Wednesday, August 10, 2011

What are you willing to do?

How important is eduction to us?  For educators in Wisconsin, it was important enough to occupy the state capitol for days and weeks on end.  For a few thousand educators, it was important enough that they travelled to Washington D.C. for the Save our Schools rally this summer.  As legislators continue to push an agenda of pseudo-reform, educators continue to push back.  But, how hard are we willing to push?  Are we willing to push this hard?  Education reform, Chilean style...


photo: msnbc

High school and college students are rioting in Chile because of the lack of government funding for education and because of tax-exempt private universities that do not put their profits back into education as they are required.  Sounds familiar doesn't it? A lack of funding and a push towards privatized, marginalized for-profit education is happening right here in the good ol' USA.

Stand up against harmful education reform, reclaim public education!

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Innovation Revisited

I have posted several blogs about how high-stakes testing is detrimental to innovation in education and to fostering creativity and innovation in our students. Not only are these exams a poor measure of potential, but they go a step further and displace art programs and elective programs that actually allow students to develop creativity.

When a school is not making the grade on standardized tests, the first programs to go are the arts, music and electives, which are replaced by more math and language arts classes. Those kids who struggle in core classes probably find it hard to go to school each day faced with possible failure, and electives such as woodshop or film making are what provide the motivation to attend school at all. We are not serving students, we are serving the test.

As a nation, we are concerned that our students are not globally competitive and thus we are pushing to institute a rigorous, standards-based curriculum. There is nothing wrong with this, but we then place all measures of success on a standardized test. If we do not do well on the tests, we will apparently be overrun and teased by our global competitors.

The other day I was thumbing through the May 16, 2011 issue of Time magazine. In the Economy section on page 17 was an interesting breakdown by country of the cost of producing the iPhone called “Adding Up the iPhone: How an American invention makes money for the world.” While parts and assembly generate income in Japan, China, Germany, South Korea, and elsewhere, the bulk of the profit goes to the US. The graphic states:

“While America doesn't make much of what goes into the iPhone, it’s always better to innovate than to fabricate; just see Apple’s profit.”

About Japan,

“It doesn't innovate as much as the U.S.”

And about China the article states,

“Often more of an assembly line for other nation’s wares, work here accounts for only 3.6% of an iPhone’s production cost.”

While the production of the iPhone feeds the world economy, the bulk of the money stays in the U.S. where the product was developed. So, while many supposedly better educated foreigners may be working on the iPhone, its ultimate existence is a product of good ol’ American ingenuity.

Perhaps our decline in competitive fitness is best measured by the creativity vacuum left by the slashing of inspiring arts and elective programs, all in the name of test scores.

Do something innovative, deemphasize standardized testing, reclaim your creativity, and reclaim public education! Is there an app for that?

Friday, April 22, 2011

Why Education Reform Isn't Really About Education



When viewed in a larger context, cuts to education are part of a Republican agenda to privatize America, be it social security, medicare, or public schools.  Government is getting involved in all levels of our lives (something Republicans normally would resent) to try and change the way we do business.  In the end, corporate America and the wealthiest win, and the majority of us lose. 

So when education reform comes to your town, you might want to find out if it really has anything to do with education, or if it is about fattening the wallets of the wealthiest while the rest of us suffer.

Reclaim Sesame Street, reclaim Head Start, and reclaim public education!

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

It is Time for Teachers to Drive Education Reform

If you are a teacher, you are probably frustrated by the current climate of education reform.  Everyday we hear  news of politicians and reformers who make our jobs more difficult and less effective in the name of saving American education.  I personally am tired of having reform dictated to me by the likes of Michelle Rhee, Bill Gates, Arne Duncan, and other self-possessed individuals. 

I have written and will continue to write about the state of education reform, but now I am trying another tactic - to start a grassroots effort to help teachers better visualize and communicate what reform should look like.  The idea is simple: by providing a site for teachers to communicate ideas, we will see where common ground exists and where we should concentrate our efforts on proactively fostering meaningful reform.

