Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform

5 Steps to Data-Based School Reform—the Common Sense Way

Are you interested in reforming a school or a district? Let’s go back to basics.

The first step to positive K-12 reform within a school or a district is to find a starting point. Often, data sets are used to determine this. This is great, but what if I told you there was another way? One that could capture the whole picture just a little bit better than data alone?

Here’s how successful school districts can improve with both data and common sense observations:

1. Develop an evaluation plan. This is to measure how effective a reform effort is.
Create performance goals. These goals will come in handy once it’s time to see how well your school or district is doing with the new changes.

2. Evaluate the pros and cons of instructional programs. School reformers need to do this regularly. You also need to realize that standardized tests should only make up a piece of the assessment puzzle, not the entirety. Continuously monitoring the progress the school’s student body makes will allow your task force to make changes to the reform plan when it’s necessary.

3. Put in some checks and balances. Make sure a variety of reformers are making the important decisions.
For instance, superintendents are responsible for making sure that creating and sustaining improvements is done in a way that meets students’ needs. The team leader’s job is to ensure teachers have all of the tools needed to help their students excel in class.

4. Keep everyone accountable. This is something that districts all over the country acknowledge as the key to improving schools. Everyone is expected to perform. To make sure this happens, the school district needs to provide staff and faculty members with high-quality professional development.

5. Keep an eye on your restructuring efforts. Your team should have useful data meant to track progress toward the goals set in step 1. Now it’s time to decide who will collect, analyze, and interpret that data. The best way to avoid bias is to hire an outside consultant—your team will receive more objective feedback about your reform efforts.

On a limited budget? Don’t worry—evaluating the results in-house is still a highly desirable option.

After analyzing the data, your team can then use the results to determine how effective the reform was.

What happens if the reform fails? Don’t worry. School restructuring is a long-term process. Simply build upon the small successes and learn from mistakes. Your team can then come up with new solutions, or fix the old solution to better suit the school’s needs.

If you want permanent improvement, reform has to occur continuously. Even the best schools need to continue to work on their restructuring process.

Is a long-lasting school reform that changes the lifeblood of the school possible? Yes, of course. It may not be easy, but with a tremendous effort, the proper use of resources, and the expertise of professionals, school reform can be wildly successful.

You may have noticed that I do not focus on data in this article. Does that mean it’s not important? No, of course it doesn’t! However, there is a lot more that goes into the bigger picture of smart school reform. Districts should recognize that and work towards solutions that not only make sense on paper, but also in real life.

Is data important? What role do you think it plays in school reform efforts? Don’t forget to leave a comment.

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

New Models and Trends in Resource Allocation

Many investigators have requested new methods to determine expenditures as a means for better understanding priorities, organizational investments, proposed strategies, and as a tool to quantify the deployment of resources across subunits. Completely new expenditure models have been pioneered by manufacturing theorists that include costs that are activity and program-based, and which assist in forming fiscal data to further broaden its comparability to strategic decision-making. In education, several reports have demanded new methods of expenditure recordkeeping as a means to modify district strategy; mostly toward ensuring the real expenditure involved in individual schools, programs, or services is duly identified.

Though the models demonstrate some differences regarding the terms of the categories used, all of them propose assigning a larger percentage of costs to specific types of students and schools. For those having an interest in resource data in relation to the context of educating students, it makes sense to review central and indirect costs that are associated with joint district resources, as well as resources that are typically school-based. Costs that have less relevance are associated with district leadership, other operations, and services of a non-educational category: e.g., transportation, food services, school facilities, and maintenance systems.

Reforms relating to accountability have placed a focus not only on performance inequalities between white students and students from minority group backgrounds, but also between students having differing determinable needs that result from disability, poverty, or limitation in English proficiency. Many policymakers stress that the first stage in tackling these achievement gaps is to align fiscal policy with student needs. But as policymakers refurbish their established funding formulas to fulfill the needs of different students, they do so without evidence. In the first instance, there is little explanation of the way resources are currently aligned to different subgroups.

Basically, for a state policymaker attempting to assign an allocation to particular student types, no baseline data exist on current expenditure in regard to each type of student within their own districts or other schools within other districts. School districts in most states do not fully track costs by student type or to the school level. Even where these data are tracked, they are not accessible from published works for policymakers attempting to pin answers down.

Equally challenging is the difficulty in accessing comparisons from other states regarding spending. Accurate ways of defining or reporting expenditures influenced by student needs are not available, which makes it impossible to compare data between states.  Furthermore, policymakers have not yet determined how to flow funds from one level of government to the next. For example, funds may be designated by the federal government for students living in poverty, with the goal of enhancing expenditures at schools having high concentrations of poverty.

However, by the time funds are dispersed through state and local allocation streams, they may not reach their intended target. Finally, only limited documentation exists on different decisions for structuring assigned allocations and the way those decisions relate to policy aims. Put in other terms, allocations meant for students having limited English proficiency (LEP) might be realized as a fixed dollar amount per LEP student, reimbursements for the spending on bilingual education services, apportionment of staff full-time equivalents (FTEs) to high-needs schools, or as funds for other areas. Research has not yet delineated the ways these different decisions influence either what is finally spent per pupil or how efficiently that funding reaches the intended students.

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

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

Surveying the Modern Applications of Instructional Leadership

A revolution is taking place in school leadership. New policies call for higher academic standards and accountability. So-called “accountability systems” include a more methods to develop and monitor school change. Researchers have joined the fray, adding their opinions about the reinvention of instructional leadership in schools.

More focus on student results leads to local changes aligned with the performance goals of the educational system. The general presumption is that these changes will come automatically, since public reporting of school outcomes creates pressure for reform.  The development of direct incentives that yield innovation, efficiency, and solutions to performance problems will also be a source of change.

Accountability systems force the development of standards required for improved instructional and assessment practices. They also act as incentives for participation in the process. This simple logic of an accountability system is compelling, providing an irresistible rationale for educational reform.

This new vigor in instructional leadership has been  spurred by  the No Child Left Behind Act. The recent debate in the U.S. on the legitimacy of using standardized tests to gauge student learning has led to new leadership efforts and spending to help schools achieve better test scores. These efforts have pressured new instructional leadership, characterized by school analysts, researchers, and school leaders focusing on data in their decision-making. This new instructional paradigm was envisioned earlier in research.

