: Early Learning through High School, Postsecondary Education and Training, Teachers and Leaders, and An Excellent Education for All.
For Early Learning through High School, for instance, the Dashboard offers the latest data on metrics such as preschool enrollment, fourth and eighth grade NAEP scores, four-year high school graduation rate numbers, and public high school grads who took at least one AP test.
Sure, all of this data can be found by searching through numerous websites or trying to divine how best to read the NAGB site.  But for those looking for outcomes and a collection of data on the status of our public schools, the U.S. Education Dashboard can serve as a strong one-stop shop for educators, policymakers, and pundits alike.  
Here’s hoping ED keeps the site fresh, updated, focused, and informative.
  

State of the Education Union?

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, early childhood education, ESEA, HQT, teachers, technology

As is typical for this time of year, most of Washington is eagerly awaiting tomorrow evening’s State of the Union address, delivered by President Barack Obama.  (Of course, Eduflack will be in a school board meeting, discussing local school budgets, but I’ll be listening to the SOTU in spirit).  And just about every year, the education community eagerly awaits to see how big a role education policy will play in the SOTU.

Last year, we expected big things, but just about all of the ed discussion was focused on higher ed and student loans, not on P-12 issues.  In the lead-up to Tuesday, the White House has made clear that this year’s speech will focus on the five pillars to turn around our nation’s economy (not to be confused with EdSec Arne Duncan’s four pillars for turning around K-12 public education).  And go figure, education is expected to be one of those five pillars.
But in the Washington Post, in a graphic that accompanies today’s story on the SOTU, expects that the education focus will be on protecting funding for existing programs.  So if WaPo is right (and it hasn’t necessarily been lately), part of the great road to economic improvement is maintaining the status quo in K-12 education.
Yes, I realize that means continuing funding for new programs such as Race to the Top, with Duncan just last week calling for a third RttT round focused on school districts.  I’ll say it here and I’ll say it loudly.  If tomorrow’s education focus is simply about staying the course, the education sector will have missed a major opportunity.
Across the nation, we are asking states, districts, schools, and teachers to do more and more with less and less.  As those budgets have shrunk, some have even said it is a golden opportunity for schools and school improvement, as we can no longer the maintain that which we’ve had, and instead need to focus on that with the greatest impact or the highest return on investment.  We’re calling for virtually all schools to “reform” or “improve,” making clear that the way we used to do things isn’t going to cut it in the future.
So if President Obama comes out tomorrow and says we need to keep on keeping on, it will be a major step backward.  If we merely try to save the U.S. Department of Education from budget cuts, while protecting recent gains for Title I, RttT, teacher quality efforts, and student loans, we will have squandered a real chance at real improvement.  And if the goal is a true economic renaissance for the United States, status quo at a time when our international standing is slipping, our achievement gap is offensive, and our resources and lacking just isn’t going to cut it.
I recognize that tomorrow evening’s speech is likely already loaded into the teleprompter, but there are a few key items I’d like to see make the cut:
* Early childhood education — We need to honor the promises made with regard to ECE and begin to fund what the research tells us is needed.  Achievement gaps start before kids ever hit kindergarten.  We address that by confronting the problem from the start.  And that means real, academic-focused ECE efforts.  Babysitters and social adaptation programs need not apply.
* Teacher quality — First, we need to agree on the qualitative and quantitative measures of what makes an effective teacher.  Then we need to see what goes into the pre-service and in-service education of a teacher to get there.  Only then can we effective use teacher incentive programs to improve the schools.  We need real research that gets at the heart of the teacher quality issue.
* STEM — And I use this as a collective discussion.  We need to increase on investment in effective math and science education.  We need to put real resources behind the goals of America Competes.  It is the only way we start to move the needle when it comes to international competitiveness.
* Ed tech — We need to convert our 19th century classrooms into 21st century learning environments.  That means focusing on both how we teach and what we teach with.  Ed tech needs to be both at the heart of our ESEA discussions and of our school funding realities.
* Achievement gap — Let’s stop dancing around the issue.  If we are talking about righting our economy, we need to address the achievement gap.  Until black, Hispanic, and low-income students start gaining ground against white, wealthy students, our schools will always struggle.  With the gaps as astounding as they currently are now, it isn’t enough to applaud all groups for incremental gains.
* College prep — We need more opportunities to prepare students for postsecondary education.  More dual enrollment.  More opps to study at local community colleges.  More career-focused, relevant courses.  More exposure to the academic world beyond the high school.  A high school diploma isn’t going to cut it as we head deeper into the 21st century.  
* Parental engagement — We need a concerted, supported effort to better engage parents and families in the learning process.  The responsibility for student success does not rest solely with the classroom teacher.  Parents need to know what their role is, how to play it, and how to ask the questions to ensure their kids are getting the education they both need and deserve.  
* R&D — As we keep asking folks to do more with less, we need to ensure that what we are doing is proven effective and has a strong evidence base behind it.  For too long, educators have done what they thought worked or what they believed worked or what they hoped worked.  It is now time to invest in what we can prove works.  That starts with a robust R&D effort focused on the classroom.  And the “&D” is very important, particularly as we look translating good research into real practice.  
What I want to see if fairly simple.  I want the circle of educational life.  What are the conditions we need to start effective learning (teacher quality, parental engagement, ECE)?  What should all children know and be able to do (STEM, ed tech, college prep)?  What obstacles must be overcome (achievement gap, ed tech)?  And what is our intended destination (increased grad rates, increased college-going rates, and the economic success that we’ll hear about for more than an hour tomorrow)?
And I would NOT talk about ESEA.  How we get to these above points isn’t nearly as important as actually doing it.  ESEA is merely a process.  But it isn’t a required path for 2011.  And I’d stay away from issues like common core, charters, and AYP.  All those buzz words do is stoke the fires of the loyal opposition (whichever side on which they may be).
What am I missing?  What is necessary to tell the true state of our education union?
 