Please visit this site and add your input, thanks!

http://meaningfulreform.blogspot.com/

Sunday, April 10, 2011

"Mayor Bloomberg Gets Schooled After Cathie Black Fiasco" (HuffPo Post)


The problem with applying the "business model" to education is deeper than whether or not it is transferra­ble. The problem is that not enough people are asking whether the "business model" is a good one in the first place. I know that as a consumer, I have to constantly guard against the dirty practices of local and national businesses that are driven more by a bottom line (test scores) than by the needs of the customers (students)­.

Bloomberg, Gates and the rest of the billionair­es are obviously intimately tied to the model. Wanna-be Rhee is trying to make her billion dollars by asking for it in the name of bashing teachers and unions through her Students First organizati­on. The sooner these types get out of education, the sooner we can develop a model for education, not business.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Lip Service

The U.S. Ambassador [Karen Kornbluh] to the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation recently posted an interesting piece on HuffingtonPost.com titled "Waking up to the need for education reform."  She has some interesting things to offer, including the lessons below which I respond to:
"What the data really show is that we can no longer pretend that we're doing just fine but also that it's far from hopeless. The report on lessons for the US that the OECD prepared at Secretary Duncan's request boils down to four lessons -- the four A's:

Ambition. The world's top performing education systems have clear, ambitious goals, and universally high standards. They match these high expectations with strong support systems, ensuring that quality learning opportunities are available to all students.

All. Commitment to educating every child. PISA researchers found that the best education systems share a belief that "competencies can be learned, and therefore all children can achieve." Shanghai transfers its best teachers to its weakest schools to make sure that disadvantaged students receive excellent instruction.

Access to good teachers. Leading education systems provide mentoring and a high level of professional development, lay out clear career pathways, and are transparent in their decisions. They treat teachers like information-age workers: providing opportunities for teachers to try new ideas and learn from their colleagues. They are careful to win support from teachers for reforms.

Autonomy, accountability and incentives at the school level. High performing education systems give individual schools -- not just states or school districts -- discretion, which they safeguard through effective accountability systems."

Kornbluh's list of the four "A's" is an excellent summary of what schools should be striving for. I hope she can encourage Arne Duncan to propose reforms that actually aim to achieve these goals as stated and not a corrupt version of these ideals.  From reading this article, I would be inclined to think that Kornbluh and the administration "get it".  Unfortunately, their actions show otherwise:
Ambition:  Standards just provide the framework for education.  The truth of the matter is that many of the standards and the tests that assess them stress fact learning and not transferrable skills.  Truly ambitious standards can only be assessed in a manner that transcends bubbling in answers.  Is the administration willing to think outside the bubble?  I have not seen any signs of that yet.
All: Public education should be universally available.  We all know that our culture does not operate in this manner.  Socialism is a bad word, regardless of the context.  The current administration has only perpetuated the model of haves and have-nots by supporting unsustainable charter school models (SEED has $35,000/pupil spending) that provide a private school-type education to a few students in poor neighborhoods.  Millions upon millions are left behind by this model.  That is not education for all.
Access: Firstly, the administration is not winning the support of teachers.  They are backing the voices that are leading the teacher-bashing and union-busting wave that is devastating public education throughout the country.  Teacher development and mentoring require time and money.  The administration has shown a greater commitment to preserving corporate tax breaks and military funding than to making any significant advancement in this area.
Autonomy and Accountability:  Can I quote you on this one?  Do you really think any reformed version of NCLB will give teachers local autonomy?  Do you really think high stakes testing and merit pay will give teachers autonomy? 
Lip service. 
Let's walk the walk, and reclaim public education!

Monday, March 14, 2011

Don’t Show Me the Money, Show Me Respect

President Obama recently spoke about the need to fix NCLB.  His solution is to keep the goals of the legislation in place but to provide the support schools need to meet these goals.  The thing is, the government’s contribution to education is a pittance, so what his declaration amounted to was a token request or plea for governors to not cut education spending.

That is great, but after a month of Obama standing by idle while Scott Walker ripped apart the support system for teachers in Wisconsin, this seems more like passing the buck than leading the effort for education reform.

Obama did say some good things, or maybe not, because it all seemed pretty ambiguous or just downright confusing.  Take this for example:


“So what we’re doing is we’re saying to states, prove you’re serious about reform, and we’ll show you the money. And because it’s a competition for less than one percent of what our country spends on education each year, Race to the Top has led over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching, learning, and student achievement…”

Show me the money, baby, all “less than one percent” of it!  This money thing is starting to confuse me, not to mention that it seems to me states are rushing through changes to meet the requirements of the competition without actually enacting meaningful education reform.  It has become about the money, not the reform.

I am glad to hear that Obama is calling the 80% failure rate of public schools a relic of the measurement system set forth in NCLB, but then he turns around and says this:

“That way of measuring success and failure, that’s the first problem with No Child Left Behind that we need to fix.  Instead of labeling schools a failure one day and then throwing up our hands and walking away from them, we need to refocus on the schools that need the most help. “

Wait a second, I thought the schools that got the most help were the ones that could meet the criteria of Race to the Top?  Here we go again…

Now, I really like how he said we need to change the way we measure and assess student progress, not more testing but better testing.

“Now, that doesn’t mean testing is going to go away; there will be testing.  But the point is, is that we need to refine how we’re assessing progress so that we can have accountability without rigidity -- accountability that still encourages creativity inside the classroom, and empowers teachers and students and administrators.”

Hmmm… assessing progress to have accountability without rigidity?  So, like making a teacher’s pay connected to a student’s performance on a test?  I am again confused.  The President is a champion of assessment based merit pay and yet he wants me to be creative in the classroom?  I think I already explained in an earlier post why those things just don’t jive.

There is an interesting change in tone here from Obama’s State of the Union address.  There is some nuance.  Unfortunately, whenever Obama starts to use nuance it tends to confuse people, like me.  It shows he really does understand the issues (hopefull), he just can’t quite do anything about it. 

I am getting a mixed message here, but perhaps a mixed message is better than an outright bad one:

I am hearing Obama say states need to support teachers and education and yet he stands by idle as Republican governors gut education and teacher rights.  I am hearing Obama preach creativity and yet he promotes a high stakes environment that forces teachers to walk a fine line.  I am hearing Obama promise that there will not be more testing, and yet testing still reigns supreme.  I am hearing Obama wanting to reward teachers with support and funding and yet all he can produce is a toothless request of unsupportive governors.

I don’t want you to show me the money, Mr. President, I want you to show me respect.  Show me respect by trusting me to develop my own systems of accountability, show me respect by allowing me to work in a truly flexible and creative environment, show me respect by believing that I know what is right for my students.  I don’t need more money to do my job better, I need more respect and space to reach my full potential as a teacher.

So don’t show me the money you don’t have, show me you really want to reclaim public education!
 

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Conspiracy Theory or Reality?

Most Americans would claim that the existance of a big money/corporate-backed movement to strip union's of their power is just a paranoid conspiracy theory.  Well, if it is not already obvious to you that the union bashing in Wisconsin has nothing to do with balancing the budget, perhaps this phone call from a prankster posing to be one of the Koch brothers (the billionaire duo that funds Tea Party events, supports union-bashing legislation, and will possibly benefit if the Wisconsin energy bill is passed) will pull your head out from under that rock.





Listening to the idiocy of a politician like Scott Walker is one reason why I shouldn't come within 500 yards of a peaceful protest - I don't know if I trust myself to remain peaceful!  How any voting populace could think that these new Republicans would actually help the average guy on main street boggles my mind.

So now, thanks to these corporate puppets, unions are endangered across the nation.  How does this affect education reform?  Rather than looking to work with teachers (and their professional unions are one way to do this) lawmakers are looking to squelch the voices of educators.  Are lawmakers really more willing to spend 20 minutes talking with their billionaire donors than with those they govern?  It is a sorry state.

Collective bargaining is one thing, but discounting the collective voice of a profession is another.  Reclaim public education!

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Thought for the day...

If a foreign power conspired to inflict this much damage on America's first responders and essential infrastructure, we would see it as an act of war.  And if a foreign dictator unilaterally announced that his nation's workers no longer had a seat at the bargaining table in their own country, the U.S. establishment would rightfully go bananas.

- Van Jones

Monday, February 21, 2011

It Doesn't Take a Nobel Laureate to See What's Goin' on Here! (but it helps...)

In his op-ed piece for the New York Times, economist Paul Krugman hits the nail on the head about the importance of what is happening in Wisconsin.  He highlights the importance of the institution of unions to counteract the political power of big money and how what is playing out in Wisconsin is more of a power grab, hence the unwillingness to compromise, than a balancing of a budget.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Thousands Host 'Waiting For Superman' House Parties

When "Waiting for Superman" first came out, it was possible to pledge to see it on the movie's website. I pledged not see it in the theater and I renew my pledge by not renting it either. These house parties are just another marketing scam for the film and its corporate backers. Vote with your dollars, don't see the film.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Shooting for the Luna

I can’t say I know much about Idaho State Superintendent Tom Luna or his plan for education reform.  But what I do know worries me.  Here is another education administrator whose closest experience to K-12 education is far from the classroom, a 7-year stint on the Nampa School Board, according to his Wikipedia page.

I guess that is why the main points of his reform seem completely devoid of genuine measures to support teachers in improving instruction and learning.  The plan appears to me to be largely based on gimmicks.   Here are the main points of Student’s Come First, Luna's reform legislation:

1.       Distribute laptops to students
2.        Have all students take online classes
3.       Increase minimum pay for teachers
4.       Institute a performance-pay model
5.       Phase out tenure by implementing 2 year rolling contracts

Let’s look at these point-by-point…

1.       Laptops.  Technology is a love-hate thing in schools.  As soon as you equip that beautiful new computer lab it is time to upgrade again and even if the machines can handle the increasing demands of software, the Tech Guy or Gal probably doesn’t have time to service them and the machines function slow if at all.  It is a huge commitment of money, and what for?  Does a laptop make a student a better learner?  No.  Do laptops make teachers better instructors?  No.  Show me a study that says otherwise.  All technology allows you to do is present things in different ways.  Laptops do not a priori create active engagement, that still requires trained and experienced professionals.  I can tell you from 15 years in the classroom, including cutting edge education back in the 1990’s when the internet was brand-spankin’ new (I did a presentation once on integrating the internet into curriculum for Autodesk), that computers are useful tools and having them in the classroom is super-convenient, but they are not always the most effective and engaging instructional method.

2.       Online Classes.  I did a Masters Degree online and I loved it because I could cut through all the excess and right to the meat of what I needed to know.  I had a similar experience doing correspondence school when I was in 7th grade.  I could do a week of school in a few hours.  But, I am a pretty good student.  When I watch my students take online courses I see varied results.  Those who are like me, a quick study and good test-taker, do just fine, but those who operate in a less linear manner often do not have a positive learning experience.  Nothing can replace the face to face interaction with the teacher for these students.  Seeing the examples done before their eyes and the immediate feedback the classroom provides is irreplaceable.  Not even the best online classroom software is effective at this.  Online courses may be good for some students who have exhausted local offerings, beyond that it runs a real danger of alienating students.

3.       I don’t know what the current minimum pay for teachers is in Idaho, but considering the salary schedule was frozen for several years and the minimum is being raised to $30,000 a year, this doesn’t seem like much of a bone to throw.  Furthermore, it won’t help to recruit skilled teachers, largely because other parts of the reform do not support longevity (see number 5).

4.        Performance pay.  We’ve been here before.  The science says it does not increase student learning (see my posting “Pay Me More… but I won’t perform better”).   Luna’s plan for performance pay appears to be awarded on a group or school basis.  If the school does well, everyone benefits.  This at least does not squelch collaboration within a school.  There also appears to be some stipulations for local control over the measures used to determine performance, which is a step in the right direction regarding testing and accountability.  In the end though, whatever measures are used and all questions of equity aside, performance pay just does not improve learning.

5.       Rolling contracts.  Luna’s nod to multiple measures is good (by requiring only a portion of performance be determined by test scores) but the reality of this process is bleak.  Teaching is an investment, it takes time to develop and build a repertoire of successful lessons and practices.  Being on the chopping block every two years will not promote the risk-taking that can lead to innovation and creativity in teaching.  I know what it is like to be pink slipped.  I was pink-slipped the first three years of my teaching career.  Every time you get that slip you feel unvalued and deflated.  It affects your desire to show up to work.  This system is like being pink-slipped every two years.  Evaluations are good and even useful if done properly, but only teachers who feel supported to improve and safe to innovate will increase student learning.

In all, very few of Luna’s reforms will improve student learning.  His package does have appeal to those romanced by the pseudo-reformer movement.  By tackling a full hand of tenure, unions, and performance pay, Luna is attempting to shoot the moon.  But let’s call a spade a spade.  Luna’s motivations are not entirely clear and his emphasis on privatization of education is as dubious as his ties to for-profit education companies are deep.

Eat a spade for the team to stop Luna’s lunacy!  Reclaim public education!

Shout-out to Wisconsin

My dear Tea Party extremists and fellow citizens: 

You have sent many candidates to political positions of power this past November and told these puppets that if they do not make good on their promises you will gleefully cut their strings and let them fall into lifeless lumps of political anonymity.

My dear friends, let me break the news to you softly.  Politics is about compromise.  The new House will learn this lesson soon when they can’t make good on their promises because they are unwilling to compromise.  The Governor of Wisconsin is learning this lesson right now.  When you try to stick it to people, you can get stuck back.  It isn’t very good politics, and it doesn’t lead to change or a positive environment for change.

Here is my suggestion:  don’t legislate change, foster change through collaboration and back it up and support it with legislation.  Common ground is a powerful foundation for effective change.

Sorry to be the one to tell you,

Your friend.

P.S. Regulate Wall Street not collective bargaining, and reclaim public education!

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Test-Driven Education Reform Could Set Up Kids To Fail

This article clearly states the motivation behind and the unfortunat­e consequenc­es of the pseudo-ref­orm movement. Hopefully more and more people will hear this message and reform can become a productive and collaborat­ive community process, with the voices of those most important, the teachers, students and parents, heard loudest.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Institutions, Inertia, and Inequity

As the revolution in Egypt unfolds, it has been interesting to watch the role of unions in the uprising.  Egypt had unions all along, but they were sponsored by the state and, as such, were ineffective.   The movement appears largely centered around workers, with professionals taking to the streets in a unified manner, including doctors in white coats and lawyers in robes. Granted Egyptians were marching for fundamental freedom from oppression, but the solidarity of professionals in the revolution has been telling.  The spirit and strength of “union” has been heard.

It was in this nexus of increased union organizing in the Middle East and the union-bashing antics of the education pseudo-reformers in America that a particular book caught my attention.  The book is titled Women Don’t Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide, by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever. 

The website for the book sets the stage, stating, “It turns out that whether they want higher salaries or more help at home, women often find it hard to ask. Sometimes they don't know that change is possible--they don't know that they can ask. Sometimes they fear that asking may damage a relationship. And sometimes they don't ask because they've learned that society can react badly to women asserting their own needs and desires.”

All societies are built around institutions.  Institutions of government and military, social institutions such as the media, and the institution of education.  The thing with institutions is that they have inertia.  They tend to continue in the same direction no matter who is at the helm.  This is why candidate Obama’s message of hope was, well, a little hopeful.  Not only are institutions harder to steer than a large oil tanker, they also perpetuate the ills of society, including racism and sexism. 

The book caught my eye for two reasons.  First, unions are powerful negotiating institutions.  Unions provide a buffer between the inertia of the institution and the worker.  Yes, I did say that the unions themselves are institutions and yes this can be problematic, but in general the members of a union value the collective strength of negotiation over the nimbleness of individuality.  That is why in times of revolt, such as in Egypt, organization plays a key role.

Secondly, the hypothesis put forth in the book that females do not enjoy negotiating is an example of institutional inertia perpetuating an inequity.  The system discriminates against the success of women.  No one is at fault, the system is just set up for failure. 

Our current education system is set up for failure in many ways as well.  The possibilities for institutionalized discrimination are great, and while the losses may not be directly measureable in salaries, students are losing out on opportunities to experience success.

If the inertia of an institution grows too large, its mass becoming too unwieldy, then it will and should be allowed to break apart.  “Too big to fail” is not a recipe for change and growth.  The education system is big and it is broken and it needs to be rebuilt.  Teacher unions are also big and powerful and have inertia, but they are not the institution that needs changing.  In fact, it is institutions like unions that help offset the inequities of society. 

Union-bashing is simply a distraction, enough so, darn it, that I keep finding myself writing in defense of unions when that isn’t really my interest in education at all!  The tactic is working I guess, at least on me. 

So to refocus on education, I suggest the following:  Education reform needs to focus on making the institution more nimble and more equitable to better serve the needs of all students.  Adding layer upon layer of testing and accountability does not achieve this.  Taking away teachers’ rights does not achieve this.  In fact, teachers need to be given more professional power to make informed and experienced decisions for the benefit of their students.  Teachers need to be accountable to each other and their communities, not to layers of government.   

While Republicans usually shy away from adding more layers of government and regulations, they, along with the Democrats, seem to have no problem in doing this when it comes to education.  Many of the current reforms are just adding to the institutional inertia of education and placing more and more inequities on teachers.

There is one area of deregulation that has the support of these factions - charter schools.  Charter schools are a favorite of the pseudo-reformers because they give schools more freedom to operate.  They can also be privatized, which is another story.  Freedom to operate means a resistance to inertia, the ability to be nimble.  This is great.  So why, I often wonder, aren’t these reformers freeing up the rest of public education in this manner?  Whose inertia is stopping that from happening?

Let’s start building inertia for positive change and reclaim public education!

Monday, February 7, 2011

It's all Apples and Oranges for Teachers

The current cast of education reformers , the billionaire pseudo-reformers and the disconnected political elite, love to compare the American education system with those of various foreign nations. That is fine, as there is much to be learned from this comparative study.

The problems arise when we attempt to take bits and pieces of one system and incorporate them into our own different system. A system, by definition, implies an entirety of parts working as a whole. Yet, the system does not function as a whole when the parts do not mesh. It becomes an apples and oranges thing.

A recent study released by Harvard suggests that our “college for all” model is hurting some of our students who would benefit from an alternate pathway (see the Sir Ken Robinson video in my prior posting). The study and its implications was well summarized by this article in the Christian Science Monitor.

The article states that 40-70% of students in some European nations opt for a career technical pathway. “In Finland, where income class is the least predictive of achievement among OECD countries, 43 percent of kids at age 16 opt for a three-year program that mixes work with learning and moves them to the labor market,” states the article.

This is of interest because many of the pseudo-reformers have highlighted Finland as an example of a successful system (see my article Fakes, Finance, and Finland). They mention a system of standards and accountability, but among the things they leave out, is that Finland offers valid and accepted alternate pathways for students to follow.  This is an integral part of providing an equitable education system and meeting the needs of all students.

Think of the student buy-in and affirmation (a la Sir Ken Robinson) a system like this can generate!

In my small California district, funding has all but dried up for career technical education. There are no alternative pathways. So while we are being pushed by the pseudo-reformer movement to be more like Finland in some ways, these reformers are stripping other programs that would complete the system. The reforms are myopic.

We are left with disparate parts that do not mesh. Apples and oranges. We are expected to educate students with differing needs in the same manner.  That is unfair to the students.

As a teacher, I appreciate receiving the occasional apple and even an orange, but I don’t appreciate when the two get confused. So, keep your apples and oranges straight and reclaim public education!

Thursday, February 3, 2011

From the Master of Creativity...

The wise words of creativity guru Sir Ken Robinson animated...

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

The Real Story

We have learned to take what our politicians say with a grain of salt and a healthy dose of skepticism.  From messages of WMD to messages of Hope, we know things never really are what they seem.  So, why should we believe our politicians when they claim to know what is best for America’s education system?  Where is the healthy dose of skepticism?

President Obama wants America to innovate to win the future and at the same time he wants to turn our schools into high-stakes test-taking machines and link everything from funding to teacher pay to the results of those tests.  In this blog, I have consistently argued against this naively simple model, asking, “Do we really want a nation of great test-takers?”

Now, the answer is clear, and it comes straight from China, the nation with the world’s top test-takers.  In an article by Kathy Chu for USAToday, Chu writes, “…critics believe this strength may mask the Chinese education system's shortfall in producing innovative and creative students.”

So, Mr. Obama, it is not just about the test, but also about culture and society.  We can create fundamentally strong students, but that does not mean they will be innovative and creative.  There may need to be a little give and take as education reform moves into the future.  After all, isn’t that what politics is all about?

Look beyond the sound bites and reclaim public education!

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

State of the Union? …Under attack!

President Obama recently delivered his State of the Union address in which he highlighted education as a necessity to move our country into the future.  Obama referenced two education reforms he wishes to implement: performance pay for teachers and the end of teacher tenure as we know it.  Obama stated, “We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones.”  Both of these will directly affect teacher rights and the unions that represent them. 

Teacher unions protect the rights of those they represent, they in no way work to keep bad teachers employed.  It is the job of school administrators to weed out underperforming teachers before they gain tenure.   The shift is simple: tell a new hire that their first year is an extended interview and they will only be kept on if the fit is right for both parties.  As for that burnt-out veteran, my guess is that they are still valuable to the school and could be used in different roles under a good administrator.

Performance pay is acceptable to most teachers if a sufficient measure can be developed.  Until that multiple and complex measure is determined, any performance pay system will be violating the professionalism, equity, and rights of teachers.  We will really need unions once these performance measures are implemented!

The President’s address also highlighted the need for innovation.  If you read this blog, you know that this is something I deem as extremely important to our nation’s success - we must teach and foster creativity and innovation.  I wrote about it in “Why Test Scores are Failing Us”.

Unfortunately, reforms supported by the President, such as merit pay, will likely continue to be tied to high stakes testing which take all the creativity and innovation out of curriculum.  I guarantee that teachers today are more refined in their craft than those that spawned the generations of NASA scientists that got us to the moon.  But, we have to have room to operate.  A generation of teachers running scared will not take risks (see my blog about the importance of risks), and yet in promoting innovation that is what we are asking the next generation to do.

While Obama also mentioned the need for family and community support of students, any reform which is fundamentally built around punishing teachers will ultimately fail.  The state of the union and the teachers these unions represent is strong (is it ever anything else?) but definitely under attack. 

Give teachers a real voice – reclaim public education!

Friday, January 21, 2011

An un-Rhee-sonable approach...

Society today is filled with polarizing personalities.  From the ionizing ire of talk radio to the great divide that is the aisles of Congress, our nation seems to feel the need to take sides.  This, as any middle manager could tell you, is not the way to work through issues and solve problems.

These polarizing trends are not just reserved for politics, but are found in education as well.  Though education reform has become largely politicized, the pitting of one side against another for no apparent reasons of ideology has become all too commonplace.

Namely, the debate on education reform pits teachers against administrators against the kids.  The vast majority of school systems in the country are not this way.  Everyone is working together.  Only in places like Washington DC and New York City do you see such polarization, and usually it is due to a top-down, irreverent administrator who has minimal if any experience in the classroom.  Michelle Rhee was just such an administrator in the DC school system, and now that she has been fired and has started her own political action group called Students First in California, I don’t expect any change in her methods.

Rhee does not get my favorite moniker of pseudo-reformer, because she actually did make reforms as the DC supe, but she has a monopoly on the “malevolent makeover” style of reform.  She is polarizing and condescending, like a right-wing talk show host.  Rhee and those like her are just the reason why unions around the world are formed in the first place.  The name of her organization, Students First, says it all.  It is a sad statement that anyone need be reminded that education is for the kids.  Yet Rhee is as far from the students as is anyone in education reform, and as such, the name of her organization is a lousy front.

For the same reason Sarah Palin should stay in Alaska (in the words of Barbara Bush), Michelle Rhee should stay way over on the right coast in Washington DC.  Her brand of politicized, confrontational, black-and-white reform has no place in the Golden State or anywhere for that matter.  Until reformers can stop pointing fingers, they will never solve some of the most pressing issues facing our children. 

Stop being un-rhee-sonable!  Reclaim public education!

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Why Test Scores are Failing Us

The question that the current crop of education pseudo-reformers fails to ask is, “Do we really want a country of really good test takers?” 

This is an important question to ask because the direction of education reform will not only dictate results on international tests such as the PISA, but will also dictate the very nature of our society.  Will we be a society of theoreticians who exist in an unreality of choice A, B, C, or D, where a skilled workforce is one that can plug and chug through computations and recite facts without ever thinking critically about what they mean and what implication they may have for society, or will we promote a culture of creativity and innovation?

I believe we are at heart a culture of creativity and innovation, and standardized tests are indeed failing us.  Not only do standardized tests fail to discover the talented, compassionate, wise, and creative members of society, but by connecting these tests to such things as teacher pay, school itself is losing its freedom to be innovative and creative as teachers continually feel the pressure to perform for the singular measure of standardized testing. 

Some people believe you can be creative while teaching the standards, but that is not the point.  The standards themselves do not dictate the current atmosphere in education.  It is all the other hubbub surrounding standards that gets in the way.  The truth of the matter is that schools just aren’t as creative as they were 10-15 years ago.

Education is a pendulum that reverses direction every 15 years or so.  Stick around long enough, and what you were doing when you started the profession will come back en vogue.  I believe the reason for this periodicity is the failure of society to address the root causes of the problems facing education, namely the health and welfare of our youth.  Thus, we keep digging into the same bag of so-called reforms. 

However, I think there are signs that the pendulum is swinging and that standardized testing is losing its stranglehold on American education.  Fantastically, this is coming from institutions of higher education.  Firstly, there is a long-standing list of hundreds of schools who do not use the SAT to gauge admissions.  But recently, some hold-outs (such as the University of California system) have been dropping the SAT II, or Subject Test, requirement.  Secondly, some universities, such as Tufts,  are using a new set of metrics to dig deeper for successful students.

In a great article titled To get the real star students, college admissions should look beyond SATs”, Robert J. Sternberg  writes on Washingtonpost.com about how Tufts uses a set of essay questions to assess a student’s “creative, analytical and practical skills and general wisdom.”  Tufts found that measuring these qualities was a better predictor of student success than test scores and GPA.

Any teacher will tell you this is obvious, and why standardized tests are such a joke in the first place.  Many of the students who will go on to make productive, creative, and innovative contributions are not the students sitting tamely in class and getting all their work turned in.  These creative contributers have an extra spark that some of the top students in my classes lack, a spark that is not detectable on standardized tests.

Universities should push harder to do away with testing requirements where it makes sense to (Engineering programs may want to retain test scores, as they may be a fair predictor in those fields).  Perhaps state and federal governments would follow suit.  The future ability of our nation to survive in the environmentally and economically challenged world of the future will not reside with a bunch of students with an aptitude for test taking, but with the creativity and innovation that education can and should instill in our youth.

Put down the No2 pencils, reclaim your inner creativity, and reclaim public education!