Policy & Reform

Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, First Year Teachers, Higher Education, Policy & Reform, Teachers

What is the Future of School Fundraising?

As the news headlines regarding the current U.S. economy continue to improve, there is one area that is still feeling the squeeze from the recession years: public and private K-12 school funding. Less state spending on education negatively impacts the learning experience that students receive in our nation’s classrooms. As a result, teachers around the country are turning to fundraising to address their funding gaps.

Teachers looking to lead their districts into 2018 and beyond need to recognize that change is a surety and that to survive this inevitability, they must adapt the way they engage potential donors and their community as a whole. They have to understand the need to find new donors, the factors that motivate donors to give, and the opportunities that are possible with the use of new technologies.

So what does the future of school fundraising look like? Not an easy question to answer, is it? Here’s what I think.

How is edtech shaping the future of school fundraising?

Over the last decade, edtech companies have been experimenting with innovative ways to use technology to help educators fundraise more efficiently and with greater success. Thankfully, several of these companies are getting it right and are doing a great job. One company, in particular, Edco, has done an excellent job of creating a comprehensive application designed to help teachers exceed their fundraising goals. “Edco was founded because we wanted to help schools raise money effectively and efficiently in an ongoing manner and use the best practices of the best fundraisers. We know that a lot of people want to donate directly to the school, but don’t want the products, goods, and services,” says Rafi Musher of Edco.

The first time I heard about this company was during a conversation with a gifted education teacher that I used to work with. I called her to see how things were going, and during the talk, she told me about a recent trip to the U.K. that she made with five of her students. She teaches in a school district that serves a large number of low-income students, whose parents are hardworking but often find themselves just trying to make ends meet. Since I knew that the school district hadn’t been fully funded education in decades, I wondered how she managed to finance this trip.

That’s when she told me about Edco, a new school fundraising web platform, and how it helped her raise the monies necessary for their field trip across the pond. Recently, I had a chance to visit their site to see what all the fuss was about. Here is what I found out. In two minutes or less, you can create your webpage that’s ready to take donations immediately – on any device. Your dedicated webpage allows you to create a goal, upload a team photo, and also tell your team’s story. It includes sponsorship templates, the ability to have Edco assist with your outreach and access to Nathan, who heads up partnerships, as your fundraising coach. Pretty cool, huh?

If you are like me and have zero fundraising experience, not to fret, Edco’s tips and templates show you what you need to do to raise more money. If you plan to involve your students in the fundraising process, Edco’s system can track which students are raising funds, and where your donations are coming from. The application allows your fundraising team to accept donations through credit and debit cards. All contributions are tax-deductible. Edco processes the payments, provides the donation receipts, and places your monies into your school bank account or prepaid debit card if you need access to your funds immediately. “We provide a turnkey service to free students, teachers, and associations up so they can focus on other things,” informs Amy Zucchi-Justice, Director of Marketing for Edco. “Using online platforms for fundraising can help you raise more than four times what you would with traditional fundraisers,” adds Zucchi-Justice.

Edco makes it extremely easy to manage and communicate with all your donors – which will pay dividends for your next fundraiser. Since the system keeps a list of your ongoing supporters and opportunities, you don’t have to start from scratch every year. Wait, but that’s not it. You can promote your cause with social media posts and customizable emails. Also, you can invite parents, students, and other supporters to help spread the word.

Did I mention that Edco is free to use? They don’t charge you a fee for registering or organizing a fundraising team. Edco collects a reasonable 4.9% fee once you have collected money using their platform. When compared to the other fundraising sites, this is a drop in the bucket. They invest the fees that they collect back into their company to improve their school fundraising solution continuously.

Edco is a service driven organization, devoted to helping students, parents, teachers and other education leaders fundraise. That’s it. They believe that a lack of funding should not hinder the learning process. We agree. Without companies like Edco, teachers would have to continue to get by on the meager resources that they are given. In a space full of edtech startups looking to get rich, Edco is certainly a breath of fresh air. I am pleased to see entrepreneurs stepping up to plate, and developing edtech solutions aimed at solving the often overlooked problem of school funding. After an hour of being on the site, I left thinking “I wish Edco was around back when I was a teacher.”

Final Thoughts

Public and private K-12 school systems must understand that the education funding landscape is changing for the worse. The most effective teachers will recognize this and adapt their strategic planning and fundraising techniques to stay afloat and provide their students with a world-class education. Also, they will use technologies such as Edco to stay ahead of the competition, and efficiently raise funds.

What do you think the future of school fundraising will look like? Have you used Edco for a fundraising campaign? We would love to hear your success stories!

 

 

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

What is the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act)?

At the end of December 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) into law, effectively sweeping away NCLB (No Child Left Behind). This bipartisan measure reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the country’s oldest national education law, which is dedicated to providing equal opportunity to all students. The new bill made long-needed significant changes to federal education policy. This was a breath of fresh air for many educators, as it was clear that the goals of NCLB were only attainable in a utopian society.

Here are some highlights from ESSA:

  1. One thing that changed with the ESSA was how teacher performance is evaluated. States can now individually appraise how well its teachers are doing performance wise. This means no more federal meddling on issues of teacher quality.
  2. Another alteration under the new law will allow states “to come up with their own way to determine the quality of their local schools.” This means that test scores are no longer the sole deciding factor for school performance. I think this is a good idea, as states are better equipped to assess the performance of their K-12 institutions. The federal government tried to do it their own way and failed miserably. They just underestimated the complexity of the task.
  3. ESSA lists music as a component of a well-rounded education and gives it more support than previous policies when it comes to access and funding. The law also means federal grant funding is opened up for states and local school districts to support music education programs and further train music teachers.
  4. The law also scores a win for education equity by reauthorizing critical protections of vulnerable and marginalized populations. It also furthers education equity by supporting and growing local innovations—including evidence-based programs and interventions developed by local organizations.
  5. ESSA continues the countries investment into early childhood education by increasing access to quality preschool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

When States Take Over School Districts, Disaster Usually Ensues

There is a disturbing trend taking place in school districts all over the United States. The pattern that I am referring to involves state departments of education wrestling control of low-performing school districts from local school entities. For a state to seize control of a school district, an emergency, either academic, environmental, or financial, etc., must exist and place students in harm’s way. Each state has its own definition of conditions that justify or trigger a takeover, as well as policies and procedures that must be followed during this process.

We will begin this piece with an overview of state takeovers in the United States and then look at a case study of the state of Mississippi’s botched takeover of its Jackson Public Schools district.

An overview of state takeovers

Before school districts are taken over, they usually know that they are in jeopardy of being taking over, and may have had several years to get their act together and show improvement. What makes this even more complicated and troublesome, is that struggling districts have no way of improving, as they usually do not have the expertise or capacity to facilitate change.

Many states have technical assistance teams that assist struggling districts in getting back on track. However, in many cases, these teams don’t have the capacity or expertise to foster school reform or change initiatives. The end result, many districts get taken over by the very entity that failed to offer them structural and strategic support, when they desperately needed it. As a colleague of mine put it, “it’s the blind leading the blind.”

States often announce state takeovers to great fanfare and make bold claims about the transformation that will occur under their watch. The results are usually less the underwhelming. School districts that are taken over find themselves in a comparable place academically in the next 3-5 years, and achievement either slightly improves, stays flat, slightly decreases or in the worst case scenario gets markedly worse. The problem is almost always that states make structural changes to these districts, but forget to, or don’t have the capacity to make strategic moves. The results are the results. And who ends up getting hurt? The students.

What makes this even more sickening is the fact that when states takeover school districts, they seem to strategically target districts with large populations of black and brown students. In some states, these school districts are either in sum or in part are turned into charter schools and exploited for financial gain. What makes this even more troublesome is that these charter schools end up failing miserably, and states usually do not have a mechanism for monitoring their progress or offering them support and technical assistance. They are left to their own devices, continuing to make millions of dollars and failing to educate black and brown students properly.

If you are keeping score, these poor and disenfranchised black and brown students have now been failed twice, once by their original school district and the state, and then by their new charter school and the state. While the scenario above may not be how things play out in your state, I am sure you will notice similarities.

An example of a state takeover disaster waiting to happen

Let me give you an example of a state takeover that is a disaster waiting to happen. The Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) is currently in the process of taking over Jackson Public Schools (JPS), located in the city of Jackson, MS, after an 18-month investigation. Mississippi is my home state, and I once worked in Jackson Public Schools, so this one is near and dear to my heart. Jackson Public Schools is a large urban school district, comprised of 58 schools.

This story starts in April 2016 after a cursory audit by MDE that found that the Jackson Public Schools district was violating 22 of the state’s 32 accreditation standards. The standards that were violated ranged from safety concerns to ineffective leadership. In August 2016, this information was presented to the Mississippi Commission on School Accreditation, which accredits public schools in Mississippi, and they voted to downgrade JPS’s accreditation status to probation.

This essentially means that JPS did not uphold the state’s accreditation standards and was forced to create a corrective action plan (CAP) within a specified amount of time. The Mississippi Commission on School Accreditation also voted to approve a full audit of all JPS schools, to be conducted by MDE. What makes this problematic, is the fact that JPS was simultaneously asked to create and implement a corrective action plan to get back on track, while being provided with technical assistance from MDE.

In September of 2016, JPS’s then-superintendent Cedrick Gray told its constituents at a town hall meeting, that JPS had created a corrective action plan and submitted it to the State Board of Education, and was well on its way to correcting all of its deficiencies. Then a month later in October 2016, Gray resigned as superintendent in the wake of an “F” accountability rating by the state and the looming possibility of another downgrade in accreditation status. Essentially, the person whose ineffective leadership created this mess was suddenly out the door.

In November 2016, the JPS Board of Trustees picked Fredrick Murray as interim superintendent and unveiled its plans to find a permanent replacement. Later on that month, the State Board of Education rejected the district’s CAP because it was not specific enough in certain areas. You would think that the state would be sympathetic to the district’s situation, and the issues that can arise during a transition of leadership. Not the state of Mississippi. Finally, in December 2016, the State Board of Education decided to accept JPS’s revised CAP, but board members warned the district of the urgency of this matter and reminded them that they were still at risk of takeover and losing their accreditation.

From January 2017 to July 2017, minimal movement occurred. Four JPS school board members resigned during this period, which increased JPS’s leadership vacuum. In February 2017, the board voted to hold off on the superintendent search until the end of the 2017-2018 school year and to allow Dr. Frederick Murry to continue as interim superintendent. In May 2017, JPS hired the Bailey Education Group to help it navigate the audit process. They were forced to do this when the state failed to provide the technical assistance that it is legally required to provide. I would be remiss if I did not point out that during the state takeover process, the relationship between JPS and MDE soured tremendously. In my opinion, it reached the status of unprofessional. This further complicated JPS’s school improvement efforts and sealed its fate.

Fast forward to August 31, 2017. The full audit that was ordered by the Mississippi Commission on School Accreditation was released, but it was not a complete audit, and MDE cited safety concerns at several of the state’s high schools as the reason. In September 2017, MDE reported its findings to the Mississippi Commission on School Accreditation, and the committee voted to recommend that the State Board of Education declare a state of emergency in the school district.

Why? Because JPS was found to still be in violation of 24 of 32 of the standards, 2 more than the initial audit of 2016. In September 2017, MDE presented its findings to the State Board of Education and recommended that the body declare a state of emergency in JPS, which would, in essence, trigger a state takeover. The board approved the measure on September 14, 2017, and announced Dr. Margie Pulley as interim superintendent. Yes, you read that correctly. Within 24 hours of hearing MDE’s case, they made a decision and also announced an interim superintendent.

The next step in the process is for the edict to be sent the governor for his signature. For a state takeover to become a reality, he has to agree that an extreme emergency exists. Initially, he said that he would not make a rash decision, and to his credit, he did not. Part of his justification for stalling the decision was the unavailability of one critical piece of data, the 2016-2017 MDE Accountability Ratings, which is an annual assessment of the academic achievement and growth of all Mississippi school districts. During the fall of each year, the rating system issues each district a letter grade from A-F.

The ratings were announced on September 19, 2017, and as expected, JPS was rated an F. We knew this because, during JPS’s September hearing with the Mississippi State Board of Education, MDE’s attorney mentioned that the preliminary data indicated that JPS would be receiving a grade of F. She disclosed this information, even though it was supposed to be embargoed until September 19, 2017. To be honest, I always thought her unethical disclosure was a political ploy. After receiving this information, the governor decided that he needed more time to make his decision.

In Mississippi, after the governor declares a state of emergency in a district, MDE takes control of and leads the struggling district (through an interim superintendent or conservator), until that district demonstrates sustained improvement, and when that happens, local control is reestablished. The average duration in of a state takeover in Mississippi is three years. The state of Mississippi has a charter school law, so all school districts rated below a C are eligible for charter schools to apply for a charter and operate schools in that district. MDE has created the perfect environment for this to happen in JPS. Time will tell if this was their objective all along.

Let me be frank, I worked in JPS for three years, and I can personally attest to its serious issues. However, MDE’s behavior during the state takeover process was anything but professional and does not lead one to believe that a takeover is not the correct move. During their audit of JPS, MDE failed to follow their own policies and procedures, and when they were called out on it, they covered their tracks. Next, state law required that they provide technical assistance to JPS as the district worked to implement their corrective action plan. However, JPS never received the full technical support that they requested, as MDE could not do so.

How on earth can you be in charge of auditing a school district, while also providing support to it? On top of that, how can you take over a district that you were in charge of helping it to improve, and failed miserably? Also, Dr. Margie Pulley, whom MDE has charged with leading JPS if it is indeed taking over, was the interim superintendent of Tunica County Schools during the 2016-2017 school year. Why is this important? Because Tunica County Schools received an F rating for the 2016-2017 school term. It seems highly unlikely that a leader of a district that was just rated an F can help transform a struggling district like JPS, who also received an F rating. This debacle in Mississippi is a cautionary tale of how greed and power grabs can lead a state and its education system down a path of destruction.

A Hollywood ending?

But wait, there is actually a happy ending to this story. Instead of signing off on a state takeover of Jackson Public Schools, Governor Phil Bryant has formed an alliance to develop a cooperative, comprehensive plan to improve the state’s second-largest school district. What happens to the MDE request for a state takeover of JPS schools? It remains active. Each member of the JPS Board of Trustees has resigned, per the Governor’s wishes. The plan forms a collaborative that includes the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Education Commission of the States and the Mississippi Economic Council.

Also included is the creation of a Project Commission, which is made up of JPS stakeholders. The commissioners and local, state and national partners will host a series of focus group sessions for the community. With consultation from ECS, which will disseminate best practices developed from successes in other states, an RFP to perform an external evaluation of the JPS system will be distributed. The Kellogg Foundation will support the ECS’s efforts, including the external assessment and focus group sessions

The external review will be led by data collection and the focus groups. Its results will inform the creation of a plan that addresses all of JPS’s issues. The Project Commission will discuss the findings and work with stakeholders to identify current resources within JPS to apply toward the plan’s implementation. Episodic evaluations will then be conducted. Hopefully this collaborative will work, and become a model for the rest of the United States.

Conclusion

This disturbing trend has to stop. States must realize that local control is essential, and the idea of a state takeover should only be broached if a real emergency exists, not a manufactured one. A state takeover should always be the last resort and only attempted if the state has the capacity and expertise to help the seized district succeed. Otherwise, it’s a recipe for disaster.

You would think that this would be common sense in education circles, but as we all know, common sense is not all that common.

 

 

 

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

What is a “No-Zero” Grading Policy?

Over the last decade, a growing number of school districts have implemented grading systems that ban educators from giving students grades below 50% (this amount can vary from region to region). This type of policy has been given the term “no-zero” grading, and it usually operates like this: If a student finishes an assignment, regardless if it is late or represents low quality, the student still deserves at least a grade of 50, just for their effort.

Educators who support this policy believe that zero grades can put students in too deep in a hole, making it mathematically impossible for them to pass, which may cause them to disengage from the learning process. They believe that you should always give students a grade of at least 50%, so they can feel as though they can catch up. Also, giving a student a grade of zero is an oxymoron of sorts and not an accurate representation of what a child can do academically.

Skeptics, on the other hand, believe that “no-zero” grading policies send the wrong message to students. At the end of the day, “no-zero” grading policies are not an accurate representation of how life works, well at least for most people. In the real world, you have to earn everything you get. Skeptics also believe that “no zero grading” can artificially inflate student grades, which can hide their academic deficiencies and socially promote students who don’t know the material.

What do you think? Are no-zero grading policies a good or bad idea? What would be a better option?

 

 

 

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

The A-Z of Education: Education Reform

In this series, I hope to guide you in acquiring the vocabulary that you will need to know to be considered a competent education professional. In this article, we will discuss education vocabulary centered on education reform.

Click here to view all of the articles in the series.

A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform A 1983 report suggesting that student performance and other problems with the U.S. educational system placed the nation at risk of falling well behind other industrialized nations.

Decentralized System refers to an organizational structure where decision making and authority, particularly with regards to finances and policy, are transferred away from state and district administrators and progressively handed over to schools. This facilitates more efficient and relevant administration.

Diverse Educational Models refers to the various educational models, developed through successive reforms that are available for schools to adopt in an attempt to implement reform in their particular district or community.

Educational Reform refers to the changes that continually take place to address the changing needs of the national society and workforce at school level. These changes to the educational system are intended to improve the educational experiences and outcomes of students in the United States.

Equity refers to policies and practices that are impartial, seeking not to favor certain groups over others. In terms of educational funding, equity relates to an equitable and balanced distribution of funds to both poor and wealthy districts.

Five-Factor Theory is a theory proposing that schools with effective leadership, ongoing monitoring, safe environments, clear vision, and high expectations of students and teachers have a higher likelihood of being more effective.

Schools-within-Schools refers to a practice based on research showing that students in smaller classes do better, particularly in higher grades. Using the same resources and staff, student groups are subdivided to allow them to receive focused or specialized training, according to their needs.

Standards-Based Education is an approach adopted on a nationwide level to create uniformity around what students are expected to gain from their school career. This is intended to ensure that all students participating in the educational system are offered the same education, regardless of their choice of school.

Virtual Schools refer to schools that are predominantly based on virtual interactions; that is, interactions mediated through the use of technology independent of student or teacher location. This is also known as eLearning.

Are there any terms that I missed?

 

 

 

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

Pass or Fail: Effective Teachers Instead of Retention and Social Promotion

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

What if the tools to eliminate retention and social promotion already exist in our classrooms?

What if all we need are more effective teachers?

Given their centrality to the student’s learning experience and to the management of education as a whole, it’s obvious why effective teachers form the most important alternative to retention and social promotion policies. With qualified, competent teachers, most students exhibiting learning difficulties should nonetheless be able to achieve enough academic progress to warrant advancement to the next grade. Indeed, what this conclusion might indicate is that there should be some internal streaming within grades of the American education system.

Students struggling with literacy or math skills could be streamed into a specific classroom either for a specific grade or for the teaching of a specific subject. The focus of the teaching could be to address the specific challenges experienced by the individual learner, to essentially teach to the student, to interpret standards and expectations for the particular student, and to play to their strengths and target their weaker areas for development.

According to Bellanca, the most successful attempts to teach for intelligence entail several basic assumptions. First, teachers must acknowledge that traditional methods for teaching are not always wrong. There are, Bellanca suggests, many high-achieving students who thrive under the traditional approach to teaching and many typical students or low-achieving students who can improve under a more traditional teaching focus. The key is that traditional methods are inadequate for many students who are less achievement-driven.

Because all students are expected to learn a specific curriculum, it is important that all students have the opportunity to be taught in a manner that enriches their learning. This applies to high achievers as well as to those who struggle academically. When faced with a less motivated student, however, a teacher must be able to develop a strategy to target their specific needs. Individual teachers must have a greater repertoire of methods.

More than this, best teaching practices should concentrate on building new theories of intelligence. Teachers should be familiar with new theories of intelligence and be able to build on them in their teaching practices. We do not have the space in this volume to elaborate on specific theories, but it is appropriate to mention Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, Robert Sternberg’s theory of successful intelligence, Daniel Goleman’s theory of emotional intelligence, and Reuven Feuerstein’s theory of structural cognitive modifiability.

The second point is that the public education system should encourage teachers to regard the process of teaching as a strategic act of engagement, consistent with new theories of intelligence that identify active engagement of students’ minds as a prerequisite for learning. Indeed, teachers have support to apply planning as a means of facilitating the effective application of proven engagement strategies. By regarding teaching as a strategic act, teachers can go about the designing lessons and units that integrate a variety of strategies with targeted content so that each student understands the required knowledge and develops the required skills.

Third, teachers have to understand that it takes more than a review of theoretical information to change teaching practices. Continuing education for teachers is crucial but it must include more than theoretical discussions. There must be some effort for teachers to learn to apply new teaching strategies in the classroom, with guidance to ensure that best practices are actually achieved. In other words, the education system should develop scenarios for teachers to receive regular practical training in addition to theory-based continuing education instruction.

Finally, teachers must also be aware that changing their teaching style or otherwise enhancing it is also going to require, in most instances, that students make changes in their own learning styles. Indeed, when teachers encounter students who are struggling academically, the need to change learning styles may be very immediate. It should, however, be recognized that changing learning styles can be extremely challenging for students. Especially when teachers are making changes to their teaching, it is important for them to be aware that the change process has equally significant ramifications on the student’s side of the desk.

Beginning from an abstract, theoretical point of view and using that to construct a framework or big picture may work in some classroom scenarios. On the other hand, starting with a hands-on classroom test of a new method may be the best approach, and will allow students to be involved in the subsequent evaluation.

As alternatives to retention and social promotion, effective teachers function as the most immediate tools available to the education system in terms of identifying at-risk students and applying all that is known about education and teaching strategies and the capacity to adjust teaching models and the like. This could help at-risk students to master the knowledge and skills needed for them to be able to successfully meet standards for graduation. Like any tool, however, teachers need effective handling as well. They need to receive regular training updates, access to research information, and access to networking opportunities.

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

Why Neuroscience Should Be Taught in Teacher Preparation Programs

Most teacher preparation programs focus exclusively on education. Future elementary school teachers learn about the latest methods for teaching students reading, writing, and math. Middle and high school teacher preparation programs focus on the content area their students will be teaching.

This sounds like a great idea. Teachers should know about education research, methods, and the content they’ll be teaching. But if teacher preparation programs want their students to become truly great educators, they need to teach more than just these things.

In fact, teacher preparation programs should be getting into the sciences—neuroscience, that is. Neuroscience is the study of how the brain and nervous system are developed and how they work. Neuroscientists examine how the brain is connected to behavior and cognition.

How could neuroscience help teachers? Neuroscience can help teachers understand how the brain learns new information. Even having a basic knowledge of neuroscience can inform the way teachers teach.

For example, neuroscience tells us that when children learn new information, that information goes through pathways in the brain. These pathways connect neurons together. The more connections that exist between neurons, the easier it is for the brain to access information.

What does this mean for teachers? When students learn something new, they need to be able to connect it to something they already know. This forms strong neural pathways and makes recall easier.

Teachers who have studied neuroscience know this and more. They know how to get all of a student’s brain active and ensure that what students learn sticks.

In addition to helping future teachers understand how students learn best, neuroscience can help them manage student behavior. Often, the reasons students behave poorly is due to stress. Neuroscientists have studied how stress affects the brain, and their findings can help teachers better understand students’ behavior.

By preparing future teachers with knowledge about how the brain works, universities can help create better teachers. Teachers who are experts on neuroscience and the brain know how to teach students in a way that will make information stick. They’re also better prepared to handle problem behaviors and understand what makes students act out.

Though including neuroscience in teacher preparation programs isn’t traditional, the benefits it offers are numerous. More and more teacher preparation programs are including classes on neuroscience in their curriculum.

What do you think teachers should know about neuroscience? How can studying the brain help future teachers? Let us know what you think!

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Black Boys in Crisis, Digital & Mobile Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, EdTech & Innovation, EdTech Companies List,

Four “Not to Miss” Education Conferences for EdTech Leaders

The field of education has a plethora of conferences and assemblies where educators and industry leaders gather to learn about emerging developments, instructional trends and market disruptors. If you are interested in attending a highly beneficial education conference to share, learn, and find new solutions to current challenges, consider these four “not to miss” conferences that stand out with effective programming and networking opportunities.

  1. The EdNET Conference – September 17-19, Scottsdale, AZ

Hosted by MDR, EdNET2017 provides senior executives from PreK-12 education companies the latest information on market trends, business partnering opportunities, funding sources, new technologies, and activities for key market players.

Now in its 29th year, EdNET is a business-to-business leadership forum, with peer-to-peer interaction. The conference  attracts senior personnel responsible for marketing, sales, business development and strategic initiatives, as well as top management from all industry sectors selling products and services to U.S. schools, including nonprofits and consumer goods.

Speakers include influential voices in education, such as representatives from innovative corporate players, education-focused investment and analyst groups, education institutions, education administrators and policy makers.

EdNET provides a forum for discussion and an opportunity for senior executives to consider not only the market they are currently working in, but also where the industry is headed. It has brought together top executives of companies whose products and services for schools constitute the most important source of instructional and assessment resources available to schools in America and beyond.

This year’s programming is built from conversations with an Industry Advisory Board, and leaders from various segments of the education industry. These Board members identify critical issues in the market, from both the business and customer perspective, and help to shape the topics, speakers and presentations of highest interest. This is one of the most well-established and well-attended educational industry conferences of the year. For more information, click here to visit the conference site.

  1. The iNACOL Symposium – October 23-25, Orlando, Florida

The iNACOL Symposium is sponsored by the nonprofit organization iNACOL, and it focuses on the education of children in grades K through 12. This conference is designed for anyone within the education field, whether a teacher, professor or administrator.

In addition to the opportunity to develop your network, the symposium offers a broad range of topics to help you explore new ways of teaching. There are over 200 sessions covering a wide variety of issues that fall one of the following foci:

  • Personalized learning
  • Policies
  • Competency education
  • Blended and online learning
  • iNACOL national quality standards

It is the kind of event that you must attend to get a real understanding of the scope and breadth of knowledge that is on display. You can check out the areas being highlighted at the symposium to see if they are covering a particular field. If you are interested in setting up an exhibition, they are still accepting applications.

While there are still months before the event, there are already several hashtags associated with it. You can post some of your own ideas or look up what others are saying with the hashtags #Policymakers and #Edleaders. You can also follow details about the symposium and other news and events by iNACOL by following @nacol on Twitter.

  1. DevLearn 2017 – October 25-27, Las Vegas, Nevada

If you are actively involved in using technology to help students learn, this is a conference you need to add to your calendar. The entire event is dedicated to different learning technologies and how they can best be used to enhance the learning experience. Sponsored by the eLearning Guild, you will have three days devoted to technology in education. You can speak with some of the leaders in the industry or share ideas with others who are enthusiastic about what technology can do to help students perform better both in the classroom and outside it.

You can follow the latest news and information on Twitter @eLearningGuild.

  1. ExcelinEd’s National Summit on Education Reform – November 30-December 1, Nashville, TN

To round out the year, you can go to the National Summit hosted by ExcelinEd for a look at ways to improve and reform the American education system. The focus goes beyond the classroom and examines how state and local policymakers and advocates can keep up with the latest trends to help students get ahead in their education. Some of the conference’s primary focus include the following:

  • Holding schools accountable for learning
  • Creating incentives for students to achieve more
  • Using technology to improve and customize education based on the student
  • Expanding the options for students and parents

By focusing on these details before the holiday season, you can establish some resolutions to help improve the way you, the local government, and the state approach education. To stay current on the latest news and changes to the event, you can follow the event on Twitter @ExcelinEd.

Final Thoughts

As the field of education continues to evolve at a furious pace, the need to assemble and share our thoughts and best practices is more important than ever. The conferences that were discussed in this piece are just a sample menu of all the valuable and relevant gatherings that will take place this fall. Our hope is that it provides a starting place for educational professionals that are planning to attend a conference in the near future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Pass or Fail: The Objectives of America’s Public Education System

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

We’ve all seen reports about contemporary students graduating high school, or even college without the basic, fundamental skills to flourish on their own. How many students do you know who are well rounded academically, creatively, intellectually and emotionally? Seems like a tall order these days, but it wasn’t always that way.

Individual Focused Education

Let’s take a closer look at some of the original goals and objectives of the American education system. The most notable point about the earliest goals of education seems to be that they were targeted to the individual. Indeed, Benjamin Franklin, one of the most innovative thinkers of his day, recommended an outcome-based approach to education. He saw the need to emphasize literacy and numeracy skills. He saw the need for foundational skills. He maintained that this foundation was fundamental and should be applied to help develop more advanced skills in math and science.

Such knowledge – scientific and mathematical knowledge and understanding – was necessary not only for productivity in the workplace, for individuals to be employable, but because it was in the interest of the individual to understand the world around them. Franklin, like us, lived in an age of tremendous scientific advancements. He was responsible for numerous inventions and discoveries himself. His objectives remain viable today, especially given the advancements we have seen with computers and with connectivity, with communications, and everything that goes along with communications today.

We see some basic applications of this objective in education today, too, in that most children are taught the basics of computers. Creativity was also an important focus for Franklin and the other Founding Fathers. Creativity was important to Franklin because he considered it necessary for the individual to see possibilities in an ever-changing world.

Modern Day Education

Of course, it has been argued that the modern education system in the United States, including such developments as No Child Left Behind, has continued to follow the principles and pursue the goals of the Founding Fathers, Franklin included. With No Child Left Behind, for instance, it could be argued that literacy is very much in focus, along with the basic understanding of math. Similarities between the modern system’s goals and those imagined by the Founding Fathers, however, are minimal. Literacy and even education were targeted to achieve a higher purpose. Franklin envisaged individuals being educated to understand and appreciate the world around them. He desired for children to be educated to interact with their world, their environment, on a higher intellectual plane.

The graded school system itself is the next problem to be overcome. Unfortunately, the resolution of this issue is not as straightforward as a simple curriculum change. The breaking of such a tradition requires an alternative system that will provide swift benefits to the population it serves and target specific outcomes that are most desirable for the education of America’s children.

When you look at early education objectives, in comparison to modern times, it’s as if they’re on opposite ends of the spectrum. For all our advancements and technology, is America’s public education system better off nowadays?

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

Pass or Fail: Is Testing a Valid Way to Measure Student Progress?

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

What if the measures we use to determine passing or failing grades are completely skewed? Is standardized testing, or any testing for that matter, the right way to determine student progress?

For obvious reasons, one of the first and most significant concerns for the application of standardized tests is that they are not consistent with the standards for fair and appropriate testing. Of course, educators must first define the standards themselves, and demonstrate them to be relevant. In this instance, we are referring to the standards for fair and appropriate testing as defined by the NRC Report, which says that measurement validity refers to the extent to which evidence supports a proposed interpretation and use of test scores for a particular purpose.

For instance, a measurement validity of the reading section of the SAT I standard test would be assessed to have a reasonable validity for assessment of an individual’s reading comprehension skills, knowledge of grammar rules, and ability to make inferences from texts. The use of scores from this test to determine an individual’s preparedness for entry into a particular college program would also be reasonably good. The component of appropriate testing usually overlaps with this second issue of validity, too, which the NRC Report Standards also outlines, and which is backed up by the findings of various other organizations.

To go back to the more formal parameters, the general rule is that the internal structure of the test, the content of the test, the relationship of the test to other criteria, and the psychological processes and cognitive operations used by the examinee in responding to the test items must all support the purpose of the test.

A test assessing knowledge and skill should target the knowledge and skills specifically; looking, as well, to ensure that the knowledge and skills being assessed are those that have been obtained from appropriate instruction. In some instances, knowledge might depend on poor instruction or on factors that are unrelated to the skills under review. For instance, a student might score poorly on the SAT reading test because their teachers didn’t transfer the necessary knowledge and skill (the students may not have received the targeted knowledge of proper grammar, for instance, or they have received inadequate instruction on how to read critically).

Another example would be that an individual might score badly on the SAT reading test not because they lack reading comprehension skills that the test intends to assess but because they have significant language barriers or because there are cultural differences that have some bearing on the test. For instance, a passage in American history that is being read for comprehension but that in some way relies upon presupposed knowledge of American history or customs might be problematic and undermine the validity and fairness of tests scores, undermining the attribution of cause.

Disabilities can also factor as an issue for the attribution of cause. Several types of cognitive or even physical disabilities can undermine an individual’s performance in a testing scenario without appropriate interventions provided to support the student’s exceptionalities.

In the context of K-12 assessments, the cause component also influences the extent to which students receive adequate opportunity to learn the material for the test. Adequate quality and quantity of instruction become important, as does the alignment of test content and curriculum.

Students need adequate opportunity within the testing scenarios to demonstrate their knowledge. If tests contain irrelevant language or content, for instance, students may not have adequate opportunity to perform and test developers will have compromised the fairness and relevance of the test.

Furthermore, many of the criteria for fairness in testing standards overlap with attribution of cause. In the Standards, overlapping elements include the investigation of bias and differential item functioning, determining whether construct-irrelevant variance differentially affects different groups of examinees, and equal treatment during the testing process.

Circular validity lies within the cause component in the sense that it relates to the alignment between test content and the curriculum taught in class. Chapter 13 of the Standards determines that “There should be evidence that the test adequately covers only the specific or generalized content and skills that students have had an opportunity to learn.”

This goes beyond the criteria outlined here and applies to a broader interpretation of opportunity to learn; one that is not restricted to curricular validity but also inclusive of the consideration of instructional quality as a predictor of student test scores.

Certain polices within the K-12 setting make high-stakes student decisions dependent upon evidence that the student has the educational experience and opportunity to acquire relevant knowledge and skill. Where students have lacked sufficient opportunity to acquire desired skills in an educational context, they may not meet the criteria for grade promotion or graduation.

At the same time, though, it is hardly fair that the student be held accountable for the deficit in their learning. At what point do we say: this portion of education is the responsibility of the schools, of the system and the stakeholders, not just the individual student?

The effectiveness of treatment is the final component of the fair and appropriate test criteria, relating to whether test scores lead to consequences that are educationally beneficial in a given context. Consequences could include placement in a particular academic grouping based on ability or advancement from one level of learning to a higher level based on test achievement. Accountability plays a part here, too, as the criteria for effective treatment determines that it is inappropriate to use tests to make placements that are not educationally beneficial.

When tests are used in placement decisions, they must be fair and appropriate. Students must be “better off in the setting in which they are placed than they would be in a different available setting.” With all of these factors in mind, though, can testing ever truly be trusted as a placement option for students?

  • no reactions
0
Share