 

Buckeye-Style E-Learning

Eduflack accountability, early college, Online Education, technology

At its heart, is e-learning about improving educational opportunity or lowering instructional costs?  Last week, Eduflack was talking with a school district in West Virginia.  Following a growing wave, school districts in the Mountain State are prohibiting new textbook purchases in a tough budget environment.  As an alternative, districts are being directed to use e-learning to replace textbook adoptions and ensure students have up-to-date learning materials.

But in a district that doesn’t have the technology to deliver optimum e-learning, is such digital instruction really a cost saver?  Do we get around that $100 textbook, which is usually good for seven or nine years, by purchasing a low-cost laptop (which have to be replaced often due to loss, breakage, or general wear-and-tear) and then purchasing the curriculum and other instructional needs?  Are there enough high-quality open educational resources (OER) to secure the free digital instructional materials to effectively replace a textbook and its supplementary materials?  And does making the shift from paper to electronic actually boost student achievement and school effectiveness?
These are some of the questions that many are working to find answers to.  Late last year, the Foundation for Excellence in Education released its Digital Learning Now! report as part of the coming out of its Digital Learning Council.  The report offers up 10 reccs for high-quality digital learning.  Written specifically for governors and state-level policy makers, the Foundation makes clear that real action on e-learning is going to happen in state capitals, and not necessarily in our nation’s capital.
Next week, it looks like the discussion is going to drill down even further.  Some of the true leaders in e-learning will gather in Columbus, Ohio to talk about how digital learning can have a positive impact on education in Ohio and in the United States.  Those in politics know that as goes Ohio (or maybe Missouri), so goes the nation.  We also know that the Buckeye State now has a new, cost-conscious governor and a state budget in need of significant reductions.
So on Tuesday, leaders from Ohio’s business and education sectors, as well as the community at large, will hear from folks like Bob Wise, former West Virginia governor and current President of the Alliance for Excellent Education: Andy Ross, the GM of Global Services for Florida Virtual School; and Tom Vander Ark, partner at Vander Ark/Radcliff and e-learning connector extraordinaire.  They’ll also hear the Ohio perspective from KnowledgeWorks CEO Chad Wick and Ohio Education Matters ED Andy Benson.
Why is this summit important?  For one, it signals that a state like Ohio is serious about re-imagining the K-12 experience and exploring what a 21st century education really looks like.  More importantly, though, it is looking to do so through a practical lens, where the hopes and aspirations of e-learning will be explored through the very-real view of the very-scary Ohio budget.
We also know that if the intellectual firepower speaking from the rostrum in Columbus on the 25th can’t figure out how to make this work in Ohio, no one can.  Florida Virtual School is the gold standard when it comes to online learning in the K-12 environment.  Vander Ark/Radcliff has led the primary drumbeat for successful digital learning leadership, particularly at the state level.  And KnowledgeWorks has successfully led change in Ohio’s high schools through its Ohio High Schools Transformation Initiative and its NewTech Network.  So it looks like the e-learning A team will be in the house, ready to “dot the i.”
