Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education

Growing the Next Generation of Data Scientists

Note: Today’s guest post comes to us courtesy of Sriram Mohan, an associate professor of computer science and software engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Terre Haute, Ind. 

Data, more than ever before is the lifeblood of every organization. From media companies to retail stores, data allows organizations to differentiate themselves from the competition. Whether used in market research or in cost reduction efforts, organizations must leverage data to be competitive, and for the most part, they now enjoy access to all the data anyone could ever need.

What most organizations today don’t have ready access to are data scientists who are trained to turn all of their data into actionable insights. Gartner predicts that by 2015, about 4.4 million data science jobs will be available, and only a third of them will be filled. Is there a shortage of people with the requisite combination of programming, data management skills and statistical and mathematical ability?

Yes.  Can we in academia develop more of those people? Absolutely. But we are going to need the help of industry to accomplish that.

As universities nationwide define and create new undergraduates and graduate data science programs, industry can help to make our programs more interesting and relevant for students. We will also benefit from greater access to industry data sets and the latest Big Data technologies.

Data science, by its nature, is abstract, making it difficult to attract initial student interest. But in the real world, data science is applied in many concrete, exciting ways that we can bring into our classrooms. The perceived gap between academia and industry is why I took a sabbatical this past year to work with Avalon Consulting, a Big Data consultancy headquartered near Dallas.

The experience has proved invaluable, however, most, if not all, of what I learned came through hands-on experience in developing solutions. To make data science concepts more interesting and tangible for students, we should provide them with similar hands-on opportunities. To that end, companies should organize contests for students that allow them to work on actual problems with real industry data sets (similar to the Netflix Prize). My university offers students a capstone project that challenges them to solve real-world problems provided through organizations such as Avalon and the U.S. Armed Forces. Such Partnerships are a good start, but to educate data scientists, we need to do more.

Academia needs to stay up to date with the latest Big Data tool chains. Those ecosystems are evolving rapidly, but most of the development happens on the industry side – so much so that academia often finds itself left behind. If we want our students to be aware of the latest changes when they graduate, we must foster a better exchange of technological knowledge between academics and industry.

Industry typically uses summer internships to expose students to the latest technologies. Such experiences could be extended to faculty as well. My colleagues at Rose-Hulman used industry experiences in the past to stay current in technologies such as Google web frameworks, Android development and other programming languages.

Longer- term experiences, such as my training sabbatical, should also be considered. My experience led directly to development of new courses in Hadoop and modern database paradigms. The time I spent working in the ever-changing world of Hadoop and NoSQL databases at Avalon was critical to those courses’ development. Given the rapid pace at which Big Data technologies are now advancing, it is imperative that academia and industry find additional ways to collaborate to better prepare our students for the workplace.

Once our students enjoy greater access to industry data sets and the latest Big Data technologies, we can bring more real-world problems, solutions and stories into the classroom and generate greater interest in data science. The future for these students is bright, but industry collaboration is required to fully meet its demands.

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

3 Developments on No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. Fifteen years have blown by since the last time No Child Left Behind was updated. That’s a significant period of time when we are talking about the treatment of our students in every school of the nation.

But just because No Child Left Behind has not been updated does not mean that it has been forgotten. In fact, there are some relatively recent developments. Let’s take a look at three of them.

  1. “No Child” Waivers extended to 2018. The Department of Education has released a letter stating the new guidance for securing waivers from No Child Left Behind, President George W. Bush’s education reform law, for three or even four more years. The waivers stop states from being tied to the rigorous expectations of Bush-led Adequate Yearly Progress, but in turn, each state must adhere to education reforms encouraged by the Obama administration.

The DOE informed chief state school officers that they would be eligible to apply to renew their waivers through the 2017-2018 school year.

The Bush-era law has been due an update since 2007. In 2012, the administration began granting waivers to state if they met certain requirement such as adopting college- and career ready standards and developing teacher and principal evaluation systems based largely on how much students learn.

Currently, 43 states and the District of Columbia have received waivers from No Child Left Behind, which allow them to forego certain accountability requirements law in exchange for implementing education reforms backed by the Obama administration.

Some education advocacy groups were pleased with the emphasis placed on ensuring states have a plan to improve student achievement for all groups of students — including students with disabilities, those from low-income homes and English language learners — and prohibiting states from giving schools high scores on state accountability reports if they have large achievement gaps.

The requirements also sparked some widespread criticism across the political spectrum.

  1. The Senate attempted to rewrite NCLB. According to The Washington Post, No Child Left Behind faced a 600-page rewrite. The Senate HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) worked on adjusting language and amendments that would seriously alter the bill’s impact.

Some of the revisions include a pivot towards allowing states to assume control over how teachers are evaluated and would drop the federal definition “of a highly qualified teacher.”

The bill  also gives additional support for charter schools by providing “incentives for states to adopt stronger charter school authorizing practices.”

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. But this time seems to be different. The bill has a bipartisan tone and any amendment that did not have support from Democrats and Republicans was withdrawn during the bill’s mark up.

Yet those amendments will likely appear again when the full Senate has an opportunity to vote on the measure. Republican Senator Tim Scott has an idea  to funnel federal money meant to help poor students into a voucher system that any child attending a high-poverty school may use to transfer into a new school district.

His amendment failed in committee but he will reintroduce on the Senate floor.

