Monthly Archives: February 2013

Shake Before Lifting

Posted on by
Reply
Now what?

Now what?

The people that always do the heavy lifting of community and/or school improvement are those in the trenches. You can’t mandate them to do it. You can’t twist their arms, as much as we might like to. People need to see the need, know they share a common problem, see a way to solve it, and believe they can. Can that be put into reform law? Yes, I not only know think it can; I know that the philosophy of helping people help themselves was put into education law in 1965.

Our common problem is that the education reform laws now are designed to “do to us” instead of helping us to improve. In Idaho, there are clearly ten Title I (low-income schools) that are falling behind the other 93% of Idaho’s Title I schools. The law did make us identify and label theses schools but we — not the schools — continue to fail because society isn’t providing them with the help they need to improve. Recent laws actually make that process harder.

We fail to serve the neediest of our schools because there are no people adequately representing these schools at “the table” were decisions are being made for them. We toss them a bone now and then, occasionally allowing them three minutes to testify and sometimes even inviting them to a conference. This is not allowing them to be part of the solution; it only serves to pacify them, momentarily. This is not full and continuous engagement in the improvement process.

What we need from real “reform” laws — laws that address the needs of schools most in need of improvement — are laws that provide direction, guidance, and assistance in evaluating the problems on the ground, educating the community about those problems and the array of solutions available to them, and making sure the public feels welcomed into the process of being successful with the plan they themselves created. After all, ordinary Americans are the real doers and shakers.

Time to shake it up?

Dare You Face Facts?

Posted on by
Reply

If there are 3 million teachers (roughly) in the US, that’s 1% of the population. And frankly, you teachers out there are not all on the same “education reform” page!

So if teachers are fighting among themselves as to the need for “reform” and what the right way to go about “improvements,” what do you think is going on with the public in general? If the public cared enough about public schools and the children within them, how can they participate in the improvement process without being led down the wrong path —the one we are on right now? face_facts2

People 18 years and under make up 24% of the population — some of them are living in two or more children households, are under school age, attend private or charter schools, are home-schooled or have dropped out. So the number of people directly associated with public schools at any one time is relatively small. And how many of these are struggling to just get by, daily?

My point is: how many people know about the condition of their local schools let alone the real story across the country? And, how many care?…Now that is something to ponder!

Then, think about who is watching the hen-house.bill-allison-quote-youve-got-the-foxes-guarding-the-hen-house-and

Setting the Right Priorities

Posted on by
Reply

“No task before our Nation is more important than expanding and improving the educational opportunities of all our people. The concept that every American deserves the opportunity to attain the highest level of education of which he is capable is not new to this Administration–it is a traditional ideal of democracy. But it is time that we moved toward the fulfillment of this ideal with more vigor and less delay.”    President John F. Kennedy, February 6, 1962

Are we setting the right priorities? How many times will be put education on the back-burner?

Yes, we have allowed ourselves to be dragged down by debt — and the policymakers that took us there do need to take us out or get out.

Yes, immigration has been a long-neglected issue but we had better ask the experts why illegal entry continues, and ask American citizens what and how is an acceptable way and means to “fix” the problems BEFORE we send it into the political muck hole of the D.C. chambers.

Yes, we continue to allow “our” representatives to put large MULTINATIONAL corporate interests ahead of national well-being.

But excellent education for all? — No task more important — no task ignored longer.quote-not-everyone-has-equal-abilities-but-everyone-should-have-equal-opportunity-for-education-john-f-kennedy-73-96-64

Policy Ping-Pong

Posted on by
6

Wrongly, many people believe that excessive testing, narrowed curriculum, and wayward accountability schemes are the fault of federal policy. Most agree that the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law is the main culprit. I most certainly am not defending NCLB, oh no, far from it. But the truth is that state-after-state was sold “Outcome-Based Education Reform” which morphed into test-based accountability. What No Child Left Behind did was to federalize the education trend that most states had already begun implementing on their own. So, why is this important to know?

If you play “The Change Game,” the first thing you need to know are the key players and the best places to play. When you know who and where to target with persuasion and propaganda, change comes at a relatively cheap price. And even though we should have a better view at the local and state level, the game hasn’t drawn much of a crowd.

So the wayward reforms began in the states, went to the federal level with NCLB, and now the ball is back on the states side of the table with NCLB waivers. Next stop? NCLB re-authorization? (Update as of 12/10/15: Yes, the law was changed to being called the Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA but the Outcome-Based foundation DID NOT CHANGE.)

Both state and federal lawmakers are for sale. With NCLB reauthorization done, the ball is in the state capitals.

Both state and federal policy writers are for sale. With NCLB reauthorization done, the ball is in state capitals.

And will the law once again follow the state’s trends – charter schools, fewer teachers, more technology, larger class sizes, and less real support for the public system (which means more privatization)? (Update as of 12/10/15: Answer, yes.)

The public is being played like a ping-pong ball. Now is not the time to sit on the sidelines and watch the ball (or the hammer) drop.

Hear Yourself, Mr. President

Posted on by
7

“Smarter government, “invest in the best ideas,” “partners for progress.”

“It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient—especially when it’s inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us. That will be my goal as President of the United States.” December, 2008.

487817Hear yourself, Mr. President, and listen to a variety of perspectives as you said you would. “The time has come for a president … who will listen to you and learn from you even when we disagree…. I will be that president for America.” — Obama, after winning the Iowa Caucus

What makes “smarter government”?

Hear this: Some of the best ideas come from our own past by way of new and sometimes unlikely messengers. It is time for reflection on your part. What do you see as the proper role of the federal government in education?

“The control and operation of education in America must remain the responsibility of State and local governments and private institutions. This tradition assures our educational system of the freedom, the diversity and the vitality necessary to serve our free society fully.

Let us put to rest the unfounded fears that ‘Federal money means Federal control.’ From The Northwest Ordinance of 1787, originally conceived by Thomas Jefferson, through the Morrill Act of 1862, establishing the still-important and still-independent Land-Grant College system, to the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the Congress has repeatedly recognized its responsibility to strengthen our educational system without weakening local responsibility.” JFK 1965

This was about partnering on way more than early childhood education.

In far too many places, local responsibility has been shirked. We need a return to the “proper Federal role of assistance and leadership.”

The Quest for Clarity

Posted on by
2

How do we have conversations and bring about clarity of ideas when we don’t speak the same language? I’m talking about the language of education reform. It’s too full of codes and triggers.

The general public, the people whose education system we are talking about, can’t possibly be clear about what is really happening to their system. And how can they possibly crack the “code”?

I personally can’t help with deciphering everything but I can help with one item of reform that we should all sincerely try hard to understand – The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. It won’t be easy. As Harold “Doc” Howe II, the commissioner of education in charge of enacting the law, said,…

“I doubt that anyone could have dreamed up a series of education programs more difficult to administer . . . but ESEA was not designed with that in mind.”

ESEA’s design had one goal in mind — providing equal access to quality educational opportunities. It focused on leveling the playing field. And it was going to accomplish this by first addressing the needs of children from low-income families. The policy stood on the principle that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” When we improve the educational opportunity for the under-privileged, we improve opportunity for others in the process.

The “process” is multifaceted and requires more clarity that a blog can provide.

Please don’t stop trying to understand because of a person’s choice of words. “Turnaround” doesn’t ALWAYS mean the Race to the Top ways, “indicators” or even “assessments” don’t ALWAYS mean standardized tests, and even “always” rarely means “always.” You get my drift.

And remember, teachers have been in the trenches of the education reform wars for far too long. They are —understanably—sensitive to buzzwords.

Right now, the right education battle is the one for clarity. Clarity about education policy gives all children a better shot at being fully educated to the limits of their potential.

When someone pulls your trigger, or you find yourself wondering “what is this person talking about?” – my advice is to slow down. Ask questions and listen to the answers. Isn’t that the very thing we would expect from good students?

The Naked Truth

Posted on by
2

I don’t get it! “It” being the fact that the very people who claim to want to save the public education system — from privatization, corporatization, dismantling, and turning it into a confusing, inefficient smorgasbord of charters — don’t want to hear the naked truth. With all this going on around them, they still argue over whether or not the system is broken. Really?

Greed-driven privatizers saw a growing public dissatisfaction with the lack of consistent and reliable quality education. The profiteers saw a weakness; they saw opportunity because of dysfunction and division. The division is greater than ever.

Educators and others who believe that the whole problem has been “created” are ignoring the voices of parents who have had some very bad experiences with the system. When we brush these parents off as complainers or excuse their comments as just a perception problem, we are telling them that their experiences have no value in the discussion. If you later want them to support public schools, how do you think they are going to feel about that?

Do you see what is broken here? Do you see the division?

A PUBLIC system, locally controlled or dictated to from above, is a broken system when it excludes the voice of the public in its decision-making. Any well-run public institution that exists to serve the public’s needs must hear the public’s voice.

We can stop all this wasteful warring by simply agreeing that the country must get back on track to continuously improving all schools. This is where we were in the 30’s, we advanced on the idea in the 70’s, and we lost it after that.

Face the naked truth – we have NEVER had quality education available to all children, all the time — but we can.

Beware: Education and Immigration

Posted on by
2

Will we see “unintended consequences” of “immigration reform” play out in the “education reform” arena?

Things happen for a reason. Sometimes seemingly unrelated things happen.

Once in awhile, you need to put two and two together, and, if you see red flags flying, ask questions especially if bipartisanship on the part of Congress is in the equation.

In the aftermath of 9/11, restrictions on foreign worker visas for temporary (lower-paid) science, technology, engineering, and mathematics-related (STEM) jobs had some large corporations seeing the need to help improve U.S. public education in order to help fill their needs. As part of a grant sponsored by a corporation, I was invited to be part of a team from my district attending a Leadership and Assistance for Science Education Reform (LASER) Institute. It was one of the best learning experiences of my life – very hands-on – so much fun!

So, a decade or so later, I’m riding the Metro in D.C. and strike up a conversation with three young women, engineering interns from Puerto Rico. They all had attended what they described as their top-notch engineering university for their bachelor’s degrees and they talked freely about the costs there versus here. I was thinking it was about a tenth of what it costs our U.S. students.

And then there is the election of Idaho U.S. house representative, Raul Labrador – the winner in my district, twice now. He introduced The American Innovation and Education Act. It is immigration “reform” allowing citizenship to those STEM master’s and doctoral graduates who have a job offer here in the U.S.- to keep their talent here. They say it will be to fill jobs that can’t be filled by Americans. Really? Or is it just one more way to hire for lower wages since these foreign students paid less for their undergraduate work? They can probably afford to take jobs for less pay.

Beware these words:

“Our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity; until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in our workforce rather than expelled from our country.” President Obama

The first part of the sentence is true to the principle upon which this country was founded, welcoming immigration. The second part??? I don’t know; they are two different things in my mind. Is this picking winners and losers?

Are these students the more privileged of other countries and already have a head start – in the competition with our own students? Will there then be any reason to genuinely help the public education system, as I believe LASER was trying to? Eyes and ears should be on this one as it passes through Congress.