Hopefully, we will see a real action plan coming out of this Learning Unbound summit.  A plan that Ohio Gov. John Kasich can adopt as part of his leaner, ROI-focused budget and a plan on which other states can model their own e-learning opportunities.  That isn’t too much to ask for, is it, A focused plan of action coming out of a positive day of rhetoric?
   

Real 21st Century Ed Tech?

Eduflack 21CS, Arne Duncan, ESEA, Online Education, technology

As a nation, we tend to give a great deal of lip service to the idea of a 21st century education.  Such a notion is particularly popular when international achievement rankings come out, when we see how the United States stacks up to other industrialized nations, and we all seem to preach on the need to provide a 21st century education to lead to 21st century jobs and a 21st century economy.

Can we really provide a 21st century education without focusing on the role of technology in the process?  While technology remains at the center of many an American life, our schools are still constructed around a 19th century instructional model.  Rows of desks.  A single teacher lecturing.  And technology turned off and put away.  We literally unplug many of our students as they step through the schoolhouse doors.
Yes, the White House paid note to the value of education technology last year, as it pledged to better integrate ed tech throughout the federal ESEA process.  And U.S. Department of Education officials such as Karen Cator have long been advocating for the National Education Technology Plan released late last year.  But how do such commitments translate into action items that are felt in classrooms across the country?
Yesterday, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) released An Ed Tech Trio for 2011: ISTE’s U.S. Education Technology Priorities.  Following up on its popular Top 10 list of ed tech issues last year, ISTE’s Ed Tech Trio keys in on specific, actionable items that Congress can take on to demonstrate a true commitment to ed tech.  The trifecta includes:
* Providing dedicated federal funding for ed tech programs such as Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT) and Preparing Teachers for Digital Age Learners Act (PTDAL)
* Demanding that federal school turnaround efforts, including Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation, include an ed tech component
* Ensuring broadband for all students, both in the classroom and outside of classroom hours
It is no secret that well-conceived ed tech can serve an important role in addressing all four of the education pillars moved forward by EdSec Arne Duncan and the ESEA blueprint last year.  From standards to data systems, teacher quality to turnaround schools, ed tech can and does play an essential role.  For instance, programs like EETT (which has never been adequately funded by Congress) provide invaluable professional development and support in ed tech for classroom teachers. 
At the end of the day, funding is king in the world of education priorities.  If Congress is serious about ed tech, it’ll again find a way to fund efforts such as EETT.  It’ll find the funding to match the promise in the recently signed American COMPETES Act, which moves our STEM commitment forward.  And it will even direct specific dollars to ensure that NETP is acted on in classrooms across the country.
It’s time to plug our classrooms back in and provide all students the true 21st century education we just love to talk about.  After all, do we really think we can move toward an instructional world filled with e-learning and virtual schools and OER if we don’t have teachers trained on technology and broadband in all schools?
(Full disclosure, Eduflack has advised ISTE and other ed tech groups over the years.)

Some Resolutions for 2011

Eduflack 21CS, Arne Duncan, assessment, charter schools, early childhood education, ELL, ESEA, HQT, i3, international benchmarking, NCLB, Online Education, reading, Reading First, RTT, STEM, stimulus, Teacher Education, teachers, technology

Another year about to go down in the history books.  Are we any closer to truly improving our public schools?  For every likely step forward we may have taken in 2010, it seems to be met with a similar step back.  For every rhetorical push ahead, we had a very real headwind blocking progress. 

So as we head into 2011, your friendly neighborhood Eduflack offers up a few “resolutions” for all on the education reform boat to consider as we start a new year.  We need to come to accept the following:
1.  True reform does not happen at the federal level.  The federal government is an important lever in the school improvement process, offering some necessary financial resources and some bully pulpit language to inspire reform.  But true improvement happens at the state and local levels.  It is about what our SEAs and LEAs do with those resources and whether they embrace the call from the bully pulpit.  Just as all politics is local, so too is all education reform.  Why do you think groups like DFER are so keen on launching new statewide efforts, like the new one in California?
2.  ESEA reauthorization really doesn’t matter.  As much as we want to fret about when ESEA is going to be reauthorized and what will and won’t be included, it doesn’t have much impact on the game at hand.  At the end of the day, EdSec Duncan could work from the current NCLB, make a few tweaks, and be just fine for the next few years.  Those thinking a major sea change is coming with reauth will be sadly mistaken.  If we see reauth this year (put at about 60 percent), expect it to simply be a kinder, gentler NCLB.  Nothing more.
3. Education technology matters.  For years now, we’ve placed ed tech in the perifery when it comes to school improvement, trying to define it as simply the adoption of a particular piece of hardware.  Ed tech needs to be at the center of 21st century school improvement.  It is important to instruction and student achievement, teacher quality, and all-around turnaround efforts.  If we are to realize its impact, we need to ensure it is a non-negotiable in the process.
4. We cannot forget about reading instruction.  Nine years ago, Reading First was born, emphasizing the importance of literacy instruction in the elementary grades.  We cannot boost student test scores and we cannot ensure that all kids are college and career ready if everyone isn’t reading at grade level.  RF taught us a great deal on how to teach reading (and how not to advocate it politically).  Building on those lessons, we need to redouble our efforts to get each and every child reading proficient.  And that now includes focusing on middle and high schools, where too many students have fallen between the cracks.
5. Superintendents matter.  Many of our largest and most influential school districts will experience change at the top this coming year.  These new leaders can’t forget that the role of instructional leader is essential to their success.  Shaking things up is good.  Sweeping out the old is fine.  Doing things differently is great.  But at the end of the day, being a superintendent is all about teaching and learning and measurement.  Magazine covers are nice, but rising test scores are far more rewarding.
6. We still need to figure out what teacher quality is.  Is it just student test scores?  Does it include preservice education requirements beyond HQT provisions?  Are their qualitative factors?  Can we accept a “we’ll know it when we see it” definition?  With increased focus continuing to be placed on the topic of teacher quality, we need a true defition and a true measurement to really launch a meaningful discussion.  We’ve spent too much time talking about what it isn’t or what it shouldn’t be.  It is time to determine what it is.
7. Research remains king.  In 2010, we spent a great deal of money on school reforms and improvement ideas.  Most of these dollars were an investment in hope.  Now it is time to verify.  We need to determine what is working and what is not.  We need to know not just that the money is being spent (as ED typically sees evaluation) but instead need to know what it is being spent on and what is showing promise of success.  We need to redouble our investments in evaluation.  Other sectors have made real advances because of investments in R&D.  It is about time for education to do the same.
8. We need to learn how to use social media in education.  It is quite disheartening to see that states like Virginia are exploring banning teachers from using tools like Facebook with their students.  It is also a little frustrating to see that media like Twitter are still being used for one-way communications.  We need to see more engagement and dialogue through our social media.  An example?  How about more Twitter debates like those between @DianeRavitch and @MichaelPetrilli ?
And as we look forward to the new year, some predictions on what is hot and what is not for 2011.
HOT — Accountability (and its flexibility).  Assessments.  International benchmarking.  Rural education.  Alternative certification.  Special education.  Competitive grants.  Local control.  School improvement.  Local elected school boards.  Online education.
NOT —  Charter schools.  Early childhood education.  21st century skills.  STEM.  ELL.  Education schools.  RttT/i3.  Education reform (yeah, you heard me).  Teachers unions.  Mayoral control.  AYP.  Early colleges.  Edujobs.
Happy new year!  

Yes Virginia, Texting is Bad?

Eduflack 21CS, accountability, Students, technology

I’ll admit it.  Eduflack is not a big fan of texting.  I am pretty wired to both my iPhone and my iPad that I get emails just as fast as I get texts.  And any reader of this blog knows I tend to be a little wordy.  So other than those Tweets at @Eduflack, my writing — emails and texts — run a little long.  At this point, my texting is pretty limited to my wife (who doesn’t monitor her email as I do); my younger, hipper sister; and a few friends who drop a text occasionally.

Don’t get me wrong, though, I definitely see the value of it.  Texts provide us instant information, allowing for a real-time electronic conversation.  It provides a written record of these electronic conversations (a fact I can state with certainty, as my wife quotes from texts I sent her two years ago).  And it offers a quick way to reach a lot of people.  When my local school district had to close schools early for a recent snow, it was able to text the news to all families who signed up for text updates. 
While I would never want to see texting (and texting shorthand) replace the ancient art of actually writing in complete sentences and with words spelled out in the Queen’s English, I do see the value of texting.  And part of that value is potential interactions between students and teachers.  Questions about assignments from students.  Updates on class schedule from teacher.  Texting can be a useful classroom information management tool when used correctly.
Unfortunately, not all seem to see it that way.  On January 13, the Virginia State Board of Education is expected to restrict or outright ban teachers texting with students.  Apparently, some believe that a teacher texting a student can result sexual misconduct.  The State Board in the Old Dominion cites 120 actions in the past decade where action was taken regarding misconduct involving minors (though no mention of what role texting may have played in those 120 cases).
Additionally, the Virginia State Board is looking to prohibit teachers from interacting with students at all through online social networking (such as Facebook and Twitter).
I’m all for protecting our students.  And I’m all for eliminating inappropriate conversations between teachers and students, while providing guidelines for both parties on the proper use of electronic communications.  But this is truly a case of throwing out the baby with the electronic bathwater.
Teachers should be bound by codes of conduct, whether it be in person or virtually.  Violators should be addressed, directly and swiftly.  Just as their teachers, students should be educated on the appropriate uses of electronic media.  This should be about responsible use, not prohibition.
Yes, I realize that Virginia is proposing guidelines for restriction.  But we all realize how this slippery slope works.  Restriction offers up too much room for misinterpretation and potential problem.  Elimination is much easier to understand and enforce.
We already have too many instances of de-connecting our students in the classroom.  We have too many examples of students being unplugged from their 21st century lives so they can be taught exclusively through a 19th century medium.  Shouldn’t we be exploring how to better integrate one of the most common methods of communications for 21st century students — the text — into the current learning environment?  
Used correctly, texting (and to a lesser degree, social media) can be a powerful instructional tool.  We should be looking at ways to maximize the resources available and better engage students in their preferable mediums.  Virginia, there has to be another way to protect teachers and students, share information, and offer a more transparent communication than shutting down that which is new.