Other inclusions and provisions included are an update to federal testing requirements, the peer review process, and an alteration to funding for early childhood learning programs.

  1. The Senate approved the changes to the law in July, a move that finally sets up negotiations with the U.S. House on updating the federal law on education.

“The Senate-passed measure would prohibit the federal government from setting performance targets or requiring specific standards such as the Common Core curriculum. It would make states responsible for establishing systems of accountability, including how much weight should be put on testing to determine whether schools are succeeding.”

According to ReviewJournal.com, the bill faces critics that believe it doesn’t reach far enough to help “minorities and low-income students.”

It is highly unlikely that the Senate’s bill will end up being passed as the final version as there is too much wrangling left to do with the House.

But besides that point, what may catch the eye of educators as they follow along with the progress of No Child Left Behind is how heavily it leans on allowing states the make final decisions on education.

Instead of receiving direction from the federal government, each state may end up having the ability to create policy surrounding how it decides to approach education. If you think about it, that is a scary prospect and would go completely against the idea of national standards.

Even that, though, is sure to change before the final version actually passes.

What do you think of the changes being made to No Child Left Behind?

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Policy & Reform

Public schools last frontier to equality?

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest column by Constance Evelyn

America’s landmark legislative actions illuminate a core mission of providing a free and appropriate education for all students attending public schools.  The common thread among these legal precedents is the objective to ensure equitable access to high quality instruction cementing literacy as the most basic human rights principle.  Inherently, is the notion that the sanctity of childhood is precious and should be protected.  These virtues are essentially upheld in Brown vs. Board of Education, PL94-142, and The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) as indicators that as a country we value the future of all children.  Indeed that we understand the very fate of our democratic nation depends on a passionate dedication that public education is possibly the last bastion in ensuring equal access to becoming learned.

Philosophically, I’m aware that my perspective is based in my life experience as perhaps many others may attest. Bias is personal; and mine is partly borne from being the only mixed race, foster child attending our local elementary school.  I should say that graduating as the valedictorian did not help an already tenuous situation.  Flagrantly displaying intelligence in my neighborhood was not necessarily smart.  And fortunately, I learned this rather quickly.  However, achieving at the highest levels was a non negotiable in my household, and therefore, my grades, demeanor, and in particular the preferential treatment I received by teachers told the true story.  I was mercilessly bullied, chased home from school, and called hurtful names.  The most frequent tag was ‘white girl’.  I often recounted to my mother that this part of the verbal attacks was particularly painful because she taught me that it communicated more about the ignorance of my offenders than any other intentions they may have had.  After years of this harassment and the school’s suggested remedy of having me skip a grade as solution for my being young, black, and gifted, my mother came up with a new plan.  At eleven years old, I was enlisted in a clandestine scheme that would forever change the trajectory of my life.   Mom decided that a better response to challenge my intellect was sending me across town to the high performing intermediate school.  It took me almost two hours in one direction to access high quality education in 6th grade.  There was no ‘skipping’ except for the three bus transfers involved in my travels.

Many things astounded me within a week’s time at my new school.  When I walked into sixth grade, the students said out loud, ‘Who’s that black girl?’ Secondly, I was the only African-American student in this class and the other two tracks that had been devoted to high performing students.  Soon there were many other observations I made, but the most startling of my discoveries happened on my ride home from school on the ‘special’ bus.  There actually were other African-American students in the sixth grade attending this school!  As I mingled with them, I realized that many of them were in the same class, 6-8.  When they asked what class I was in, I changed the subject.  I was even ‘smarter’ by now, and I knew that I should let them get to know me, before I let them identify what kind of student I was.

As public school educators, we must regard our charge as both a moral imperative and obligation.  This commitment will foster a clear understanding of what we have come to believe is our purpose for serving students.  Our decisions about this are usually equal to our assets.  Essentially, the pledge is straightforward. High-quality educators have a mindset that warily recognizes the menacing nature of mediocrity and the sustenance of low expectations.  A good teacher approaches her work with a sincere faithfulness in response to the pledge that, all children should have a right to a sound education.  In turn, our confidence in all students’ ability to achieve at the highest levels emanates from this respect.

And then there is the case of leadership.  Great leadership should propel the work of removing barriers and creating multiple pathways for all children to achieve success.  No child should have to leave her neighborhood to access a rigorous education.  Nor should his education be denigrated by tracks that lead to an erroneous certificate of completion.  It is unconscionable that any young person would necessarily travel four hours a day to forge their entitlement to good teachers, appropriate curricular resources, and coursework enabling them to open doors that would have otherwise been unapproachable.  And no American, should have to know the shame and guilt of never learning to read.  This is the fundamental promise of public education.

As a Superintendent, I am one of hundreds of school leaders faced with the many challenges presented by capped budgets and, notwithstanding, the most economically and racially segregated public school systems we’ve been charged to manage in recent history. Simply put, doing more with less has never been this harsh.  The urgency of this status is magnified in the knowledge that sixty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, resource allocation formulas remain broken and, at least in New York State, the hardened perpetuation of outcomes for underprivileged students is grossly predictable.

The challenge for everyone involved in the education of children is commitment.  Unwavering support for the idea that we must all contribute to a common value system that conveys high standards for student and educator achievement, organizational and individual growth, and the underlying truth, that a ‘good’ school can always be better.

________________

Constance Evelyn has a Bachelors of Arts in Psychology from the College of Staten Island, a Masters of Science degree in Special Education PreK-12, and Supervision and Administrative degree from Long Island University. She currently serves as Superintendent of Schools in Auburn, NY.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Parental Involvement

Are parents missing from schools or are they being pushed out?

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest column by Regina Paul

Dr. Matthew Lynch’s “Parents: The Missing Ingredient in K–12 Success” in the September 24 issue of The Edvocate is insightful as far as it goes, though that is not far enough.  Dr. Lynch writes, “As K-12 academic standards become more rigorous, parents are becoming an even more integral piece of a student’s success.”  Yes, most of us policymakers and advocates would agree that parents should understand what their children are expected to learn in school and should be engaged in helping them learn it.  That goes for parents with college educations, parents with high school educations, and parents with grade school educations.  That goes for parents with great jobs, parents with not-great jobs, and parents with no jobs.  In fact, as we prove time and again, all parents can help teach their children.  

Some three decades ago when the Cleveland Public Schools were the subject of a long Court-ordered desegregation case, we worked on behalf of the Federal District Court to establish new reading curriculum objectives for grades 1 through 9 and to develop new districtwide tests to see whether children were learning the new objectives.  It sounds so old-fashioned now, but it worked.  Reading improved, but not just because of what teachers did in the classroom.

Reading improved because we sent the new reading objectives home to every family of every child in those nine grades—the actual objectives that teachers taught every day.  On the back of the Reading Skills Checklist (there was one for each grade), we had an important tagline—Remember:  The schools cannot do it all alone.  We followed up the parent checklists with Reading at Home:  A Parent’s Guide to Helping Children Read (there was one for each grade), which explained each objective, gave some easy-to-do activities for parents to use to teach it, and gave a sample test question from the districtwide test.  We sent a parent handbook to every family of every child in those nine grades.  

Many people told us that parents in Cleveland were way too busy to help their children learn to read.  Many people told us that parents in Cleveland wouldn’t be able to help their children learn to read even if they wanted to.  Many people were wrong on both counts.

When we did the same thing a few years later in the Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools—this time with parent checklists and parent handbooks for language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, and health objectives for each marking period—we got the same pushback.  People told us that the parents who still had children in the public schools after desegregation were just not able to do what we imagined.  They told us we were wasting the district’s money.  They were wrong again.

When the school district was late sending out Savannah’s parent checklists at the beginning of the next school year, the principals said their phones were ringing off the hook, with parents calling to say, “Where is my checklist?  How do you expect me to help my child this year when you haven’t sent me my checklist?”  Standardized test scores improved so much that the testing company rescored the tests; gains like that were never seen, the testing company said.

So, I know that parents can make a big difference—maybe all the difference.  But here is a problem I have run into in some of the hundred school districts I have worked with:  Some schools and school districts are staffed with professionals who would rather that parents just stayed out of the way.  They are willing for parents to come to back-to-school night in the fall, to take part in fundraisers, to sign homework before it is turned in or tests after they are graded, and to attend twice-yearly parent-teacher conferences.  But are they willing to give parents any power, any say about how things are done?

Are they willing to let parents have a voice in the curriculum, for example?  Not long ago, I attended a statewide PTA convention.  The Common Core and its matching statewide tests were all most people were talking about.  Yet, there was not one workshop session about the Common Core, the tests, or any curriculum topic.  The sessions were about how to get more PTA members, how to conduct meetings, and how to raise money—all useful topics, but far less important than what kids are being taught.  The exhibit hall was full of parents with misinformation about the Common Core and the tests being used to measure them, but there was not a workshop to be found.  Who was benefitting from the parents’ confusion?

My question is this:  Are the parents missing or are they being pushed out?  Do they even realize that they are often being held at arm’s length?  Could they do more if they were invited in?  Would schools be better if parents had a real voice in more school decisions, if they wielded real power and not just a rubber stamp?

One clear path to increased parent power is for parents to run for local school boards.  As someone who has worked with and trained literally thousands of school board members nationwide, I can honestly say that I think there is no nobler calling.  I continue to be amazed at how smart and perceptive most school boards are when their members are working together to improve schools.  Parents, if you haven’t attended a school board meeting lately—or ever—it is time.  Watch the way the board handles its power.

And when you go, ask the board to discuss its policies on parent involvement.  Look at how parents in your school district are encouraged and expected to engage with teachers and administrators.  Are there structures in place that put any power in the hands of parents and that give parents a real voice in important decisions?  If there are policies that call for real engagement, then you are lucky.  Make sure you take advantage of them—in the best possible way.

________________

Regina H. Paul is president of Policy Studies in Education (PSE), a nonprofit organization with more than 40 years of experience in working with schools, local and state boards of education, state and federal education agencies, foundations, professional associations, and colleges to improve education.  Ms. Paul is the co-host of NYCollegeChat, a weekly podcast for parents about negotiating the world of college, and the co-author of a new book, How To Find the Right College:  A Workbook for Parents of High School Students.  She blogs regularly at ParentChatwithRegina.org.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

These 3 Studies on Education Results May Shock You

Studies are a dime a dozen these days, but there are still plenty that force you to pay attention. Let’s talk about three education related ones that just might surprise you.

  1. Being uneducated is more dangerous than chain smoking. According to the Post’s  review of a study published in PLOS ONE, “more than 145,000 deaths could have been prevented in 2010 if adults who did not finish high school had earned a GED or high school diploma – comparable to the mortality rates of smoking.”

That’s staggering considering smoking and education aren’t necessarily congruent.

For decades Americans have been warned about the horrors of smoking because of the adverse effects that it has on one’s health. While having an education has always been synonymous with success, not sure if anyone, or any study for that matter, has ever gone this far to connect poor health, or death related to poor health, to lacking a proper education.

The study, according to the Post, doesn’t directly correlate poor education with death. Rather it counts death as “an estimate of education’s impact on mortality, and do not indicate direct causality.”

While this study doesn’t directly state that failure to attain an education will result in death, it does portend that death is a consequence of one’s failure to gain an education. Make sense?

This type of information is multi-faceted because of how far it stretches. Personal responsibility plays a role; the government has an act in this play; the private sector and many other areas are also complicit.

How we move along with the information posted from this story will be interesting as well. Because, maybe more than anything, this shows just how stark the consequences are for our society if we fail to properly educate our children.

The results may be death.

  1. The Ivy Leagues may not be worth it. Saving a year’s worth of salary for one year of higher education at Harvard may yield great career results for some but that may not be true for all.

According to U.S. News and World Report, a recent Brookings Study shows that “other schools may either not cost as much and yield a similar salary and success of loan repayment, or they may cost about the same but generate higher earnings potential.”

Harvard is a small sample size and represents a limited portion of the zenith of college costs. But, in essence, the study shows that one may earn just as much for the duration of their career by attending a college with cheaper tuition.

That’s not a knock against Harvard as students, and their parents, are free to choose any school that matches with their educational goals.

This is an alternative that students have always taken. Take Ronald Nelson, a student who was accepted  to all eight Ivy League schools.

Instead of choosing a prestigious Ivy League school, and the tuition that came along with it, Nelson went with the University of Alabama.

He said that Alabama “offered him a full scholarship and admittance into their selective honors program.” Nelson also wants to save for medical school and states that going to an Ivy League higher education institution would not allow him that luxury.

Still–students and parents have to make the decision that’s best for them. Rising costs of higher education will likely force more students to choose cheaper schools over ones with higher tuition rates.

  1. Closing the achievement gap would increase the GDP by $10 trillion by 2050.

Talk about boosting the economy.

One study after another has shown a wide educational achievement gap between the poorest and wealthiest children in the United States. This prompted researchers at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a group focused on narrowing inequality, to study and conclude that if America could improve education performance for the average student, everyone would benefit.

The U.S.  ranks behind more than 33 advanced industrialized countries that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development when it comes to math and science scores. The study used scores from the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment, a test used around the world to measure and compare achievement.

America ranks behind countries such as Korea, Poland and Slovenia in the 24th spot.

Elimination of the achievement gap in the U.S. will boost the economy — but this requires raising the country’s average score to 1,080.  The average combined score for the U.S. is 978, and the O.E.C.D average is 995.

If the U.S. could move up a few notches to number 19 – so the average American score would match the O.E.C.D. average – it would add 1.7 percent to the nation’s gross domestic product over the next 35 years, according to estimates by the Washington Center. This could lead to approximately $900 billion in higher government revenue.

If the U.S. scores matched Canada, number 7 of the O.E.C.D. scale, America’s gross domestic product would increase by 6.7 percent. After taking inflation into account, this is a cumulative increase of $10 trillion by 2050.

The achievement gap in America is a pressing issue, and it is certainly something we have to hone in on to eliminate. I hope to see our country’s O.E.C.D. ranking improve in the near future so we can narrow, and eventually close, the achievement gap and benefit from the boost in the economy too.

What do you think of these bizarre study results? Do any of these statistics surprise you?

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

The Principal’s Role in Improving Student Learning

Increased attention at both the local and national levels on improving student learning has resulted in a growing expectation in some states and districts for principals to be effective instructional leaders. Consider these statistics: nearly 7,000 students drop out of U.S. high schools every day and, every year approximately 1.2 million teenagers leave the public school system without a diploma or an adequate education. There are 2,000 high schools in America in which less than 60% of students graduate within four years after entering ninth grade.

The situation is not much brighter for students who do earn a high school diploma, and enter a two –year or four-year institutions. In community colleges, approximately 40% of freshmen (and approximately 20% in public, four-year institutions) are in need of basic instruction in reading, writing, or mathematics before they can perform in college-level courses. It is vital that principals advocate for these students and provide leadership to reverse this appalling educational outcome.

The failure of many public school districts to provide the working conditions that well-trained principals need to prosper is often a central reason for these ongoing graduation and future preparation issues. By having access to resources and being committed to school reform, principals are able to work with teachers to create school environments that facilitate excellence in learning.

The issues that principals need to work on with teachers include aligning instruction with a standards-based curriculum to provide a good measure of achievement, and improving both student learning and classroom instruction by effectively organizing resources. Principals must use sound hiring practices, ensure professional development is available at their schools, and keep abreast of issues that may influence the quality of teaching in schools.

While having good leaders in place is crucial, it is not always enough. If principals don’t have supportive work environments for their improvement efforts, then even the most talented and best-trained individuals may be discouraged by the challenges they face on a daily basis. Districts where no major high school improvements have been made don’t have a cohesive agenda for improvement. Such an agenda would specify clear goals, research-based practices, improvement-focused accountability, and strategies to support implementation. In practice, schools without such an agenda can often be characterized by disjointed actions. Many of the principals in such schools report that they are not involved in defining existing instructional issues in their schools.

The district (or state) makes these decisions , meaning that principals have little ownership of their problems or the proposed solutions to them. They also report having little support or motivation to find solutions, and that they do not feel there is a well-designed system of improvement. Rather, they feel that “improvements” are undertaken in a series of random acts.

When decision-making is shared, leadership roles are redefined at all levels. Principals are supported by district staff members, not blocked by them. District staff members make frequent visits to schools to provide coaching, technical assistance, and staff development. Teachers benefit from continuous professional development;principals have sufficient autonomy and resources to engage and develop staff. Professional development may target groups or individual teachers, and the teachers are given opportunities to work together on curriculum and instruction.

In contrast, many districts focus on educational management instead of educational leadership. The support provided to improve instruction in these districts is not grounded in research on effective teaching. In addition, these districts lack a systemic approach to improvement and fail to provide principals with the guidance and support they require to reform processes and put effective instructional practices into place.

Many principals spend much of their time finding ways to work around the district office, rather than with them. To obtain the support they need, they often decide to avoid hiring protocols and develop “underground” relationships with individual staff in the district office. Supportive district leaders understand the challenging work principals must do, as in many cases they have been successful principals themselves.

These district leaders support principals’ focus on instruction and acknowledge that priority by publicly focusing on curriculum and instruction in school board and superintendents’ meetings. Rather than micromanaging staff, they routinely involve school and teacher-leaders in developing and using tools such as walk-throughs, pacing guides, and research-based instructional practices.

The best districts have developed a collaborative “lattice” approach between the central office and the school. This entails districts providing good principals with the support they need to enable their schools to succeed. When given the space by the district to focus on improving their schools, principals can then support their teachers to do the same. The focus of districts must be on raising standards and achievement, and improving instruction by supporting and enabling principals to develop their ability as instructional leaders.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

Understanding Strategy and Strategic Leadership

Strategy leadership involves decision-making aimed at shaping the direction of the organization. In a school, creating strategy takes time, three to five years and beyond. Strategy also includes considering broader core issues and themes for development in the school, instead of day-to-day issues.
Strategic planning is held to be one among a number of development approaches. While strategy can be a framework to set future direction and action, it can also be used to judge current activities. A strategically focused school is educationally effective in the short term, but also has a clear set of processes to translate the core purpose and vision into an excellent educational provision that is sustainable over time.

Through strategic leadership, this broad activity is linked to shorter-term operational planning, responses to immediate events, and the long-term strategic direction. In simple terms, strategic leadership defines the vision and moral purpose of the school and translates them into the desired action.

In their analysis of data from interviews with leaders possessing high-level strategic skills, Davies, Davies, and Ellison (2005) split their research findings into two categories – what strategic leaders do and what characteristics they possess. Their analysis established that strategic leaders participate in five main activities.

1. They Set the Direction of the School

This activity relates to the traditional definition of strategy as a pattern of decisions that set the direction of the organization. Strategy is the actual framework of choices that is relied upon to determine the nature and direction of an organization. The following summarizes what strategic leaders do:

• They set the direction of the school.
• Dissatisfied with the present, they challenge and question..
• They turn strategy into action.
• They prioritize their own strategic thinking and learning by re-framing their understanding and that of others.
• They align the people and the organization with the strategy.
• They display strategic wisdom based on a clear value system.
• They know when to intervene.
• They network.
• They develop strategic capabilities within the school.
• They have high-quality people skills.

2. They Translate Strategy into Action

While most schools establish plans, few translate them into action. Strategic leaders are good “completer-finishers.” They were capable of not only “seeing ahead” but also “seeing it through.” This characteristic of strategic leaders is born of their ability to focus on a limited number of issues and move forward on those issues.

It is key that a leader be seen as a person who not only builds a sense of purpose and direction in the school, but also as one who translates them into reality.

There is a danger where strategy is seen as a desirable activity, and in consequence so much time is spent designing strategic frameworks and plans. Thus the question that emerges is: “How do we translate these frameworks into the capacity to move toward better outcomes in the school?” A strategic leader uses his or her strategic ability to translate strategic vision into action.

3. They Align the People, the Organization, and the Strategy

It is vital that school leaders build in-depth capacity within the school to deliver the strategy. Davies (2003) suggested a four-stage approach that, first, articulates the strategy in oral, written, or structural ways; second, builds a common understanding through shared experiences; third, creates a shared mental image of the future through dialogue; and fourth, defines the desired outcomes.

4. They Determine Effective Strategic Intervention Points

An important aspect of strategic leadership is timing. Knowing when to make a change is as important as the change itself. This critical issue arises from rational analysis or leadership intuition. Discerning when both external circumstances and internal conditions can be effectively managed toward successful change is significant in effective leadership.

The issue of strategic timing goes hand in hand with the concept of strategic abandonment. The issue that comes up is that of differentiating between abandonment of things that are not working well and abandoning those that were satisfactory in pursuit.

A key ability of strategic leaders is not only knowing when to make a change, but knowing how to free up organizational space to have the capacity to move into a new strategic direction.

5. They Develop Strategic Capabilities in the School

A good example of long-term competency is the fundamental understanding of learning and the varying needs of students. Strategic leaders agree that more focus should be on the development of long-term abilities.
If leaders develop strategic abilities, they would achieve more, in the form of a reflective-learning culture in teaching staff, a no-blame problem-solving approach, and a deeper understanding of learning.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, list, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

These 3 Advancements in Early Childhood Education Could Change Society

Even though education should begin as early as possible, there are only 15 states and the District of Columbia that require Kindergarten by law, and there are actually six states that do not even require public schools to offer Kindergarten. That is not to say anything about pre-K and preschool programs! Nonetheless, many schools and states across the nation are working to make early childhood education a priority. Here are three advancements in early childhood education that are simply game-changers for our society.

  1. Early childhood education in Michigan would slash the crime rate. By putting more money into early childhood education in Detroit, the crime rate would go down, according to a recent study.

Jose Diaz of the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation conducted the study “Cost Savings of School Readiness per Additional At-Risk Child in Detroit and Michigan” where the findings appear.  The research was commissioned by the Max M. and Marjorie S. Fisher Foundation and it suggests that investing in early childhood education could cut Detroit’s crime rate and save taxpayers in the state millions of dollars, according to a story on the study by The Detroit News. The story says that Detroit taxpayers would save around $96,000 for each child who was enrolled in a quality early education program and Michigan taxpayers would save $47,000 for each child.

The figure was derived from adding cost savings to special education, public assistance, childcare subsidies, the victims of crime and the criminal justice system. The majority of the savings would come from the criminal justice system.

These findings prompted Diaz and law enforcement officials to call on the Legislature to invest more dollars in early childhood education to help halt the alarmingly high crime rate in Detroit.

At the present time, only 4 percent of prisoners in Michigan under the age of 20 years old graduated from high school.

Learning begins at birth, which is why early education programs are so important. These programs provide an integral foundation for young minds and prepare children for success at school and in life. At-risk children who don’t receive high quality early education are more likely to drop out of school and more likely to be arrested for a violent crime.

I think investing in early childhood education programs is a cost-effective way to promote positive development of children and get to the root causes of high crime in the city. I hope that Detroit can see early childhood education as an initiative that could finally pay off and cut crime.

  1. More Native Americans could go to college with some early childhood investment. The Ké’ Early Childhood Initiative convenes today in Albuquerque and will bring together 45 representatives from four American Indian tribal colleges who will discuss strategies for better early childhood education and family involvement in the community.

The meeting is sponsored by the American Indian College Fund’s Early Childhood Education program which attempts to “strengthen the role of Native families in early learning opportunities, building culturally-responsive programming with families and tribal partners.” Specifically, the representatives will look at ways the American Indian community can better prepare children for long-term academic success, targeting learning opportunities from birth to 8 years of age.

In education circles, we talk a lot about the way black and Latino students struggle in K-12 classrooms through a combination of cultural circumstances and inequality. The reality is that American Indian K-12 students are the most at-risk of any minority group for either dropping out of high school or never making it to college. The American Indian Fund reports that American Indians who earn a bachelor’s degree represent less than 1 percent of all of these degree earners. It is not shocking then to realize that 28 percent of American Indians lived in poverty compared to 15 percent of the general population, according to 2010 U.S. Census figures. A college education opens doors for a higher quality of life.

The path to college starts long before the application process, of course.

Early childhood education has such an enormous impact on how students fare throughout their school careers. It’s the reason why President Obama has called on more states to implement universal preschool programs and has ushered more funding to Head Start and other early childhood education initiatives. There is a reason why an organization with “college” in the title is going back to early childhood to strengthen the potential of future students in the American Indian community. Better quality early childhood education, and families that are on board with supporting kids through the K-12 process, will lead to an uptick of interest in college degrees and a higher percentage of college graduates too.

  1. Vermont is set to receive $33.4 million for pre-K programs from the Education Department. Vermont has been awarded $7.3 million in what is anticipated to be a $33.4 million grant for pre-K programs at public schools and Head Start agencies across the state.

In 2014, President Obama announced that he is fulfilling his promise to expand early education for thousands of children with a $1 billion investment in programs for the country’s littlest students.

Vermont was one of 18 states awarded Education Department grants to create or expand high-quality preschool programs. A total of 36 states had applied for the money.

Governor Peter Shumlin announced, “This is great news for Vermont, our children and our economic future. Vermont is one of the top states in America when it comes to early childhood education, and we are committed to being the best.”

Last year, 28 percent of America’s four-year-olds were enrolled in state-funded preschool programs. The new $1 billion investment in learning programs is for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers in lower-income communities.

The education summit also highlighted a series of 60-second public service announcements that focus on various aspects of early childhood education. Actors Jennifer Garner and Julianne Moore and singers Shakira and John Legend all narrated a part and conclude with the tagline, “When we invest in them, we invest in us.”

I am thrilled about the $1 billion dollars that is dedicated towards early education and want to congratulate Vermont, as well as the other recipients of the grants. Of course I am an advocate for programs that help students of all ages, but I firmly believe focusing on our nation’s youngest students is irreplaceable.

What do you think an investment in early childhood education could do for our country?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, HBCU's, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch,

Beyond Athletics: Three Other Ways to Recruit Minority College Students

We’ve all heard the fairytale stories before: a minority kid from a tough neighborhood gets a shot at a college career because he or she is recruited for a particular sport. Not only do these athletes get to show off their physical talent, but they get a college degree and a more promising future in the process. Listen, I’m all for athletes landing athletic scholarships if it means that more minority college students earn a college degree. But I also know that stories like these, while intentionally heartwarming and media friendly, do not represent the vast majority of minorities with college aspirations. Athletes get a lot of the attention, but if colleges and universities are truly committed to diverse populations of students then they need to put the steps in place to make it easier for all minorities to earn a college degree.

A few of the areas where I think universities could improve on minority programs and recruitment include:

Arts recruiting.

Just as scouts go out and recruit the best basketball or football players for teams, the same should happen with minority students who show promise in the arts. Theater, musical performance, sculpting, painting, film studies and even creative writing – minority students who have talent in these areas should be given attention and invited to college programs. Why arts programs over more practical careers in STEM or healthcare? Minority students with arts passions often feel forced to abandon them in favor of immediate jobs or things that are simply not their passions. Arts careers are considered “silly” for white peers, but almost irresponsible for minority students. This should change and colleges should take the lead on it.

Mentorship programs.

There are some minority students who come from a home where one or both parents are college graduates but those odds are lower than their white peers. All first-generation college students face different challenges and expectations than those for whom college acceptance, success and graduation has always been expected. During the recruiting process, colleges should tout their mentorships programs and make sure minority and first-generation students are aware of the support they will receive when they decide to attend. As much as possible, these mentorship programs should work on matching students based on race, gender and career industry – though aligning all of that is admittedly difficult. Using the same mentor for several students is an option. Particularly in the case of minority students, mentors are generally overjoyed to be able to help a young person succeed. Colleges just need to be asking for that help and then expressing that it exists to their potential minority students.

Creative financial aid.

College is expensive and for students who have to pay for it on their own while supporting themselves, it can be overwhelming. There are no shortage of loans that students can take out to help finance their college careers, but saddling them with debt before they even set foot in the work world can be a recipe for disaster. Colleges that truly want a diverse population of students who succeed after graduation should look into adding more minority scholarships. The “pay it forward” college payment system that is implemented in certain states like Oregon should be considered for wider adoption, especially when it comes to attracting minority and first-generation students to college campuses. College does not need to be completely free in order for more minorities to attend and graduate. It does need to be affordable, though, and that takes some thinking out the normal financial aid box.

Athletes who earn college degrees are certainly inspirational but they are only a small portion of the minorities who want the type of education a college or university can provide. If we really want equality on our college campuses then it will take more than touting the success of our minority football, basketball and track stars. We need to find ways to translate that same success across interests and disciplines, and to give those students the support they need to truly succeed. Part of that process is to make college more affordable for all students. Another piece of that puzzle is targeting areas that are often overshadowed by athletics, like the arts. By understanding the true picture of what potential minority college students are like, colleges and universities can get more of them on campus or enrolling online.

How do you think more minority college students can be recruited?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, EdTech & Innovation, Teachers

Goalbook publishes white paper on universally designed instruction

5-Step Instructional Design Process makes learning rigorous and accessible for all learners

SAN MATEO, Calif. (September 22, 2015) – Goalbook has published a white paper, Different Paths Up the Same Mountain, which outlines a 5-Step Instructional Design Process for educators to apply in the classroom.

The new state and Common Core standards were intended to prepare all students to be college and career ready in the 21st century.  This transition has occurred as general education classrooms have increased in diversity, including students with special needs and English Language Learners. Diversity and variability is the norm – not the exception – in the US K-12 classroom.  School and district leaders across the country are adapting their instructional approach to address the diversity of learners present in classrooms.

Rob Neu, Superintendent of Oklahoma City Public Schools, states, “At Oklahoma City Public Schools, we are committed to providing our diverse student population a wide range of opportunities for learning and experiences that prepare them well for the future.  Increasing academic rigor is a central pillar of our district strategic plan.”

Neu observed, “Goalbook’s white paper articulates a clear approach for how educators can design instruction that provides access to high levels of learning for all students.”

Research organizations such as the National Center on Universal Design for Learning have emphasized the importance of acknowledging learner variability: the idea that there is no such thing as the “average student.”  Different Paths Up the Same Mountain presents actionable steps for educators to incorporate best practices from pedagogical research into instructional design.

“Instructional practice is the key to student success.  Our 5-Step Instructional Design Process unifies two important frameworks for educators, standards-based instruction and Universal Design for Learning,” states Daniel Jhin Yoo, Founder of Goalbook and author of the white paper.

Yoo puts forward, “Every student can learn – planning instruction for a diverse group of students doesn’t require multiple lesson plans – instead, it’s about offering students multiple pathways for success.  We help teachers make this instructional approach easier to apply.”

The full publication is available for download at www.goalbookapp.com/differentpaths.

About Goalbook

Goalbook empowers teachers to transform instruction so that ALL students succeed.  Goalbook’s Toolkit and Pathways blend pedagogical research and intuitive technology into its easy-to-use online tool and leading professional development for educators.  The team partners with over 500 district customers in 45 states, working closely with district and school leaders to create scalable and sustainable change to instructional practice. Founded by former teachers and administrators, Daniel Jhin Yoo and Justin Su, Goalbook was part of ImagineK12’s inaugural class and the first company funded through New Schools’ Ed-Tech Seed Fund.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch, OpEducation

Why Colleges Need Athletes as Minority Mentors

When it comes to getting more minorities into college, and then graduating them, there are a lot of different ideas out there. Stronger high school recruiting, better guidance programs for first-generation students, and more minority faculty members are just a few of the ways to make college campuses more diverse to the benefit and success of everyone.

Having strong minority role models as mentors is another, and perhaps the most powerful idea of them all. Successful people who look like the students a particular college or university is trying to graduate, and who come from a similar background, can leave a lasting impression and inspire students to similar heights.

One particular group of minority mentors that I feel should be getting even more involved in the minority recruiting and mentorship process are student athletes. Whether still athletes at the school, or alumni, this particular subset of minority mentors should play an important role in graduating other traditionally disadvantaged students.

Maurice Clarett as mentor

One great example of a college-athlete-turned-minority-mentor is The Ohio State University alum Maurice Clarett. The former college running back has taken on a new role as both a cautionary tale, and inspiration, to other young people. If his name sounds familiar, it is because his claim to fame was not just on the football field or as a national champion in the sport. Clarett served four years in prison for aggravated robbery and carrying a concealed weapon. It was behind bars that he started reading up on personal development and ways to grow beyond a delinquent and even ways to rise above his association with being a football star.

Today he talks with other college athletes about things like personal responsibility and being accountable for actions, no matter what their upbringing. Clarett has visited athletes at Alabama, Notre dame, Tennessee and Mississippi State. He recently spoke with the national champion Florida State football team and acknowledged that many minority college athletes come from home environments that leave them “undeveloped” and without the skills needed to function successfully in life. Taking advantage of the resources available on college campuses and determining to be better than life’s circumstances are two lessons that Clarett tries to pass along to the people he mentors.

A story like Clarett’s is so much more powerful than the seemingly-empty warnings from adults on college campuses, many of whom look nothing like the students they are trying to influence and have no shared life experiences. By finding ways to tap into the stories of athletes, colleges can give their students a more impactful way of committing to success.

Mirroring smart mentorship

Traditionally getting into college on an athletic scholarship has been a way that minorities have been able to break onto college campuses, particularly if they came from educational environments that simply did not offer the same resources as advantaged peers. I’d argue that getting these athletes to graduation day is simply not enough; a whole other realm of life skills is needed to ensure that they are successful long after their athletic playing days have passed. When the cheers die down and the attention turns to the more practical things in life, these student athletes need ground to stand on. Pairing them up with mentors, or at the very least bringing in former athletes to share their after-college success stories, is a great way to inspire greatness that lasts a lifetime.

Leadership. Teamwork. Hard work. Earning a “win.” Losing gracefully. All of these are lessons that college athletes know in the context of their respective sports. Translating that to life beyond college can be challenging but can be made much easier with the help of mentors that have a common understanding with the students they address. Schools should make this as much a priority as recruiting minority students to sports and academic programs. Colleges and universities have a responsibility to their students to prepare them for all aspects of life and proper mentorship can be a necessary building block in that process.

How do you think colleges can best mentor minority students?

 

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Testing

4 Ways Common Core Teaches Life Skills

One of the loudest arguments against Common Core Standards is that they don’t apply to “real-life” situations and that their methods are too far removed from what actually happens in the workplace. It’s unfortunate that this argument is so prominent, because these standards were developed with the opposite intent.

Connecting the material that kids learn with the real world abilities they need to succeed is a foundational element of the internationally benchmarked standards. At the heart of Common Core is a recognition that students must be able to retain what they learn and that is accomplished by using real-life examples and applications.

Here are just a few of the ways that the transition to the standards and new Core-aligned assessments will teach life skills:

  1. Emphasis on the “how” of things. You can find the answer to anything by typing your question into a search engine box. Think about how often you rely on this technology to find answers to your everyday queries compared to the amount of effort you used to expend as a student before the Internet existed. Common Core puts an emphasis on the journey to finding answers, particularly when it comes to the math standards. It eliminates rote memorization and gives students the freedom to decide their own path to finding a correct answer.
  2. Computer-based test taking. When was the last time you did anything in your professional life that was handwritten? Even if you are in a business where you handwrite invoices, receipts or memos, technology likely comes into play with communications, bookkeeping and other day-to-day functions. We ask our high school students to complete assignments online, take college assessment exams online and even apply to college online. It makes sense to shift to a universal computer-based assessment model for our younger students, too. The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) test aligns with Common Core benchmarks using familiar technology that helps take away some of the test-taking anxiety, allowing students to focus solely on showing what they have learned. These new tests also require more writing and break away from the decades-old “fill in the bubble” multiple-choice format that focused on rote memorization rather than any true critical thinking.
  3. Better feedback. When you are on the job, your superiors do not wait until you’ve been promoted to review your strengths and weaknesses from the previous position. The end goal for tests like PARCC is to return answers to students in the year that the assessment is taken so it can have an impact on what they are learning in the present. Instead of reporting back to students on what they know, PARCC testing informs them about where they still need improvement in a timely way that allows that progress to take place more quickly.
  4. Discipline-specific writing skills. Despite the dominance of digital technology, more than ever, many jobs demand strong writing skills. Common Core standards address this growing need by calling for more rigorous reading, writing and critical thinking across subjects. It is not enough to simply know something—you must be able to communicate that knowledge. Common Core does not supplant or discount language arts instruction, but strengthens it through better connecting the practice of writing with the needs of employers today.

Students, parents and educators are discovering Common Core and hearing a great deal of conflicting information. One truth that should not get lost in the public debate is how the new standards promise to create a generation of K-12 students who are not only prepared for the world stage, but who excel on it.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts