Teachers

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

Promoting Student Achievement through Accountability and Assessment

Educators, parents, politicians, and concerned citizens agree that the American educational system is in poor shape, and that far reaching changes are needed for improvement. One illustration: in today’s junior high schools, more than 80 percent of Black and Latino students say they intend to go to college. For those who get to college, up to 60 percent require remedial work to prepare them for college courses. Furthermore, 25-50 percent of these students drop out of college after only one year.

Accountability in education refers to holding school districts, school administrators, educators and students responsible for demonstrating specific academic performance results. Accountability has become a word describing a whole host of educational activity, and is held up as a banner by some and feared by others. Throughout the country, policy makers are moving toward systems designed to reward educators for achievement and punish them for lack of improvement.

Historically, school system reform was guided by “inputs” into the system. Schools were given more resources, more funding, more staffing, and in some cases had added more days to the school year, in an attempt to improve learning outcomes. The focus on inputs did not necessarily lead to noticeable improvements in student achievement.

A paradox remains where low-performing schools are having the most difficult time making significant improvements. As a result, these schools risk losing funding and support they so desperately need to advance. Of course, many people are worried about making such huge funding and support decisions based on a single high-stakes test. Clearly, there are no easy answers to fixing our education system, but accountability and assessment are the current avenues we are taking. When discussing how to improve our educational system, it is important to understand the language and the relevant issues.

School reform can no longer rely mostly on giving schools more resources and more support. Time has shown that inputs have no real impact on student performance. Federal edicts, such as NCLB have enforced protocols based on standards, testing, and accountability. These standards emphasize performance objectives and require high levels of accountability from educators.

The required reforms, particularly those which impose sanctions similar to those imposed by NCLB, often create much stress and anxiety. Many educators ask whether it is fair to hold schools accountable for student achievement. And, even if it is “fair,” how are we to measure such achievement? What testing and evaluation formulas will be used? The answers to questions like this are not easy. Obviously, achievement can only be guaranteed if we assess it in some way. However, current assessment models are flawed.

Research suggests that standards and accountability may improve learning for some disadvantaged students, particularly those with disabilities. When some schools implement accountability guidelines, they promote an environment of increased collaboration among educators and create an environment where teachers expect all students to perform well academically, which in turn encourages better learning outcomes.

Some countries have been able to show effective and useful outcomes based on their use of certain accountability policies. However, American policy-makers and researchers still do not have any real evidence that these latest accountability reforms are working to improve outcomes for the vast majority of students.

Conversations around school accountability have been polarized. Politicians and parents often want to hold schools and teachers completely responsible for student achievement. Teachers point to disinterested students and uninvolved parents, saying that there is only so much they can do. But studies have shown that if teachers and students work together, and schools hold themselves accountable, great strides can be made. Open discussions of accountability and standards bring us to a place where schools are performing better and our children are learning. This is what the American education system should focus its attention and resources on. Then and only then can we make substantial progress in our quest to close the achievement gap.

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

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

Why Teaching Jobs Should be Preserved during School Reform

 By Matthew Lynch

School reform is never easy. When sweeping changes are decided upon and implemented, everyone must fully participate in order for students to benefit from the changes and certainly not to suffer during the transition. Part of providing that stability for students is through a strong front of teachers that remain at the school during the sometimes turbulent reform process.

Reform is truly not possible without a united front of educators and administrators. A shared vision is challenging to create and maintain without stable leadership, and a supportive culture from the staff.  It is a simple fact of life that high staff turnover can create instability and have a negative impact on efforts to establish a consistent learning environment for students. High staff turnover is also quite costly, particularly when the recruitment of teachers, and then the training of new teachers in the intricacies of the reform effort are considered.

More effort and support needs to be given to the recruitment process for teachers at the outset as schools and districts initiate reform efforts. Hiring teachers who “fit” reform goals will likely reduce teacher attrition.  Still, more support needs to be available for new teachers. Even teachers who ostensibly have the skills and attitudes that align with reform goals will need mentoring and other supports as they begin their jobs. Every attempt must be made to reduce the debilitating rate of turnover.

Doesn’t reform result in loss of teaching jobs though?

Inevitably, a major factor for sustaining reform is having the money to do so. Most efforts now are centered on how to make the most of current funding and utilizing money effectively in order to maximize the positive impact of reforms, rather than how to access untapped resources. Despite the dearth of new money, it is possible to free up cash through alternative means of spending.

An extreme proposal to accomplish this is to reduce staffing to the absolute minimum. For example, a school with 500 students would have 20 teachers and 1 principal. Approximately $1 million could become available, depending on how many education specialists (regular and categorical) and instructional aides worked within the school. This is radical option, and there are other, less extreme ways to change the way money is spent, to include increasing class sizes, spending less on upgrading technology, and eliminating some programs.

The key however is to look in detail at all financial outlays, measure them according to the extent to which they contribute to the goals of the school reform, and rank them according to how well they do this. This will enable schools to break down spending into its core components and work out what is necessary and what can be cut during the process of change in order to better implement their improvement strategy. This is particularly important in times of austerity, when elements that are not essential may have to be reduced or cut in order to help drive reform, no matter how popular or long-standing they may be.

Spending money on non-essential areas does support school reform efforts. Prioritizing what money is spent on does not automatically mean cutting all non-academic projects. What gets cut will depend on the goals of individual schools. This should be a workable situation, as long as the school is still accountable to the state and the district for shifts in expenditures. An understanding that cutting teaching jobs can actually be detrimental to reform is important though, instead of just looking at the numbers on a piece of paper.

photo credit: R Joanne via photopin cc

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

Understanding Federal Funding Part I: 3 Types of School Funding

Not only do school systems receive state funding but also federal funding through various programs and initiatives. Therefore it is important to understand three types of federal funding methods that transpired throughout history which include categorical aid, grants, and Title I funds.

Currently, the federal government contributes approximately 9% annually, or about $71 billion, to the education of the nation’s elementary- and secondary-aged children. The amount of support varies from state to state, with some states receiving more federal monies. South Dakota receives the most federal funding (an estimated 16% of the state’s entire educational budget), while New Jersey gets only 3% of its funds from federal sources. The U.S. Department of Education was allocated $63.7 billion for fiscal year 2010. The department distributes funds to schools, determines major education issues and focuses attention to them through provision of funds, instigates programs designed to ensure an equal education for all, and engages in research activities that result in an accumulation of educational statistics.

Before the 1980s, federal funding was distributed to states solely in the form of categorical aid
(or grants). Basically, money was designated to fund several federally sponsored programs and to support federally based educational legislation. Categorical aid was spent on specific items or in particular ways. For example, money for textbooks was to be used exclusively for textbooks. Schools and districts had to track how money from categorical aid was spent and had to report these expenditures to the federal government to ensure that money was used in the manner for which it was intended. Any unused funds had to be returned to the provider, if they were not spent within an allocated time frame. Many critics claim that the stipulations attached to federal monies allowed the federal government to more readily influence state-based education, as districts had to accept federal regulations in order to receive the funding.

In the 1980s, the Reagan administration introduced the notion of the block grant. With this method of funding, monies were dispersed to states with relatively minor conditions attached. This change in funding reflected the Republican belief that the federal government should play a lesser role in educational policy making. The federal government transferred money in a “block” to individual states, and the states decided how the money would be spent. Both block grants and categorical aid are currently used by the federal government to finance education. States are accountable to the federal government for how monies are spent. To this end, they must accept conditions attached to grants and prepare plans for funds received. All expenditures must be tracked, and reports regarding how monies were spent must be submitted to the federal government. These requirements have led to an increased federal influence over education nationwide.

Federal government monies are often distributed to school districts through the state departments of education. Typically, states apply for available federal funds to support state goals and needs, although school districts can apply directly to the federal government for grants as well. As a beginning teacher, you may be asked to sit on a committee that structures a grant proposal. You may also want to consider taking the initiative to suggest an idea, a program, or an educational service that could benefit from the funds provided by a federal grant.

Some sources of federal funds have been available for a number of years. Funds under Title I of
Elementary and Secondary School Act (ESEA) have been available since 1965, when the legislation first passed. Title I funds are directed toward improving the education of students from low-income backgrounds. The intent of the legislation of ESEA 1965 is to provide “compensatory education” as a means of ensuring equality of educational opportunities for all children, regardless of the economic status of their parents. Today, states wishing to receive Title I monies must submit to the federal government a proposal for educational improvement.

Typically, the state disperses funds to school districts, which then provide funds to individual schools. All schools considered for Title I funds must have a minimum percentage of low-income students in attendance. Schools with the highest percentages of poor students receive the most money from the Title I fund. Schools have the right to decide how the money will be spent on site and do not have to specifically allocate funds to individual students. Title I monies can be channeled into general programs of improvement, benefiting all students enrolled in the school. Initiatives such as the “Race to the Top” stimulus program have also been initiated at a federal level. This fund aims to assist states in achieving the standards outlined by Title I, acting as a stimulus grant for schools that can demonstrate that they are committed to reform and take proactive steps to ensure the output of competent students. As a beginning teacher, you should investigate how your state participates in and coordinates reform initiatives and ensure that you remain abreast of requirements. Your investigation will also familiarize you with many of the structures discussed in this chapter and with applying the required guidelines to your particular school and students.

In the 2006–2007 school year, the federal government committed almost $14 billion to Title I grants, which aided 17 million elementary- and secondary-aged school children in 61,000 schools across the country. Almost two thirds of the recipient children were in elementary school. Funds aided the education of 35% of all Hispanic students, 33% of all European American students, and 25% of African American students. Asian American and Native American students made up the remaining 7%. A national assessment of Title I conducted in 2006 found that students who had received services through the grant made modest improvements in both reading and mathematics, as evidenced by standardized test scores. Although Title I funds have helped low-income children improve, their progress in basic reading and mathematics lags behind that of their higher-income peers.

Some criticize Title I as a waste of money, suggesting that there is no real evidence that Title
I helps to improve education outcomes for students who receive Title I services. Critics point out that the funding directed toward improved educational outcomes for low-income children has done little to stem the unremitting cycle of poverty. They maintain that social ills associated with poverty, such as drug use, dropping out of school, early pregnancies, and the inability to find work persist. Advocates of Title I claim that the legislation was never meant to address every facet of poverty, and that services made possible by Title I funds have resulted in small gains in the lives of children the services were intended to help. Proponents of Title I further argue that small successes have an inestimable influence on a life that would otherwise be destroyed by poverty, and that no monetary value can be assigned to that influence.

In addition to Title I, the federal government funds other compensatory programs, all aimed to provide equality of education for lower-income children. Some, like Head Start include a substantial parental involvement component as a means for increasing each parents’ role in facilitating the intellectual and social growth of their children. Other programs target older students, whether in elementary or in secondary schools. Tutoring, literacy training, and projects designed to discourage dropping out of school are all examples of programs funded by the federal government. Title I programs today fall under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, which was passed in 2001. The 2001 enactment of NCLB was actually a renaming and reauthorization of the ESEA. ESEA was modified several times after 1965, but NCLB was the first sweeping overhaul of the legislation.

Unlike its predecessor, NCLB includes extensive language that connects federal benefits and funding to evidence-based achievement, like standardized testing. NCLB includes specific goals for schools that include early learning initiatives for at-risk students intended to set them on the right path for learning in the formative years. These reading programs for young students have been shown to boost the overall educational achievement for children.

While ESEA took the first steps toward equalizing public school education, NCLB put more specific benchmarks in place. NCLB is grounded in the conviction that a student’s performance can be improved through the simple act of setting high standards and that the achievement of educational objectives can be accurately measured by standardized tests. NCLB requires schools to show adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward a goal of 100% proficiency among students by the 2013–2014 school year, in the areas of reading and mathematics. Schools not making AYP from year to year are subject to sanctions, ranging from the requirement to develop or revise an existing improvement plan after missing AYP for 1 year to complete school restructuring after missing AYP for 5 consecutive years. School districts that fail to ensure that sanctions are implemented at schools not making AYP risk losing Title I funds. Schools do have some leeway in how they can attain AYP. The safe harbor provision, for example, allows a school to improve by 10% overall, even if individual students have not attained state standard. Schools can also receive credit if individual students improve their performance by one third over the course of the year.

The federal government’s commitment to the education of all children was evidenced most recently with the American Recovery and Revitalization Act (ARRA), formalized in 2009.
ARRA allocated a total of $150 billion to keep schools open and functioning across the nation.
This particular piece of legislation was especially significant, because it marked the first time that the federal government provided funding based on the level of need of either the schools or the educational system.

Through the development of federal funding programs school systems are able to continue providing education to children and youth. Although there is still some controversy regarding the amount of funding given by the government, as Educators and guardians, we must be aware of the changes in legislation and how their decisions impact federal funds.

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

Education crisis extends across the United States

The U.S. Education Department reports that the high school graduation rate is at an all time high at 80 percent.  Four out of five students are successful in studies completion and graduate within four years. While these statistics sound like a reason for a standing ovation, they are overshadowed by the crisis that is sweeping the United States. While 80 percent of high school seniors receive a diploma, less than half of those are able to proficiently read or complete math problems.

The problem is that students are being passed on to the next grade when they should be held back, and then they are unable to complete grade-level work and keep up with their classmates.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the largest standardized test administered in the United States, reports that fewer than 40 percent of graduating seniors have mastered reading and math and are poorly equipped for college and real world life.  These students who are passed to the next grade are at a serious disadvantage and have an increased chance of falling behind and dropping out of college.

Luckily, the problem isn’t going unnoticed.  The chair of the National Assessment Governing Board, David Driscoll acknowledges the sobering scores. He points out that it is necessary to determine the performance level of high school seniors, and that the data obtained is useful. It can instill a sense of urgency throughout the U.S. education system to better prepare students for college and the real world.

While this isn’t new news to me, I do feel that this crisis is alarming. I agree with David Driscoll and feel that this data can be used to make improvements in education. All students should be able to proficiently read and do math problems prior to high school graduation.

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

The First Year Teaching: The desist approach to classroom discipline

By Matthew Lynch

As you look for your own way of operating your classroom efficiently, there are several styles of teaching discipline to consider. One that is often used because of its easy-to-implement practices is the “desist” approach. Unlike the self-discipline approach where students are responsible, the desist approach places teachers as the responsible ones. This approach can be viewed as a power system, as teachers have the power and they set the specific rules to give students discipline and correct students’ behaviors. Here is how this method is put into practice:

Assertive Discipline

This approach bases itself on the fact that teachers have the power to ask and require specific actions from students. However, this discipline still has students’ best interest in mind. Canter and Canter, in their historical study conducted in 1992, found that teachers who use this discipline are actually calm when it comes to the rules and limits. This discipline makes teachers assert clear rules.  It gives students the clear idea that misbehavior has consequences and if students want positive consequences, they know how to achieve them.

Behavior Modification

This approach centers around four types of punishment/reinforcement.  These are:

  • Positive Reinforcement: Giving extra credit for a question answered with much thought
  • Positive Punishment: A meeting with a Principal
  • Negative Reinforcement: Removal of an activity that the student does not enjoy
  • Negative Punishment: Decrease in free time

This approach finds the positive reinforcement to be the most effective while punishments are comparatively ineffective. It goes without saying then that teachers are expected to encourage students’ good behaviors instead of criticizing the misbehavior.

In both cases, a lot of the responsibility of the enforcement of acceptable classroom behavior falls on the shoulder of the teacher but for individuals who want to have a tighter control over how things operate, this may be favorable. In classrooms with younger students, this may also be something that is desired as students, particularly in grades K-3, have not yet had enough classroom exposure to really understand how to implement self-discipline models.

In most cases, teachers will subscribe to more than one type of classroom management when it comes to discipline and order. If you are a teacher with different students depending on the period of the day, you may find that one style is preferable over another based on the personalities in your specific class. Conversely, you may go into the process with one style in mind and then find that in practice, something else works better. The main thing is that you at least consider how you want your classroom to operate before going into the process blindly, hoping for the best.

It may be hard to believe, but at some point you won’t need to put so much upfront effort into determining the kind of teacher you want to be — it will just come naturally. In the mean time, consider the best ways to function in your classroom to benefit your students and make your early teaching years more manageable for you.

Check out all our posts for First Year Teachers here. 

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

Don’t Miss this Quick (Yet Important) Guide to Multiculturalism in the United States

The United States is becoming more diverse every day. We are rapidly approaching, if not yet solidly in, an era where the majority of students are from ethnic minority groups. Because of this, it’s really important to know the role multiculturalism plays in the United States and in American education.

Here are 7 questions you’ll want to know the answers to. You will be that much more prepared to face any unique challenges that come with educating with multiculturalism in mind.

  1. What does “culture” mean in the United States? Culture in the United States can be separated into several elements, including behavior, beliefs, traditions, and values. In the early years of the republic, American culture was indelibly associated with European-derived, English-speaking Protestant culture. More recently, however, the influx of new languages, religions, and other cultural ingredients has created a more diverse and challenging environment. Many elements of personal freedom, including freedom of religion and speech, are protected by the legal system. But there’s a conflict between autonomy and assimilation: Is it better to press students into a monocultural mold or to celebrate their diversity?
  2. What is the role of ethnicity in our schools? Determining ethnicity can be complex and includes factors such as race, religion, customs, and culture. The United States is becoming increasingly diverse. Americans of Asian, African, and Hispanic origin are on the rise, and this is reflected in classroom populations. Furthermore, individuals who are multiethnic (who associate with more than one ethnic group) form an increasingly large portion of the student population. Laws have changed in the United States to reflect the value of cultures and languages other than the traditional European ones. It is important that teachers are aware of and are prepared to deal with racism in the classroom.
  3. What is the role of multiculturalism in today’s schools? Multiculturalism is the acceptance of multiple cultures coexisting in a society that provides equitable status to distinct ethnic groups. The former “melting pot” ideology is being replaced by a “patchwork quilt” perspective, in which cultural identity and language are preserved. A number of theories have been floated to explain the variety of performance levels in children of different backgrounds, including the cultural deficit theory (students don’t do well because of an inadequate home environment), the expectation theory (teachers have lower expectations of certain students), and the cultural difference theory (students from different cultures have different ways of learning).
  4. How can teachers embrace their multicultural classrooms? Currently, 37% of U.S. students view themselves as coming from multicultural backgrounds, and the percentage is increasing. By 2040, children of color will make up a majority of students. Schools are currently engaged in producing more inclusive curricula, which reflect the backgrounds of their student population. Teachers should be “color aware,” rather than “color blind,” and should encourage students to share and celebrate their diverse backgrounds and experiences by being inclusive and particularistic.
  5. How religiously diverse are our students? Today, only 51% of U.S. students are Protestant. Groups such as Hindus, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists make up around 5% of the population, though this percentage is growing rapidly. The separation of church and state in the educational sphere has grown more pronounced in recent years, and it is now against the law, for example, to have school prayers. But it is important to encourage students to share about their religious experiences, and to celebrate all forms of religious experience.
  6. How linguistically diverse are our students? In the early part of the 20th century, laws were passed limiting the teaching of languages other than English. More recently, however, those laws were challenged. Students may now be taught in languages other than English, and transitional services are offered in many schools.
  7. Does America promote linguistic and intellectual diversity in the classroom? The United States does not have an official language. About 80% of Americans speak English at home. Other families speak languages such as Spanish, Tagalog, Hmong, French, and Chinese. As a result, most schools now include language programs for non-English speakers. The Bilingual Education Act and similar legislation stipulate that ELLs must be provided with the tools to acquire English. Models vary, however, and include the immersion model, the transition model, and developmental bilingual education.

Do you have any beneficial information on the role of culture in our society? What is your personal experience with multiculturalism in the classroom? I would really appreciate hearing your thoughts, so feel free to leave a comment.

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

The Benefits of Browsing: Why Teachers Should Indulge in Online Social Networking

The Internet is not just about consuming – it’s also about connecting. Forums and other forms of online social networking provide opportunities for educators to come together and commiserate, encourage, and share information.

Online social networking encompasses different online communities of people who share common interests. It allows members of that community to interact in a variety of ways. They can conduct live chats, or they can leave comments in blogs or discussion groups.

These communities are shaped by different profiles of individuals who link to each other. Each member of the community creates a personal profile that can include pictures, personal information, audio, and video files. Others can access this profile and can connect to it by requesting a friendship with the other member. Almost all of these social networks have security settings, so each member can accept or deny access to their information and profile.

An example of an online social network is Facebook. This is a worldwide tool that allows individuals to connect with friends, classmates, coworkers, and teachers. This network also includes a feature that allows you to look for individuals by name. Facebook is creating a worldwide network, connecting people around the world and allowing them to rediscover friends and family members not seen for years. Other examples of social networking sites include Tumblr and Google Plus. Teachers have taken advantage of these tools. Using Facebook, for example, they can develop small group projects, build a classroom community, and present discussion boards for students.

Something to be aware of is the fact that, when you become involved in online social networks, you are highly exposed to students and parents. Educators must be very careful not to have “inappropriate” profiles, pictures, or postings. A teacher cannot post personal opinions about students and must be very careful about the pictures they include in their profile and the kind of communication they have with students.

Communication and information access have also shifted. New online tools give teachers and students immediate access to millions of gigabytes of information, available in seconds. International news is heard and watched virtually live. One of the leaders of this change is YouTube, an online video clearinghouse, where any user can watch, upload, and share online videos. Almost any subject matter can be found in this site, from homemade video to footage captured by cell phones to comprehensive film productions.

E-portfolio or assessment tools allow students to store their work in web-based portfolios, so teachers and students can have access to it. This is also a feature included in blogs. Teachers can permit students to upload their work to the blogs for other students to watch and review. Students not only get the opportunity to publish their work, but they also get opinions from fellow students all over the world. Knowing that other classmates will be reading their work, students tend to invest more time and effort in their writing.

Online social networking is a massive opportunity to expand your network, pick up new tips and techniques, and find support and friendship. If you haven’t already, take some “you-time” to peruse the various social networking sites available to you and check out what they have to offer you as a teacher – and a person.

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

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

Teaching and Politics: Behind the Scenes of Common Core Wars

By Matthew Lynch

As more and more governors and local politicians denounce Common Core initiatives, and more states officially back away from the standards, the debate over the place and effectiveness of Common Core heats up.  In fact,Indiana’s Republican Governor Mike Pence made headlines when he announced that his state would soon abandon the Common Core standards.  But what is really going on and how does this affect those who matter most—the teachers and students?

What Indiana did may have appeared groundbreaking to outsiders, but anyone following the Common Core debate knows it is just the tip of the iceberg. There have been a significant number of bills filed in the U.S. that deal with ways for students to become college-ready. Of those, 100 are designed specifically to slow, halt or overturn Common Core requirements. So there are a lot of non-federal entities that feel their legislative toes have been stepped on when it comes to K-12 college readiness curriculum and testing.

Federal versus State Rights

Beyond academics, the Common Core requirements are at the heart of a war that has been waged between state’s rights and the role of the federal government in uniform K-12 standards. On the surface, it does appear that Common Core standards are meant to give federal authority. In truth though there is some wiggle room for states to make the standards their own and places like Tennessee, Mississippi and Arizona are doing just that. If implemented in the way they were designed, Common Core requirements will actually put more control in the hands of the states and not the federal government.

Are Teachers Happy about It?

There seems to be a lot of conflicting information when it comes to what teachers think about Common Core standards – and what they think matters. After all, they are the people who are most accountable for any standards and testing systems that are put in place. They are also the ones who see firsthand how education policies impact students. So what is the truth about what teachers think about Common Core testing?

  • 75 percent support Common Core, says a May 2013 American of Federation (AFT) poll that surveyed 800 teachers.
  • 76 percent strongly, or somewhat, support Common Core based on an Education Next Survey from 2013.
  • More than three-fourths support Common Core Standards “wholeheartedly” or with some minor reservations, according to a September 2013 National Education Association member survey.
  • 73 percent of teachers that specializes in math, science, social studies and English language arts are “enthusiastic” about the implementation of Common Core standards in their classrooms, from a 2013 Primary Sources poll of 20,000 educators.

Beyond those numbers, a higher amount of elementary teachers are optimistic about Common Core than their high school counterparts. A survey conducted by The Hechinger Report Scholastic and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation found that just 41 percent of high school teachers are positive about Common Core standards. A recent survey by the National Association of Elementary School Principals found that more than 80 percent of principals (out of 1,000 from 14 states) say that Common Core standards have the potential to increase student skill mastery, create meaningful assessments and improve areas like conceptual understanding.

It seems that the basis of Common Core is a solid one, then, when it comes to the people who understand teaching the most. Today’s teachers are in overcrowded, underfunded classrooms with higher accountability standards placed on them than ever before. If there truly was an unfair setup, teachers would certainly be the first ones to point it out.

What do you think is really going on?  Are the common core debates simply political or do they hold water—academically speaking?

 

 

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

3 Keys to Inspiring True Dialogue in Your Classroom

A longtime educator and nonprofit leader shares his blueprint for turning contentious topics into teachable moments that help turn students into global citizens.

By Dr. Ian Jamison

More than any other generation in human history, the students who are in school today will live alongside, work with, and relate to peers with the widest possible range of cultural backgrounds, beliefs, values, and perspectives. To help them thrive in this complex world, it is imperative that we give them the tools they need to build societies that welcome diversity rather than fearing it, that encourage open-mindedness rather cultivating prejudice, and that include rather than exclude.

The alternatives are too terrible to contemplate. Every day we see news reports that indicate what happens as a direct result of people rejecting diversity, celebrating intolerance, and wishing to impose their monolithic vision of reality upon others. With the rapid growth of social media and other forms of online communication, our students are almost certainly already participating in global discussions. At best, young people are being subjected to poor examples of how to interact online, and at worst, we know that a great deal of radicalization into violent extremism takes place online.

Read the rest of the article on The Huffington Post.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Education Leadership, First Year Teachers, Teachers

6 Best Practices for Internal Communication in Public Schools

Written by Eric Walters and Karen Gerberry

Internal communication may be more important than many think. 42% of communication is  delivered   through   other   people.  Whether  it  is  information   needing  to  be communicated  to  teachers,  students  or  administration  a  student  success  is highly dependent on the frequency and quality of communication. Successful communication between teachers and parents is most common in schools with well-informed, effective educators.

Schools, realizing this, have implemented practices to communicate valuable information within their school systems. What are some of these strategies and what benefits do they provide to these school districts?

  1. Developing New Policies

School systems can often be dispersed, making meetings and collaboration difficult. With advancements in technology, however, sharing thoughts and ideas is becoming increasingly easier. In the past, in order to make policy changes, the school board would have to coordinate meetings between all interested parties to develop new policies. Now, with the use of wikis, administrators can access information regarding changes in the school district and make adjustments accordingly.

Not only has technology made it possible for people to access this information from anywhere at any time, but it has also expanded the reach of this data. Before the use of wikis, many parents and faculty were left out of the policy­making process altogether. Whether the problem was logistical or time related, some would argue that there was not an accurate representation of all interested parties.

By using technology to streamline an antiquated process, school districts have afforded many people the opportunity to provide insights and opinions on some of their most important educational concerns.

  1. Schools Employing Internal Communications Managers

With all of the responsibilities involved with being an educator, it is easy to get caught up in day today activities and lose sight of larger issues within the school district. Schools are realizing that a disconnect exists in the communication process and are becoming more active in increasing engagement with employees.

To assist teachers in becoming more involved with internal communication, some districts are employing Internal Communications Managers. These managers act as facilitators of information throughout the school district. Their primary responsibilities are to keep employees informed on major initiatives, events, and news affecting the school district.

Although this method is slightly different than wikis, the idea is essentially the same. The Internal Communications Managers help teachers stay involved by gathering the information and releasing it to interested parties, thus reducing teachers’ time devoted to the discovery of this information.

  1. Developing Employee Portals

There are many facets and resources on school districts’ websites that provide valuable information to visitors.  But, often, what lies within these sites are valuable portals tailored for specific audiences.

At this point, it is commonplace for both students and teachers to have portals in the school district website. Portals are valuable resources for educators to find information that pertains strictly to the data that is important to them. With the obvious value that these portals provide, think of the value that may be added if every school made these resources available to their employees.

  1. Being Recognized by Leadership

Few things at the workplace are more satisfactory than hearing how much your boss appreciates you.  So,  when  we  talk  about  internal  communication  in  schools,  it is important that we address the interaction between the school board and the educators. It is vital that the school board keeps acknowledge educators that are making an extraordinary effort to enhance students’ education. When board members recognize these educators, they need to implement positive reinforcement practices to encourage future innovation.

On the other hand, if the school board notices teaching practices that are less than expected, they can communicate this to educators and push for corrective action.

  1. Using Digital Signage

The challenges of communicating with staff in a public school system are apparent. Whether checking and responding to emails or logging into portals, communication can require a great deal of effort.

Because of this challenge, we are now seeing schools take the “billboard” approach throughout their buildings. These digital signs are easily recognizable and don’t require additional effort to absorb the information. Schools are using these billboards to display both general and emergency information.

If these signs are placed throughout the school, educators will also see them as they pass by. This eliminates the need to have a phone conversation or to send out a memo

to all interested parties. The digital signage creates a platform to simultaneously provide all of the necessary information to the entire staff.

  1. Remembering that Communication is Key

If we want educators to be as effective as possible, we need to keep them informed. Parent­teacher communication is crucial to student success, and in order to maximize the effectiveness of teachers we need to master the internal communication process.

With these 6 best practices for better internal communication in public schools you are sure to see an improvement in overall employee communication. A school that is engaged together will have students that succeed together. To kick off your communication this school year sign up for your FREE trial of Ving here. It is time to start using a tool that allows you to be in control of your communication and start knowing what is and isn’t working at your school.

Ving

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share