This new instructional style has also been referred to as “learning-centered” leadership. It began with a push by state education leaders to process student data from available achievement tests. Private companies enjoyed financial benefits, selling data reporting systems to schools to help them  sort the data. State education leaders  hired consultants, who created data analysis workshops and data retreats to instruct school leaders on effective data use. School leaders adopted new  school reform plans and curricula coordinated with state learning standards, resulting in far-reaching changes in student learning. Positive results only happened when practitioners were willing to change their ways and conform to the new standards.

The biggest problem in data-driven decision-making is the implementation of  new accountability practices. Most schools already had active, working internal accountability systems. Schools already made decisions based on data, such as class attendance, test scores, student discipline, available budgets, and teacher reputations. Administrative reliance on these old internal accountability systems has cased the most  resistance to reforms in school instructional practice.

To use  data to improve student performance,  leaders need to factor in external accountability instead of traditional methods. This new model  improves on traditional practices such as teacher evaluation, professional development, curriculum design, and building new cultures of learning. Older techniques will have to be changed to address the challenges of contemporary schools.

Practical  systems rely on two-way information flow,  connecting classroom practice with external accountability measures. This requires stronger links between teaching and leadership , teacher collaboration, learning matched with current instructional goals, and close monitoring of instructional outcomes. To succeed here, the leader must assist students in taking tests, avoid favoring  test preparation over learning, and justify instructional practices changes to the community.

Data Acquisition

Data acquisition refers to the  processes of seeking, collecting, and preparing useful information for teaching and learning activities. The data gathered and processed at this stage comes from  student  test scores. However, other fields of information are needed to inform teaching and learning.

Data storage is a vital element of data acquisition. There is a need to use local data systems, since the NCLB Act requires certain information on student performance. Schools have created a retail demand for data storage and data analysis products.

Data Reflection

Data reflection is the manipulation of student learning data toward improved teaching and learning practices. DDIS data reflection is a structured opportunity for both teachers and leaders to make useful sense of data, rather than guessing  “what works.”

Data reflection can be done at a school-wide level, grade level, or even in subject-area meetings.  Problem framing is a vital element of data reflection . This involves active thought on how data can improve outcomes, leading to a a plan of action.

Program Alignment

This  involves matching the school’s instructional program to the content and performance standards in classrooms. Program alignment is an essential part of planning for instructional leadership, probably the most sensitive part of DDIS, in order to influence the outcome of the new policies.

Program Design

— It is through program design that the school’s policies, plans, and procedures are defined in such a manner that reported problems are addressed. Curricula, student service programs, and instructional strategies are modified to improve student learning. Program design also involves the inspection of the school’s access to budgets and grants, for starting and maintaining a new program.

Formative Feedback

Feedback is always a crucial in the adoption of new strategies. The DDIS model creates a continuous and timely flow of information, designed to improve student outcomes. This feedback is different from data acquisition and reflection. It applies to information gathered to measure the school’s progress measured in terms of student performance.

Test Preparation

This last part of the DDIS model consists of activities  designed to assess, motivate, and develop student academic abilities, as well as strategies to improve performance on state and district assessment tests. Test preparation covers a wide range of issues, such as test formats, testing skills, and addressing weak areas, as well as test preparation.

“Teaching to the test” refers to study content, called “formulaic instruction.” It is teaching students topics that are tested, without regard to holistic learning. Leaders in schools across the U.S. have changed multiple aspects of school life to gear their instructional programs toward test content. Schools where the DDIS mode was put into action didn’t narrow their curriculum to the test content. The researchers noticed instead that, in schools with DDIS systems, there were rich instructional systems designed to help students meet state exam standards.

A DDIS  system of instructional leadership is insightful, innovative, and results-oriented. It increases precision in predicting student outcomes and developing key areas of study relevant to academic improvement.

Improvements and changes in instructional leadership have kept it relevant, even in the face of other leadership styles. It is accepted that  schools must practice some level of instructional leadership. Instructional leadership remains a crucial aspect of the school setting.

 

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

Teachable Gardens Cultivate a Sustainable Future

By Cat West 

An appreciation of nature is a primary understanding for children. The bright golden sun and vivid blue skies are often the first images known to developing minds. When a love of nature is encouraged and understood at an early age, it’s easy to see why kids grow to love, preserve and appreciate nature. If a young child is able to take an outdoor class in gardening on a beautiful spring day, their enthusiasm for the beauty of nature is renewed and refreshed. This sets into motion a lifelong appreciation for growing plants and nurturing a garden. It’s only natural for kids to learn how to grow food from an edible garden and for that knowledge to improve their lives over time.

Interestingly, each grade level has an ever more advanced study available to them in the school system at Los Angeles Unified School District. At the Carlos Santana Arts Academy in North Hills, the program is just beginning with a second grade class of 100 students. For these few students, it will most likely be their very first encounter with home gardening.  The lessons are a brief overview of germination, composting and the fundamentals of how to set up and tend a small vegetable garden over 7 weeks time, but it is the seed of understanding that grows in in their minds that represents its true value. The lessons learned in this little program will continue to encourage a love of gardening in each student throughout his or her lifetime. They will become the tending hands and preservers of our gardens in the future.

That is the concept of The Teachable Garden Program, which starts it’s first garden this Spring that will be the first of many teachable gardens in California and beyond. The program is partially funded by a grant from Whole Kids Foundation  from WHOLE FOODS. Teaching the students that the smallest little patch of space can produce significant crops for the grower is an important part of this initiative.

Funding for these programs are always the hardest part of setting them up. Often the program grows from the space the school has for an activity and the program evolves to fill that space naturally. That is the case with Sylmar High School who has grown an entire agricultural program around the garden spaces available on the Sylmar high school campus.

It was natural for the director of Sylmar High AG department Steve List to get the high school students to help do the work. With all the able bodied teenagers searching for a class that would lift their spirits and get them outside in the beautiful gardens on campus, there was no shortage of interest in his courses in horticulture. That was the reason behind the grant from State Farm Insurance and CBS/KLCS-TV 58 to fund the PBS shows and the horticultural curriculum for another year. Mr. List reports that the kids love the program and often after graduating 12th grade, their love of gardening begins a positive trend in their lives encouraging their studies in organic farming and agricultural studies in college campuses all over the country.

But some students want to travel to organic farms and gardens around the world with programs like WWOOF that allows volunteers to work on farms as a way to gain college credits. WWOOF is an international network of organic farms, gardens and businesses where students can stay and receive food, accommodation and training in return for their help and participation. No experience is required, just a willingness to work hard and learn about farming. There are about 600 locations in Canada alone — plus 70 other countries around the world. On farms all over the world, students can travel and work on organic farms as volunteers and learn their methods while gaining wonderful experiences of travel and adventure.

The opportunities are everywhere when you begin to look around.  This Spring, look for garden projects in your neighborhood. Community gardens will be gearing up as soon as the last frost has passed. Green is sprouting in your neighborhood too, you just need to look around.

____

As a creative professional in Los Angeles, Cat West brings versatile skills to any topic. Whether freelancing as a writer or designing digital art from her studio, Cat provides excellent creative product with content driven artwork and photography. Cat contributes to several other online newspapers including Examiner and Ontopix. You can read more here: http://www.examiner.com/public-schools-in-los-angeles/cat-west

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

Ask An Expert: Closing the Achievement Gap

Question: Dr. Lynch, what are your thoughts on the achievement gap? What do we need to do to close it? Lisa K.

Answer: Thanks for your question Lisa. I have researched the achievement gap for over 9 years and this is what I have learned. Our political leaders have finally begun to recognize the importance of education to the survival of individuals and societies in the 21st century. The other aspect of this conversation is all too familiar: while our children do learn, not all of them are learning as much or as well as they should to meet the demands of the new century.

In the United States, there are low levels of achievement among students from low-income backgrounds and students of color. This is in contrast to the fact that students in educationally supportive states and those from advantaged backgrounds easily rival students from across the world. To put this into context, nine year-olds from White, advantaged backgrounds read as well as thirteen-year-old Black and Hispanic students. In addition, even though funding has increased, it has done so unequally and the achievement gap has grown.

Typically, schools that serve a large number of “minority” students face big issues, which put them at a disadvantage when compared to other schools. They have to deal with lower budgets, larger classes, and often less qualified teachers and school leaders. The effect of this has been to create an “educational debt” that negatively affects the students in these communities. Major efforts are needed to address this issue. Recruiting great teachers is important, but it is not the whole answer. Systemic elements are needed to support the work of talented educators. It is not the people who are at fault: it is the system that needs an overhaul.

As Ted Sizer once put it, “The people are better than the system.” We have come a long way in understanding how to create more effective school leaders and build a national commitment to educational leadership. However, we are not there yet. We need leadership to forge all of the various elements of school reform today into well-functioning systems that make sense for those working hard to achieve results for students. If this is accomplished, we will begin to close the achievement gap.

 

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Higher Education

Black women in STEM: An interview with Dr. Namandje Bumpus

**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 post by Anwar Dunbar

This is the continuation of A black history month interview with Dr. Namandje Bumpus. Dr. Namandje Bumpus (pronounced Na-Mon-Jay) is currently an associate professor of Pharmacology at the Johns Hopkins University. You can read the first part of the interview by clicking here.

Anwar Dunbar:  Did you always have the leadership skills necessary to run a lab or did you have to learn them? Was it a work in progress?

Namandje Bumpus: Yes, you always build on it and it’s still a work in progress. I think you don’t necessarily get trained for it in graduate school or as a postdoc, but I tried to participate in things that were extracurricular; the Association for Minority Scientists at Michigan, and in my postdoc I was a part of our postdoctoral association, so I tried to pick up leadership skills by being involved in those other groups; but even still you’re not prepared to run your own lab. You really learn it as you go; you try things to see how they work. You talk to senior colleagues to get their advice and potentially go back and try something else. You take mentorship or leadership classes which I’ve done too, but I think it’s always a work in progress.

AD: We’re almost done. For the lay person, what are Cytochrome P450s and why are they important?

NB: They are proteins expressed in our bodies in all tissues, but mostly in the liver. What they largely help us to do is clear foreign compounds from our bodies. So for instance, if you are taking a drug therapeutically, you take it orally and you swallow it, one of the first places it’s going to go is into your liver. Your liver doesn’t want it to hang around and be inside of your cells forever, so we have these proteins that will change (biotransform) these drugs structurally to make them something that can be removed from your cells and removed from your liver. Thus, P450s are proteins that help us to clear foreign compounds and molecules. Drugs are obviously a large percentage of the foreign compounds that we’re exposed to, so we call them drug metabolizing enzymes.

AD: All of us went different routes after leaving Michigan. Some landed in the private sector in big pharma or the chemical industry. Others like myself, went into the public sector on the regulatory side, and I think I’m one of the only ones from our department to do that. A large chunk of our graduates went into academia which requires a ton of skills: leadership skills, entrepreneurial skills, and teaching skills. It’s also a very competitive environment and I very much admire my peers, such as yourself, who went that route. What made you decide to go into academia as opposed to the private sector or some other track?

NB: I think academia is the only thing that really fits my personality. I really like interacting with and training students. I like having a really close relationship with them where they come and work in my lab for several years while they work on earning a Ph.D. I get to see them grow. It’s similar with postdoctoral fellows. They come to the lab for a couple of years and I help them try to get to the next stage in their career.

I really love the educational aspect of the training. Additionally, I really like the broader training environment. In addition to my associate professorship, I’m also associate dean in the area of education where I get to spend a lot of time with graduate students who aren’t in my lab. I work more broadly with other graduate students helping them decide which lab they should choose for their thesis, and what they want to do next with their career. I further help them identify training opportunities for careers that they might want outside of academia. I really enjoy education training so this is the place for me.

Also, I like that scientifically, if I can dream it I can do it. If we have something that I really want to test in my lab, we can find a way to do it and test it out. I like the autonomy and the ability to be that creative with our science as well, so I think it’s a really good fit for my personality and goals.

AD: Now lastly, what advice would you give to young African American girls or those who are curious about science, but not sure that they can do it, or parents who are reading this and want to expose their kids to science?

NB: I think first knowing that if it’s something you really want to do, then you can do it. I think what’s most important about being a scientist is the passion for it and the interest. It’s not about everyone thinking that you’re brilliant. It’s about being interested and being a curious person and organically interested in science. I think it depends on which stage you’re at. If you’re in elementary school, starting off like me getting chemistry sets and microscopes is a good start – getting kids the type of gifts that will stimulate their interest and curiosity in science. Make them see that they do have the ability to do experiments and explore things on their own, and I really think that can get them even more excited about it. Microscopes, chemistry sets, and telescopes, those are things you start with from five years old.

Often times there are summer camps. At Johns Hopkins we have summer programs for people, middle school students and high school students. At many different stages you can contact local universities and museums to see if they have summer camps for science that kids can go to and that can be helpful. A lot of schools including ours have high school programs. In ours you can spend the whole summer working on a project and I think that’s a great way to see if you like scientific research and really get excited about doing research; so I think there are a lot of opportunities. You just have look out for them. The best place to start is contacting local universities and museums. Most universities will have a community engagement program you can contact for opportunities.

AD: The last question, Namandje, involves something personal you shared with me. The science community recently suffered a great loss, someone who was a mentor to you. Would you like to say a few words in memory of this individual? From what I gather, this person was also a female African American scientist.

NB: Sure. Her name was Dr. Marion Sewer. She was a full professor at the University of California-San Diego, and a Pharmacologist as well. She worked on endocrinology and really did a lot to understand the endocrine system and how it impacts lipid metabolism.

She was just a very highly regarded scientist and she was also someone who cared a lot about outreach. She ran a lot of programs that were focused on diversity and giving opportunities for people in high school through undergraduate school, and really spent time with postdocs to make sure there were really opportunities for people of different backgrounds, including African Americans, particularly for African Americans to have exposure to science. She was someone who was a really great colleague, a really great scientist and someone who also, in a rare way, really cared about people, service, equity and inclusion in science. She really inspired me and helped me to get my first National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant by reviewing it for me several times. She was more senior and experienced, and I think a lot of us have that same story where she helped us get started because she was so generous with her time, so it was definitely a really big loss.

AD: Well thank you for this interview opportunity, Namandje, and your willingness to discuss your life and career. A lot of people will benefit from this.

NB: Thank you, Anwar.

_____

Anwar Y. Dunbar is a Regulatory Scientist in the Federal Government where he registers and regulates Pesticides.  He earned his Ph.D. in Pharmacology from the University of Michigan and his Bachelor’s Degree in General Biology from Johnson C. Smith University.  In addition to publishing numerous research articles in competitive scientific journals,  he has also published over one hundred articles for the Examiner (www.examiner.com) on numerous education and literacy related topics in the areas of; Current Events and Culture, Higher Education, Financial Literacy, and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics).  He actively mentors youth and works to spread awareness of STEM careers to minority students.  He also tutors in the subjects of Biology, Chemistry and Physics.  He is a native of Buffalo, NY.  He can be contacted via email at [email protected], and can be followed on Twitter @anwaryusef.

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

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

Tenure: 3 Groups Fighting Against Bad Teachers

The war against underperforming teachers is in full swing, with proposed laws created to prevent them from negatively impacting their students. One of the many ways we tend to address this is by targeting teacher tenure. Teacher tenure protects teachers from the many threats to their jobs—but does it also make them complacent and keep them from doing their best? Taking this even further, do the worst teachers benefit from tenure?

Some people believe so, and they’re fighting back by tackling tenure in their proposed laws. Here are three institutions that have taken measures to protect their students by going after teacher tenure.

  1. Teach Great proposed an amendment that would get rid of teacher tenure in Missouri.

In Missouri, instead of tenure, teachers would get renewable three-year contracts. Test scores would also become the chief factor in teacher evaluations.

However, an overwhelming number of teacher groups, statewide education associations and school boards fought against the amendment. Teach Great, the group that drove the proposal, even backed off before the vote admitting that the timing was off. The group hoped this system would reward good teachers.

Andy Hosmer, Springfield Public School Board vice president said, “I’m thrilled the voters saw through this blatant attempt to influence education across Missouri. This was a situation where no one thought this was a good idea.”

Had the proposal passed, tenure would no longer have existed. Students would have taken more tests and bargaining over teacher evaluations would have been prohibited. Teachers’ salaries would be based on the performance of their students with over 50 percent of teacher evaluations based on standardized testing.

Teachers felt that the proposal would have forced them to “teach to the test.” The testing also would have cost Missouri millions of dollars.

Luckily for teachers, the statewide efforts to spread the word about the negative consequences of the proposal proved to be triumphant.

  1. Students Matter sued to change the status quo of teaching in California.

Nine public school students in the state brought on this case and challenged a set of laws – one of which gives teachers in California tenure as soon as 18 months into their careers. Another requires layoffs on a last in, first out basis without taking into consideration the quality of the teacher.

Judge Rolf M. Treu ruled in favor of the group, Students Matter, and against teachers unions in a decision that may turn over how the state’s teachers are both hired and fired in California.

Students Matter believes the laws allow ineffective teachers to stay on board and that low-income, minority students suffer as a result when less-desired educators make their way into their classrooms. Judge Treu agreed and found that five California statutes violate the constitutional protection children have in the state to equal education opportunity.

Economist Raj Chetty calculated that the one year of exposure to the worst performing teachers actually might cost a classroom of children $1.4 million in lifetime earnings. These findings were from a study that looked at data on 2.5 million students’ grades three through eight between 1989 and 2009 and compared their test scores in English and math to tax records as adults.

Chetty went on to say that students who had higher quality teachers for even one year were more likely to attend college, less likely to have teen pregnancies and more likely to have higher adult earnings.

Teachers’ groups who firmly believe that removing their job protection will not help students find greater success dispute the conclusions.

  1. The Senate in North Carolina wanted to increase teachers’ pay in exchange for tenure—by they changed their minds.

Senate leaders in North Carolina proposed an 11 percent pay increase for teachers. Senator Harry Brown introduced this proposal and pointed out that the budget plan would boost North Carolina to 27th in pay ranking for teachers in the U.S. Teachers in North Carolina will be ranked at 37th in pay though if the House’s plan is approved instead.

Representative Brian Holloway says he is glad to see that the Senate would no longer make pay raises contingent on whether or not teachers give up tenure, but also pointed out that the Senate wants to pay for the plan with the money gained through the elimination of teacher assistants.

Brown and Senator Bob Rucho defend the plan stating that since the teacher assistant model was put into place in classrooms, reading proficiency among children in North Carolina has not increased. In fact, proficiency has actually decreased. It was also noted that TA’s have no positive effect on student achievement and are not an essential classroom investment.

Senate leaders also proposed the idea of increasing the lottery advertisement budget to pay for the 5 percent increase in teacher salaries.

Representatives from the House’s plan are unwilling at this time to increase the lottery advertising budget.

I am interested to see whether the Senate or House proposal is passed. I do like that the Senate is offering an 11 percent pay raise to these teachers, but I do not like that the increase in pay is partially funded based on the elimination of Teacher Assistant positions.

The bottom line is this: teachers should be held accountable for their actions. Tenure shouldn’t protect the educators who aren’t making an impact in our students’ lives. We also need high quality teachers in our schools and no matter how many years a teacher has been on board, he or she should be held to the same expectations as the newest ones. With all that said, however, I do not think that scrapping tenure completely is the best way to increase the quality of teaching in our public schools.

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

Is Microsoft’s reign in education coming to an end?

**This piece originally appeared on ClassThink and has been republished with permission**

By Karl Rivers

Microsoft has been a fixture in schools for the last twenty years, but with iPads, Chromebooks, and consumer tastes changing, how much longer do they have at the top?

Recently, I attended a Microsoft seminar covering the latest developments in the Windows eco-system. I know, but please keep reading. As I was listening to the speaker, who looked and sounded remarkably like Michael Caine, my mind drifted onto a topic that must be at the forefront of most school administrator’s minds for some time now — where does Microsoft fit into the modern school?

I spent a good portion of the presentation trying to formulate questions to which the response would have to be “you were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off” but the rest got me thinking, could we rebuild a school without Microsoft software or services?

A Broken Monopoly

When I first started working in schools, almost fourteen years ago, Microsoft was just becoming dominant in the enterprise. Some of my earliest work was transitioning away from systems like Novell and Lotus, and moving to Windows NT and Microsoft Office. Back then we were sowing the seeds for Microsoft’s stranglehold on schools that still, generally speaking, holds today.

Most secondary schools run an Microsoft Exchange, store documents in Windows file shares, store user accounts in Active Directory, and use Microsoft Office on the desktop. But Microsoft’s complete failure to recognize the importance of mobile technology early enough has broken the mind share allowed then to reach this monopoly. A generation of teachers and students are now entering their educational careers without Microsoft.

In around 2005 I attempted to encourage a number of teachers to begin experimenting with Open Office. If you haven’t used it, Open Office is a suite of open source office applications that replicates Microsoft’s alternative. Even then we recognized the exorbitant financial toll Microsoft Office was having on our IT budget and we wanted to, if not replace Microsoft’s suite of applications, at least lessen its control on the curriculum.

The project failed completely. Not because the feature sets of the suites were not comparable, but simply because outside of the IT department very few had the time or desire to become familiar with the new system. For teachers the financial saving that Open Office represented simply didn’t present enough of a reason to switch.

While we’re talking about budgets, you’ve likely noticed the drastically reduced cost of volume licensing Microsoft software in recent years. If this isn’t an acknowledgement of increased competition, I don’t know what is.

Microsoft’s Lack of Vision

Microsoft, for all it’s power in the market, hasn’t been known for its vision. They completely missed the importance of the Internet, and then spent a few years scrabbling around trying to implement their own proprietary alternative.  Then along came the iPad. It didn’t matter that they had had almost three years of the iPhone to get their stuff together, Microsoft was left completely unprepared. The company were caught with their drawbridge down and Apple proudly strolled across.

But it’s not just the shift to mobile technology that is the most important aspect of the mobile technology revolution. The iPad cleared the way for others to follow. The Open Office experiment proved that we needed more than just an equivalent to Windows or Office, we needed something of the magnitude of the iPad to stomp a path right through Redmond. Had the iPad not existed the Chromebook would have sunk into oblivion and Android would have been a consumer only product.

With the iPad Apple succeeded in opening the eyes of consumers– and by extension those of our teachers and students — to alternatives to Microsoft software. The iPad provided the sexy hardware, the flash but simple operating system, and a new way to deliver software in a way that was compelling enough to change the habits of IT users.

Apple’s greatest legacy isn’t the touch screen or the app store, it’s that our users are no longer fearful if their computer doesn’t have a Start button.

Does Microsoft Have a Place in The School of The Future?

So, where are we now? The presentation I sat through this morning was brilliant…for me as an experienced network administrator. The software shown provided exactly the level of control I want, and enough knobs and buttons to push to keep me in network heaven for the foreseeable future. Windows Server 2012, and System Center 2012 are brilliant products, but they’re also extremely complex and its for this reason that only the largest of schools will ever implement them.

While Google and Apple are moving to simplify device management, Microsoft is strongly moving in the opposite direction. Microsoft has been explicit that they consider PowerShell — Windows 2012’s all encompassing command-line interface — to be the standard method of control for network administrators. The GUI still exists, but Microsoft doesn’t expect “true administrators” to use it.

Likewise, imaging Windows is “no longer supported.” Going forward Microsoft will only support systems which have been consumer installed, or set up using the Microsoft Deployment Toolkit (MDT). If they wanted to alienate a huge section of the education market, this is how to do it.

Features like the ability to create an iSCSI SAN managed by Windows, add an iPad to a domain, control network access with NPS, Work Folders, Remote Apps web feed, session based RDP are all great, but Microsoft seems to be headed off down a road alone while the competition can only look back with confusion. In the business world with huge corporate networks Microsoft makes complete sense, but for schools with limited budgets and personnel the implementation has to be questioned.

Schools want low cost, low maintenance, flexible devices. They want devices that are instant-on, don’t slow down, and are quick to log in to. They want iPads, Chromebooks, and smartphones, not a complex server infrastructure. The Microsoft representative, when asked about the amount of time required to manage System Center 2012 said, “it’s a full time job.” Unless you are an administrator responsible for multiple sites and thousands of desktops this makes no sense.

Microsoft Has Lost its Power

When Microsoft released a Remote Desktop app for iOS and Android a few weeks ago many saw it as sign that the company was finally opening up to new mobile platforms. Microsoft makes the argument that they are transitioning into a services company, rather than a software company. But I would argue that they had to release these apps because the market has reached a tipping point.

Previously Microsoft could use their weight in the market to bolster or weaken a product. When Microsoft had incentive to support Mac they did so by releasing Internet Explorer for Apple’s platform. When they no longer wanted to support Mac they pulled the software.

Microsoft releasing RDP apps for competing mobile operating systems is acknowledgement that failure to do so would make their server infrastructure and software ecosystem irrelevant to many users. The power has shifted. Where previously users would look for a platform on which to run Microsoft Office, now they will instead look for an alternative to Office.

Where once Microsoft Office was a standard application, we’re now seeing it relegated to specialist software. In the same way that Adobe Photoshop is only installed where it’s required, Microsoft Office will only be installed for specific use cases.

Services Not Software

I will admit I was slightly skeptical when we installed our first set of Chromebooks last September, but the opinion of teachers and students alike has been overwhelmingly positive. Yes, if I spent the time I could get a similar setup with Windows 8 laptops. I could pour hours into Microsoft deployments and System Center 2012, but why should I when I can get the desired result with an externally managed service? I just connect my devices and go.

Unless you are running a large network across multiple sites with thousands of desktops I see little reason to recommend a Microsoft infrastructure. In fact, many schools are now ripping out their ICT suites and replacing them with mobile devices for use across the curriculum, and they’re not doing it with Windows.

There have been many articles this week about why Microsoft is so scared of Chromebooks that they feel forced to produce what are essentially political smear adverts to slight Google’s laptop. The truth is that Microsoft should be scared of Chromebooks. Google is getting in at the grassroots. They’re creating a generation of students who may never use a single piece of Microsoft software.

Microsoft is shifting to become a services company. Office 365, is a great example of this. The problem Microsoft has is that they have lost their anchor in the market through which to funnel users to their online services. There are now competing products like Google Apps which provide similar services and many schools are making the switch. How much of the internal infrastructure of a school can Microsoft hold onto in this shift is yet to be seen.

So, I’m left with the thought, if we had to start from scratch, if we threw everything away and began again, how much of our school infrastructure would we build with Microsoft software? The answer, I think, is very little. How about you?

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

____

Karl is an award winning school Network Manager, IT Lead Professional for Bedfordshire Borough Council, and is an ICT Across the Curriculum Co-ordinator based near London, England. He has been working in education for more than ten years and founded ClassThink in 2013 to share technology best practice with other schools. In 2014 he won the NAACE Impact Award for support services in schools, and writes edtech articles for Education Executive Magazine. Follow him on Twitter @karlrivers.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, International Education

What fewer women in STEM means for their mental health

Jennifer Drake, University of Toronto

“You’re in engineering!?! Wow, you must be super-smart…”

It has been over 10 years since I was a first-year engineering undergraduate student; but when I remember the time a fellow female student made this comment, I can still feel a visceral, bodily reaction: my muscles tense, my heart rate increases, my breath quickens.

Comments like these on the surface appear as compliments. But when unpacked, they reveal subversive attitudes about women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math).

As I think back to this encounter, there are two aspects that stay with me. First was the surprised, skeptical tone of the other student’s voice that conveyed it was surprising and unusual (or, to put it more crudely, freakish) that I was in engineering. Second was the attitude that since I was in engineering, this could be explained only if there was something exceptional or outstanding (or, once again, freakish) about me. Women remain an underrepresented group in STEM. In Canada, women account for 23% of engineering graduates and 30% of mathematics and computer graduates. In the United States, women are 12% of the engineering and 26% of the computing workforce.

The reality is that STEM professions are most commonly male and it remains surprising when these professional roles are held by women. The large gender imbalance means that women may naturally feel they’re outsiders at school and at work. This situation is often uncomfortable and mentally demanding, when even just showing up and doing your job comes with constant social stresses and anxiety. Ironically, the difficulties that they (we) encounter often dissuade the next generation of women from joining us. It’s a self-reinforcing cycle that we need to break.

Fight or flight, designed for quick response

Because of their underrepresentation, women in STEM often regularly question their place in these professions. When things feel uncomfortable – like when I was confronted with that comment a decade ago – our brains can overinterpret the situation as an imminent threat. And there’s an evolutionary reason for that physical response.

Stress is an adaptive response to perceived threats. It’s how the body reacts to these situations. Anxiety is stress that lingers after the immediate threat is gone; it’s experienced as a feeling such as embarrassment, fear or worry.

Fight-or-flight is a physiological response.
Jvnkfood, CC BY-SA

This stress response evolved in human beings to help us navigate a wild, dangerous and unpredictable world. When faced with imminent danger, like a pouncing tiger, our bodies have evolved an automatic reaction to help us react fast. Stress hormones are released, the heart beats harder and faster, breathing becomes rapid and muscles tense, ready for action.

This automatic response prepares our bodies for possible actions: fight or flight! From the perspective of evolutionary adaptation, it’s in our best interests NOT to distinguish between life-threatening and non-life-threatening dangers. Act first, think later. In the African wilds in which early humans roamed, the consequence of underreacting could mean death.

Good during lion attack, less good during daily life

In modern life, we don’t have to worry much about attacks from lions, tigers or bears. But adaptive mechanisms are still very much a part of our brain’s biology.

The flight-or-flight response is intended to be short-term. The problem comes in when stress becomes a daily part of life, triggering a physiological response that’s actually detrimental to health over the long term. Repeated and long-term releases of the stress hormone cortisol cause changes in brain structure that leave individuals more susceptible to anxiety and mood disorders, including depression. When exposed to long-term stress, the brain structure called the hippocampus shrinks, affecting one’s short-term memory and ability to learn.

Subtle cues can make female students feel marginalized.
World Bank Photo Collection, CC BY-NC-ND

Messages you don’t belong can be stressful

These physical stress responses can unfortunately run at a constant low level of activation in people who are made to feel like they don’t belong or aren’t good enough – such as women in STEM. Social situations like my undergraduate encounter – and their ramifications – are a part of day-to-day life.

The effects of stress on women in STEM fields are often already obvious during their undergraduate studies. A study of women in engineering at the University of Waterloo has shown that female students tend to have lower overall mental health. Women in STEM fields are more likely to report higher levels of stress and anxiety and higher incidences of depression.

Sadly, the percentages of women working in these fields have remained stagnant for decades. In 1987, women represented 20% of the STEM workforce in Canada. In 2015, their numbers remain unchanged at 22%. In the United States, the reality is very similar, with women representing 24% of the workforce. Confrontational reactions like “You’re in engineering!?!” communicate the message that as a woman, one may not belong in the social group of engineering. The brain perceives these kinds of social interactions as threatening, dangerous and stressful.

The social cues that women may not belong in male-dominated STEM fields can often be subtle. For example, researchers have shown that the presence in labs of objects considered stereotypical of computer science, such as Star Trek and video game posters, are perceived as stereotypically masculine and can dissuade women from expressing interest in topics like computer programming.

Moreover, seemingly complimentary “Wow, you must be super-smart!” comments also communicate an even more troubling possibility that, in order to belong in this group (of men), as a woman, one must be exceptional. Women + Engineering = Super Smart.

But what if a female student is not exceptionally intelligent? What if she is only ordinarily smart? Or, even more troubling, what if she does not believe that she is smart at all? In her mind, she becomes a sheep in wolf’s clothing, an impostor who has tricked those around her into accepting her into a group where she does not belong. From the brain’s perspective, this is literally interpreted as being in the lion’s den.

Women can flourish in STEM, but it can mean shutting out the noise.
USAID Asia, CC BY-NC

STEM should welcome everyone

So what can be done? If we are to increase the participation of women in STEM fields, we must make workplace and educational environments inclusive. In order to thrive, female students need to believe that they belong in technical professions, in both academia and the private sector.

The social marginalization caused by gender imbalances in STEM programs can be mitigated. Targeted intervention programs that foster social belonging and coping mechanisms to deal with stress and threat can help women develop skills to handle the mental challenges caused by gender inequality and help women integrate into their male-dominated environment.

Connecting female students with female professional role models such as mentors or instructors has also been extremely effective at improving women’s self-concept and commitment to STEM.

Finally, campaigns like the #Ilooklikeanengineer hashtag disrupt our common stereotyping of STEM professionals and help support a cultural shift.

The rates of female representation in STEM will not change overnight. It will probably be at least another generation before parity becomes an achievable target. But it’s through changing these attitudes and stereotypes that we will reduce some of the social stresses on women in these fields, helping women choose STEM as a career path, stay in these fields, and most importantly, remain healthy and happy.

The Conversation

Jennifer Drake, Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

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

8 Reasons Common Core Will Ultimately Fail

By Matthew Lynch

Since their initial implementation, national Common Core standards have caused quite a stir. It seems that everyone from politicians to parents have an opinion on these learning benchmarks and their corresponding testing systems. Everyone is throwing his or her two cents into the Common Core discussion and it has all led to a firestorm of questions surrounding the future of K-12 education in the U.S. and whether one streamlined goal program can really be effective with all students.

As a disclaimer, I actually support a lot of the components of Common Core and believe that heightened, more focused teaching toward subjects like math and science are necessary for this generation of K-12 students to survive and thrive in the future world workplace. Despite my personal feelings on the heart of Common Core standards, however, the initiatives are misdirected in more ways than one and will be rendered ineffective in the end. Here are just a few of the reasons I feel this way:

  1. Common Core is tied to President Obama.

Even though President Obama did not draft or implement Common Core standards, he is inextricably linked to them. This is due in part to the fact that his Race to the Top program connects federal funding with states that have Common Core standards in place and who excel in the testing of the material. The President has certainly put his weight behind the ideals of Common Core standards and has always been vocal about his belief that streamlined learning benchmarks and continued teacher accountability is necessary for the future of the nation’s economy and knowledge base. He did not, however, come up with the idea for Common Core standards nor approve them upon completion. The bi-partisan National Governors Association did that. Still, people who already dislike President Obama seem to think that passionately disliking Common Core is just another way to show their disapproval of his administration. While this specific group is certainly not large enough to topple the standards alone, it is influential, particularly when it comes to politicians that are looking for an easy way to please constituents. Which brings me to my next point…

  1. Politicians are using Common Core as a platform.

Republican governor of Indiana Mike Pence was once a supporter of Common Core initiatives, and so was Republican Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal. Yet both are now some of the most prominent politicians to speak out against Common Core standards – and in the case of Pence, he has since withdrawn Indiana from the program (and then replaced the standards with eerily similar “state developed” ones). It seems that Common Core is becoming a platform for politicians looking for their next news byte or front-page photo op. It’s not limited to politicians in office, either.

In April, Republican Rob Astorino of New York, a gubernatorial hopeful, made a public announcement that his own children would not be taking state assessments based on Common Core benchmarks. The spotlight-stealing is not limited to Republicans, of course. Just this month Virginian democrat Adam Ebbin who hopes to replace long-time Senator Jim Moran said he does not support Common Core standards (which Virginia has so far opted out of using). Politicians from both sides of the aisle are seeing the fiery side of their constituents and looking for a way to push that passion in their own directions.

  1. Parents think common core standards are too rigorous.

The heightened concepts of learning and retaining Common Core materials means that some students will get left behind. The aggressiveness of the learning campaigns, however, make it difficult for teachers to spend extra time on subjects or circle back to them once most of the class has retained them. In a perfect world, this is where the parents would step in and fill the gap, or at least hire a tutor to do it. Ever since No Child Left Behind legislation, however, the assumption is that public schools are responsible for the total learning process of all their students. Parents who find that Common Core is leaving their own children behind find it easier to point the finger at the standards instead of initiating a way to make them work for their kids.

  1. Parents don’t understand the material.

Particularly when it comes to math, some of the new-fangled methods that Common Core implements are foreign to parents. Moms and dads who remember excelling in elementary school math are suddenly befuddled by the homework questions their second-graders must figure out. Parents, even the very young ones, did not use many of the tactics now in place in K-12 classrooms and certainly were not required to learn as many complicated subjects at such a young age. This lack of comprehension translates to lack of confidence – and causes parents to become defensive about the materials their children are expected to learn.

  1. Parents are growing wary of the testing culture.

Parents are a finicky bunch when it comes to education. They want the best career opportunities for their kids but resent the idea of teaching too specifically for the simple sake of scoring higher on an assessment test. The items on state assessment tests, more than ever, are designed to test the knowledge set deemed appropriate for the future economy (in part, at least). Though parents want the best job opportunities for their kids, they don’t want knowledge to be so narrowly dispersed. The truth is that no teacher has enough time to teach everything to his or her students. Some of that learning must happen at home and in other real-world applications.

Standards are a calculated guess as to what learning materials should be prioritized among U.S. students – not an end-all-be-all list. Parents see items that they deem “important” missing from Common Core standards and believe it signals a complete dysfunction of the benchmarks. The growing movement to protest or even eliminate standardized tests is being driven mostly by parents. Though it’s unlikely that they will ever truly succeed on this front, their outspoken concerns about Common Core will eventually aid in dismantling the standards – particularly if their political representatives are listening.

  1. American students are diverse.

It seems everywhere you look, we celebrate diversity in this country. From skin color, to language spoken, to sexual preferences, the national message seems to be “Be you. Whatever that looks like.” Except when it comes to measuring a “good” education. It’s widely accepted that students learn in different ways and customized learning initiatives are a trend fueled by in-classroom technology. HOW students learn is varied, but WHAT they are learning is somehow expected to fall into some neat, standardized package. Laying down countrywide rules of sorts for learning, and attaching those to funding, is an easy way to check off boxes on a spreadsheet but not an effective way to teach each student exactly what he or she needs to know based on career paths, interests and life circumstance

  1. It doesn’t recognize the differences among states.

It’s true that the world is becoming smaller and that the differences that once divided K-12 students by geography are shrinking. Still, there are some learning standards that just make more sense in one area over another. The benefits of learning a foreign language should be shared on a national level, but the specifics of those benchmarks should be considered. A state like Arizona or Texas, for example, with a high percentage of Spanish-speakers could benefit from more curriculum customized to that population, and in a much more effective way than a state like Iowa or Maine. Common Core is not a curriculum set, of course, but I use the language example as a way to show the difference between students and how where they live really does impact what they really should know. Industry specific learning is also a consideration when it comes to what should be taught more heavily, not as a way to pigeon-hole students but as a way to set them up for the best chance at career success. Considerations for subject areas that have been weak in a particular region should also be thought about and given priority.

  1. There is not one model student.

The idea that all U.S. K-12 students should know exactly the same things, and graduate from high school with the same shared learning experiences is flawed. Of course no one expects any two students to be identical in their learning outcomes, but the implication of Common Core standards are that there should be a cookie-cutter which every district and every teacher uses. Such an educational model goes against every other American ideal – like innovation, creativity and individuality – yet is prevalent throughout the public school system. If there were one leading flaw in Common Core requirements, it would be this: it allows no wiggle room for letting students be the people they were meant to be.

Hopefully, proponents of Common Core will read this piece, correct its deficiencies, and prove me wrong.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch, Teaching Strategies, Tactics, and Methods

The Business of Lesson Plans

Creating and writing lesson plans are activities common to basic teacher education courses. Before entering a classroom, young educators are taught how to meticulously plan their time for the benefit of their students.

Through online collaboration though, many teachers now take a different approach to lesson planning than even a decade ago, and it has stirred up some controversy from both sides of the aisle.

Buying or borrowing lesson plans

The most obvious way that teachers avoid the traditional lesson planning concept is by finding ideas, or even entire plans, online. This shortcut can be as simple as finding an in-class activity idea on Pinterest or as complex as downloading a grading period’s worth of lessons that are grade-appropriate. Critics of this type of planning cite ethical issues, saying that a teachers’ lesson plans should always be original. Creating these plans is simply part of the job and should never be outsourced.
Even if teachers spend just a few hours per week on lesson plans, that is a few hours of time that educators could feasibly be doing something else. The internet has made so many other professions more efficient – shouldn’t teaching benefit too? If sharing lesson plans cuts out some of the non-student interaction time, then maybe that is a cause worth getting behind.

Selling lesson plans

It’s well-known that the teaching profession is not a get-rich-quickly (or ever, really) way to earn a living. Some educators are finding ways to earn some extra income: by writing and selling lesson plans. A teacher who spoke with the New York Times said that she brings in an additional $36,000 annually from selling her original lesson plans on websites like Teachers Pay Teachers. On one hand, if teachers are developing something that is both useful to other professionals and boosts their own bottom line, why not? As long as these lesson plans are carefully vetted and that the teacher on the receiving end does due diligence to check the accuracy, what’s the big deal? In this context, selling lesson plans can be compared to people who knit or sew and sell their patterns online for others to buy and use. The buyer can make customization changes based on preference and knitting or sewing style, but if the end result turns out the way it is supposed to, everyone wins.

It is not that simple though. According to the Copyright Act of 1976, when teachers complete lesson plans for their classrooms, those materials are technically owned by the schools. Along that line of thinking, a lesson plan then sold to other teachers infringes on the inherent copyright of that material. Legalities aside, should a teacher who is already being paid to write a lesson plan for his or her own classroom then “double dip” and make even more revenue on it?

And what about teachers who keep the lesson plans they write for their classrooms and the ones they write on a freelance basis separate? Shouldn’t these teachers be able to do both things, as long as their primary teaching job does not suffer?

This is an area where it seems like teachers are expected to live up to an impossibly higher standard than other professions. By common cultural standards, any lucrative activity outside classroom hours is deemed a distraction to the purpose of teaching children. How, though, is making a little extra cash and therefore being a little more satisfied with a teaching salary really that bad? Why does it bother so many people, inside and outside the teaching industry, when teachers find a way to get ahead?

What is your take? Do you buy or sell lesson plans – or do you find either ethically wrong?

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

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

Do we know where Republicans stand on education?

Forbes.com has an interesting opinion piece posted about the GOP presidential candidates and where they stand on education. Rather, it’s what they should be asked in upcoming debates regarding education.

Because there are so many candidates and so little time to ask them detailed questions about anything during a debate, it might be tough at first to receive detailed information on their stances regarding education without viewing them through their own prisms.

While some of the questions posed in the post are generic, (“How will you support parental choice?“), others are worth exploring.

The author asks “What will you do to support better research on vital education topics?” Sounds legit to me.

“What’s more, as a recent report from TNTP (formerly The New Teacher Project) found, most current teacher training is not effective; we’re wasting teachers’ time and taxpayers’ money. The education industry is filled with training seminars that promise the moon but deliver little in terms of outcomes.”

The subject of teacher training is certainly loaded. How much, if any, money should the federal government invest in training new teachers and re-training older ones? Should it be a state decision?

Another question presented attempts to tackle federal rules surrounding education. If a Republican is elected, that individual will likely present a hands-off approach towards education. At least from a federal perspective.

But as we trudge forward to the 2016 presidential election, surely we’ll hear more about education and where each candidate stands. It’s important to start to delve into these questions now, though.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts