Uncategorized

By Matthew Lynch

An interesting phenomenon in many public, private and charter schools is the adoption of accountability standards that read more like a white paper on business efficiency than suggestions for actually teaching human beings. The problem with these standards, of course, is that with stringent, subjective targets for learning, schools are able to “game” the system to make it work in their favor. In other words, these schools are looking for ways to meet a specific, narrow goal – think of it like a salesperson closing a deal – and then they are rewarded for that piece of shallow success.

The flip side of this is that the schools that do not manage to meet these standards are then punished, in true NCLB style, even if the details of their teaching methods actually have some merit. Teachers and administrators at schools that are deemed “failures” or even just mediocre by the established system then must bow to the pressure in order to stay relevant and away from the target range when it comes to adding “competitive” school choices.  This is the most unattractive face of school reform.

Whose fault is it?

So, are the teachers to blame?  I think it is unfair to count on, or to blame, teachers solely for the performance of their students. Yes, they play a role in shaping the young minds in their classrooms and yes, they should be held accountable for that. It seems to me that the root of issues in classrooms that tend to cause the most problems for students (like poverty and ill-equipped or uninvolved parents) should be the target of any true reform. Teachers come and go, moving from school to school or on to different careers. Strong programs that address equality in education and focus on social issues at the root of learning challenges are what will truly make an impact on what students learn and retain, and whether those students succeed.

But what about the “superstar teachers”?  You are probably familiar with the concept, particularly since it is perpetuated in popular culture through movies like the classic Edward James Olmos film “Stand and Deliver” and 2012’s “Won’t Back Down.” The idea is that with the right teacher – a committed, bright, in-tune, talented teacher – P-12 problems like the achievement gap and high dropout rates will cease to exist. If only every student had a standout teacher like the ones portrayed in these shows, the very P-12 system as we know it would be transformed for the better.

I do believe in the power of teachers, both positive and negative, on their students. I train educators for a living and have written books about following “the calling” to become a teacher. I do think that teachers make a difference – but I cannot put all of my faith in these “superstar teachers” to reform the education system the way that is truly needed.

For one thing, the schools that desperately need some sort of superstar saviors are often unable to attract them. In a study on urban schools and poverty released by the National Center for Education Statistics, urban administrators said that they had difficulty attracting and retaining high-quality teachers. This observation, coupled with the fact that schools with higher percentages of students living in poverty had less resources available for teaching, is a recipe for disaster when it comes to counting on these “superstars” to close the achievement gap, lift standardized test scores and increase graduation rates. These urban schools are the very places that need all of those factors to happen to improve student achievement and the long-term overall quality of life in those communities. So if the answer falls solely on strong teachers, these places are in a lot of trouble.

What do you think?  Are teachers the answer to fixing the problem with many of the attempts at school reform, or does the problem run much deeper?

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

While recent high school dropout rates appear to be on the decline, the numbers are still too high to stomach, especially with all of the alternative options high school students now have to finish their diplomas outside traditional classroom settings. At this juncture in U.S. K-12 progress, the dropout rate should be barely worth mentioning.  So, what does the typical high school dropout look like, and how can we address the situation?

The Numbers

Since the government started tracking the dropout rates specifically for Hispanic students in 1972, this group has consistently had the highest percentages of students who fail to complete a high school diploma. In 1972, over one-third of all Hispanic students dropped out. Today that number is down to 13.6 percent, but the group still leads all races and ethnicities when it comes to young people out of school with no diploma or G.E.D. Black students dropped out at a rate of 29 percent in 1967 (the first year the group was tracked) and that number is down to 7 percent (the same as the national average) today. White students have always held on to the lowest percentage of the dropout pie chart, even when their numbers represented a larger majority of total student populations. In 1967, 15 percent of white students dropped out of high school; today, just 5 percent do.

When it comes to gender, there has not been much differentiation when it comes to percentages in over 40 years.  As far as economic backgrounds, lower-income students have always been at a high school graduation disadvantage. In 2009, students from families in low-income brackets ran a risk of dropping out that was five times higher than high-income peers. Still, the future is not completely bleak for kids from disadvantaged economic environments; in 1975, low-income students dropped out at a rate of 16 percent but that number now sits comfortably under 10 percent.

One unchanging factor when it comes to the dropout rate is socioeconomic background. Since the National Center for Education Statistics first started tracking different groups of high school students in the late 1960s, the socioeconomic status of each pupil has impacted the graduation rate. Students from low-income families are 2.4 times more likely to drop out than middle-income kids, and over 10 times more likely than high-income peers to drop out.

Household income is the not the only disadvantage many dropouts have, though. Students with learning or physical disabilities drop out at a rate of 36 percent. Overall, a student who does not fit the traditional classroom mold, or who falls behind for some reason, is more likely to lose motivation when it comes to high school and decide to give up altogether.

One thing is certain, a high school diploma is the first step to a better life.  Therefore, that should be a starting point for focus.

So what can be done to increase the percentage of high school graduates?

One solution is increased involvement from the business community.  There is money to be made and an economic boost is possible – but only if these students stick around long enough to obtain a high school diploma, and potentially seek out college opportunities. Georgia is a great example of a state that has taken advantage of the business community to help improve graduation rates. Areas like Atlanta Metro have some of the strongest business leaders in the nation, and school officials have begun to call on them for guidance and funding when it comes to improving graduation rates.

Further support outside the classroom would also go a long way toward improving drop out statistics.

Since risk factors for dropouts include coming from low-income or single-parent families and teachers simply cannot address emotional needs of every student–programs need to be in place for students who are at risk for dropping out. A pilot program in San Antonio called Communities in Schools has set out to accomplish this through offering on-campus counseling services for students on the fence about dropping out. Of the students in the program in the 2012 – 2013 school year, 97 percent obtained a high school diploma instead of dropping out.

Finally, earlier education for all would address the problem before these teens reach the proverbial crossroads.  In truth, the learning and social experiences they have from birth influence their attitudes about education, society and their own lives. Perhaps the dip in dropout rates in the past four decades hinges on another statistic: from 1980 to 2000, the number of four-year-old children in the U.S. enrolled in preschool programs rose from half to over two-thirds.  It’s time to stop making the high school dropout issue something that is confronted in the moment; prevention, as early as pre-K learning, is a long-term solution.

What do you think? What is the solution to the high school dropout crisis?

Education may very well be the single most important ingredient in allowing a person to achieve success in life. The ascendancy of each individual defines the prosperity of our society; school reform is the backbone of a continuously developing education system. As G. K. Chesterton once said, “Education is simply the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another.” Education is a continuous process of converting information into knowledge that can help students develop and explore further information.

In order to learn, a student must take new information and process it in a way that relates it to what is already known, and in the process form a newer, deeper understanding of the material. Just as learning involves changing one’s understanding of concepts and ideas over time, social phenomena such as education must also be subjected to ongoing scrutiny, evaluation, and change. It is necessary to recheck policies and practices upon which education systems are based, and continually strive to make improvements.

Constantly improving

The Japanese have a philosophy of continuous quality improvement called “kaizen,” which they apply to many areas of their life. Kaizen is the idea that one does not need to wait for something to be broken in order to fix it. Rather, one should always look for opportunities to improve upon current processes, making things incrementally better as time passes. This drive for continuous improvement should apply to our educational system; we need to constantly be striving to make things better, reevaluating how we do things, looking at the results we are achieving, and taking steps to improve things incrementally.

In the same way that kaizen theory speaks to improving life in general, we should apply the same principles to U.S. K-12 education. We must consider ways in which our educational system can and should grow, change, and continuously improve in ways to best serve our children. In order for the United States to continue to progress toward a knowledge-based society, it is necessary to reform and streamline our education system to enable the development and assimilation of information as knowledge. Our schools are the primary institutions to facilitate transference and conversion of information into students’ knowledge base. It is our duty to keep a watchful eye on the schooling processes, and to change educational policies and practices to ensure improvement.

Reform, or consistent improvements?

Over the past century, many reforms have taken place throughout the U.S., and on a continuing basis. Despite the constant need for change, very few, if any, of these reforms really made their way to the school level. Most of the initiatives that led to reform originated from dynamic leaders who were capable of implementing these changes in an extraordinary fashion, despite the presence of various radicals in strong opposition to these changes. However, as soon as the leaders moved on to their next challenge, these radical individuals returned to their old ways. The reform was diminished, and eventually there remained no trace of it.

Study after study has shown that the American educational system is not just in need of regular, continuous quality improvement. Something very different is needed since the system is in a state of fundamental disrepair. Our children are performing poorly compared to other developed countries. Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds are performing even worse.

Whether you believe that continuous improvement is good for our educational system or not, what is certain is that our educational system needs to change. Rather than always calling for radical reform when the numbers don’t work in our favor, always striving for improvement and never letting our classrooms become comfortable is a better route to K-12 success.

Although diverse school models exist, a fundamental question remains—how are we to know whether or not a school model is effective, and how can effectiveness be judged? A number of research studies focus on characteristics of effective schools. However, there is debate over which attributes should be considered when describing successful schools.

According to some researchers, student performance should be the primary indicator of a successful school. It makes sense, really, since the sole purpose of schools is educating their students. Other researchers propose that students’ social characteristics, such as personal growth should be included when determining effective schools. Another issue with school effectiveness research is that findings are predominantly based on research conducted in elementary schools or unique school settings in the inner city.  Consequently, it is suggested that these findings cannot be generalized to all schools.

In truth, there is no one factor that can accurately determine the effectiveness of K-12 schools. Instead, it is a multi-faceted conversation and one that evolves with each generation of students. As suggested above, the context of schooling will impact factors that contribute to effectiveness in specific schools. At the same time, there are attributes and factors that contribute to effectiveness across schooling contexts. By understanding an array of effectiveness attributes we are able to observe which attributes exist at a particular school and which, if adopted might facilitate effectiveness, given a particular school context.

Common elements of success

A 2008 study describes five common characteristics that make up an effective school; these characteristics, and the theory behind them has also been described as the five-factor theory.

• The first factor is quality leadership.  In other words, students perform better where the principal provides strong leadership.  Effective leaders are visible, able to successfully convey the school’s goals and visions, collaborate with teachers to enhance their skills, and are involved in the discovery of and solutions to problems.
• The second factor is having high expectations of students, as well as teachers.  High expectations of students have repeatedly been shown to have a positive impact on students’ performance. More attention should be paid to high expectations of teachers. In other words, teachers who are expected to teach at high levels of effectiveness are able to reach the level of expectations, particularly when teacher evaluations and teacher professional development is geared toward improving instructional quality.
• The third characteristic of a successful school is the ongoing screening of student performance and development.  Schools should use assessment data to compare their students with others from across the country. Effective use of assessment data allows schools to identify problematic areas of learning at the classroom and school levels, so that solutions can be generated as to how to best address the problems.
• The fourth characteristic of a successful school is the existence of goals and direction.  Administration should actively construct goals and then effectively communicate them to appropriate individuals (i.e., students, teachers, community-at-large).  School principals must also be open and willing to incorporate innovation into goals for school processes and practices. It is important to invite input from all stakeholders in the process of developing school goals. Student performance has been shown to improve in schools where all in the school community work toward goals that are communicated and shared among all in the learning environment.
• The fifth and final factor of a successful school is the extent to which the school is secure and organized. For maximum learning to occur, students need to feel secure.  Respect is a quality that is promoted and is a fundamental aspect of a safe school.  There are also a number of trained staff and programs, such as social workers, who work with problem students before situations get out of hand.

Other elements of student success

Apart from the five factors of a successful school already mentioned, the size of the school seems to be a school effectiveness factor.  Research has found that the smaller the school, the better students perform, especially in the case of older students.  This is the rationale behind the concept of schools-within-schools. Students in smaller learning environments feel more connected to their peers and teachers, pass classes more often, and have a higher probability of going to college.

A number of school districts view preschool education as a factor that will influence overall effectiveness across all schools located within the district. Evidence suggests that children with preschool experiences fare better academically and socially as they enter kindergarten and beyond. Experiences in literacy and numeracy among early learners not only prepares preschoolers for a kindergarten curriculum that has heightened expectations of prior knowledge, but also helps identify early learners who will need additional support to ensure they are able to have positive learning experiences later on.

Additional factors that influence effective schools include time to learn, teacher quality, and school and parental trust. Research supports the commonsensical view that the more time a student spends learning, and the more efficiently that time is used, the higher their achievement.   Schools that find creative ways to extend time on learning will likely be more effective. Schools with high quality teachers also tend to be more effective. Schools able to hire teachers from high quality teacher education programs increase the possibility of being an effective school.

School effectiveness can also be influenced by the frequency, relevancy, and quality of the teacher professional development offered by the school and/or school district. Trust and parental participation are also features of a successful school.  Trust between all parties of the school community is vital for enhancing the school’s effectiveness because it supports the prospect that parents and teachers believe in the motives and actions of each other.  Parental participation is also important because it sends the message to students that the adults in their lives—both teachers and parents—believe in the importance of education and are willing to make time to support students’ educational experiences and efforts.

So there is no simple solution for labeling the effectiveness of a particular school – but it should certainly go beyond assessments alone.

What are some keys to school effectiveness in your opinion?

Many school administrators enter the field hell-bent on making a name for themselves and refusing to live in the shadows of their predecessors. Often, they feel as though their only choice is to go in a totally different direction, making the previous school reform mandates null and void. This situation creates frustration among the surviving faculty and staff. The changes of the new administrators often happen before they fully think about the consequences or repercussions of their actions. Perfectly competent adults massage their egos instead of thinking about what is in the best interests of the school, the teachers and the children.

To be fair, part of the reason that most administrators take the jobs they do is because they want to make a difference and blaze new trails. As teachers, it may have been difficult to implement the change they really wanted to see – but as administrators, that path is more straightforward. Taking the time to develop a well-thought-out plan, and keeping policies of merit in place, makes a big difference in the well-being of any school community, though. So how should administrators looking for school reform proceed?

Start with a plan.

When initiating reform, an action plan must be developed before the school can determine how the reform implementation will be carried out. Too often, administrators become anxious and feel the need to change the implementation processes before any data has been collected. It is best to examine all the moving parts before making the decision to start from scratch on any initiative.

Allow time for the plan to work.

It is counterproductive to start one reform and then decide to start another several months later. Some school districts revert to a model proven to be ineffective due to impatience and the desire for quick results. Once reform has been implemented, all parties involved must show fidelity to one reform until there is concrete data or evidence that indicates the reform is effective or ineffective. Reform is about creating an environment in which students are the priority and we as their teachers assist them in starting and finishing their journey to becoming educated citizens.

Be okay with some setbacks.

Strategic planning and the implementation of school reform sometimes require schools to absorb temporary setbacks in order to reap the benefits of long-term gains. Student progress might dip for a month or two before teachers and administration see a significant gain in student learning and performance. Teachers and administrators need to allow change to take place and not panic when instant significant changes are not apparent.

Don’t compare.

Model schools can be found in every major city, but when trying to recreate their successes, many schools fail to achieve the same results. Trying to recreate another school’s success is potentially dangerous, even when schools share similar characteristics. This is because, regardless of the similarities, every district is unique. Often, after a large amount of time, energy, and money has been spent, the school declares the plan a failure and has nothing to show for the efforts.

Stay focused.

Too many plans to change can be as dangerous as not having a plan at all. Strategic plans are a district’s consistent road map, even in the face of overturning staff or administration. The plan will also serve as documentation when the federal government looks into accountability. In this way, schools should glean what they can from the efforts of other schools to implement and sustain change. In the end, a strategic plan that reflects the culture and needs of the individual school is likely a better route than attempts to replicate the efforts at another school, or a plan that is over-zealous for the wrong reasons.

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?

By Matthew Lynch

When it comes to creating and launching school reform, the most critical question administrators must confront is: where do we begin? It is not advantageous to begin reform by tackling several goals at once; when trying to start reform in a complex environment such as a school, administrators need to focus on one task at a time. When making decisions, the administration needs to be sure to complete all steps of the reform in sequential order, using a strategic way of thinking.

Schools as business models

When considering school reform, it may be advantageous for administrators to think of their schools as businesses. If the structure of the school were to reflect the business model, we would work from the assumption that students in the school system are customers, schools are the businesses, teachers are the employees/supervisors, and the administrators are the CEOs.

In any business, the customers needs always come first. The reputation for customer service is the best advertising a business can receive. Keeping this savvy business strategy in mind, the business of the school should be to create learning opportunities that lead to greater academic achievement. If educators make lessons fun while adhering to the curriculum, the graduation rate will increase dramatically. If children feel safe and entertained, they will want to come to school. It is the educator’s task to make sure students learn to love to learn, while it is the administration’s task to support their efforts.

Categorizing goals

In some cases, goals can be independently accomplished. Departments will be able to achieve short-term goals while accomplishing the larger goals. When it comes to long-term change, however, three conditions must be present in order to sustain it.

• Administrators must come to an agreement concerning the issues that have made it necessary for school reform to take place. They must be open and honest and refrain from blaming others for the issues that exist. All individuals directly and indirectly involved in the school reform must share a common vision. Administrators also need to agree on the rules and guidelines that will support the implementation of the reform, while respecting cultural beliefs of the faculty, staff, and students.
• Administrators must communicate the current issues of the school and the vision for the future to stakeholders. Those who support and participate in reform need a clear vision of the common goal. Administrators must paint a reform picture that alleviates fears, and entices all to buy into the vision.

It Takes a Village

Administrators should make sure that teachers are a major part of school reform. Reform is considered a success or a failure based on the students’ performance, but teacher performance is inextricably linked to student performance. Through positive teacher-student relationships, genuine learning can take place in the classroom. Teachers know their students and the educational practices that work best in their classroom.

When creating school reform, administrators should also consider communicating with community members. Community members and parents have a lot to contribute when it comes to school reform and they should be encouraged and allowed to do so. Parents and educators undoubtedly have a genuine concern for the needs of students. Why not place the important decisions concerning our students in the hands of the people that have the children’s best interests at heart?

Too often, the most critical decisions concerning the educational system are made by people without the capacity to understand the inner workings of the individual school and what it takes to live up to the standard that “no child is left behind.”  To achieve true success in any school change, the decision-makers need to seek out the people who know what needs to happen to make a real difference in the outcomes for students.

By Matthew Lynch

It is no secret that teachers in the United States receive little recognition and a salary below their abilities, and that their training after hire consists of professional development that rarely fosters much growth.  There is also little incentive for teachers to strive to earn more because pay isn’t based on excellence, but on time on the job. This can lead to quality teachers feeling burned out, with no recourse for better pay for their efforts. With a little creativity, this truth can be reversed—even for districts on a tight budget.

Teachers on an assembly line

There is a tendency for American teachers to be treated like factory workers. The No Child Left Behindprogram holds teachers entirely responsible for their students’ performance on state achievement tests, regardless of the many variables that influence students’ performance on these tests. For example, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to prepare a sixth grade student reading at a second grade level to perform well on a state achievement test. It is no wonder that standardized testing has caused schools and teachers to panic.

In addition to concerns about job security, low compensation, and student performance on high stakes test, teachers must also worry about subpar principals who are overcompensated for the successes of teachers. Although administrators deserve to be fairly compensated for their work, their pay does not seem equitable compared to that of teachers. If administrators are to be compensated fairly for the job performed, then teachers, too, should be fairly compensated.

But what about the bottom line?

When considering these issues, a major mistake made by reform groups is to table efforts at improving teacher salaries because the expenditure does not fit into the school budget. If children are America’s most precious commodity and the focal point of the nation’s educational system, then the lack of funding is no excuse to forgo efforts. Many school reform efforts are cost-effective and can be implemented by resourceful educators. When there is a lack of money, change is contingent upon the faith and commitment level of the faculty and staff.  Money should not be wasted on model programs and unsubstantiated trends.

Considering factors such as teachers’ professional development, while at first may seem unrelated, can be a key factor for successfully improving teaching salaries as well. When analyzing budgets, it is important to set aside money to hire teachers with the ability to create and teach in-service professional development programs. The ability to train the staff and educators internally will save the school money, and will give the teacher/expert a feeling of usefulness. For instance, a teacher with 30 years of experience and a demonstrated ability to obtain amazing results from her specific teaching strategies might create a professional development seminar to share her expertise. This saves the school an enormous amount of money, and saves the administrator the trouble and cost of hiring a consultant.  These savings can then be passed on to the teachers, perhaps in the form of bonuses, etc.

In the end, schools operating with limited funds to support reform efforts will need to be both resourceful and creative in order to affect positive change and strive toward equitable pay for superior teachers. Forward thinking leaders, committed and imaginative teachers, and a supportive community can contribute to change that improves the working environment of our teachers – and their salaries too.

By Matthew Lynch

Year after year, it breaks my heart to see the public education system in my home state of Mississippi repeatedly scoring so low in education rankings, particularly when it comes to students in a viscous cycle of underachievement. As an educator, it makes me disheartened to know that as a whole, public schools are not winning the battle against low-incomes and poverty and their negative impact on learning.

I do not doubt that there are exceptional schools in Mississippi. In fact, I have worked for several of them. However, this is the exception to the rule, rather than the norm. We all know what happens to students who leave high school without basic skills. More often than not, they fall prey to a cycle of generational poverty, underachievement and possibly incarceration.

My critiques are not meant to bash my home state and its K-12 educational system; my aim is to issue it a no holds barred wake up call. Collectively, our educational system cannot get any worse, so why deny charter schools the right to come in and mix things up a bit? Or to put dollars beyond aggressive social work programs that extend beyond academic constraints? I do not endorse making rash decisions, but I also do not condone sitting idly by and expecting for our system to magically get better.

So what can be done about this? There is obviously a problem that exists but observation alone will not get us very far. Then the question shifts to whether anyone even cares. Realistically, the parents of most Mississippi public school students cannot be relied upon to change this near-failing trend. Many of these parents were students in the same seats in their own K-12 generation so they do not know anything different. The children certainly cannot change the course of their educations. Even if they understood that the learning process around them needed to improve, they have no power to change it.

The responsibility then lies on the shoulders of educators – from the public school classroom teacher to the state superintendent of education, Dr. Carey Wright.

Increased equity

One way to improve the achievement of Mississippi public schools is to consolidate high and low-poverty districts to increase equity in school funding and reduce racial or socioeconomic segregation. I’d say that is a start – but simple consolidation will not solve the underlying problems. With low incomes and poverty come students with more baggage than their mid- to high-income peers and if those accompanying issues are not accounted for and addressed, the learning process will always be fruitless.

Life skills

Along with learning teaching methods, educators in Mississippi need to have social work training, of sorts, to accomplish their goals of reaching children academically and emotionally. Without public school programs that reach beyond the constraints of academics alone, Mississippi will continue to suffer low scores on annual education rankings. The bigger problem, of course, is that these numbers reflect public school student underachievement and that is an issue that impacts every citizen in my home state.

Urgency needed

The risks have never been greater: the future of Mississippi and its children is at stake. Mississippians cannot continue to allow the educational system to operate in its current condition. While there is no magic formula or configuration to solve the problems our schools face, we must engender change, and we must do it now!

On the surface, the concept of creating and sustaining school reform is an oxymoron, simply because change is inevitable. In many ways, what is needed is sustainable change. In other words, schools must change to meet the current needs of children and youth in order to support their development into contributing and productive adults.

As the needs of our society shift, our education system must adapt to ensure that it prepares an educated populous to meet society’s needs. Education reform is possible, but it depends on what the state is willing to do to achieve its educational goals. Will Mississippi develop and pass effective educational legislation aimed at creating viable solutions to the problems at hand?

Lasting and beneficial change in our schools will require hard work from a committed group of stakeholders — teachers, administrators, parents, policymakers, and community members alike. Ultimately, it is the children who matter most. At the end of the day, they are the reasons why we must champion the cause of education reform in Mississippi and throughout our great nation.

I hope to be writing a very different column in the near future about Mississippi’s public school ratings but that can only happen when better management of the poverty-classroom relationship takes place.

By Matthew Lynch

Teachers have a lot on their plate when it comes to measuring achievement. Student success is determined by assessments, graded materials and even technological savvy. The consensus seems to be that to give K-12 students a fighting chance in the real world, teachers and administrators must stay on top of any and all technology trends. While it’s impossible to use every piece of technology to the students’ advantage, there are some legitimate reasons (aside from the cool factor) that teachers should embrace technology in their classrooms.

At-risk students

Technology has made it possible for students who fall off the traditional path to jump back on and finish what they spent most of their childhood working towards. This may be in the form of taking remote classes from home, remedial classes in on-campus computer labs or even by enrolling in full-time online schools, public or private. The technology available for these options benefits students who face difficulties with a normal school schedule including teenage parents, students with short-term or long-term illnesses, teens with substance abuse struggles, or those who had poor academic performance due to learning disabilities or bullying.

Equality through Technology

Technology is also a great equalizer in K-12 classrooms. Students have the same access as their peers to whatever technology is available in their district and specific classroom. While there is certainly some technology discrepancies between one district and another, often based on the socioeconomic status of the families within that district, within each one, students have fair access to technology. In a way, things like computers and mobile devices in classrooms usher in the technology of the outside world and give students who may not otherwise have access a chance to use it for learning purposes.

Having in-classroom technology more directly impacts the graduation rate by providing customized learning experiences. A student who needs extra help on a particular topic need not hold up the entire class, or feel embarrassed asking for that help when there are computer modules and tablet apps available for individual learning experiences. Teachers who spot a trouble area with a particular student can gear that teen towards more exercises to master the topic. Of course, technology is not the magic wand to fix all problems, but it does allow for more flexibility of the learning process which in turn makes it easier for a wider group of students to stay in classrooms until the end of the K-12 journey.

College Prep

K-12 educators used to have the goal of helping their students reach high school graduation, but now the pressure is on to create students who go on to achieve college goals too. No matter how advanced the technology options in a particular school district, they are dwarfed by the reliance on and widespread use of technology on college campuses. High school students who become acquainted with technology for things like course selection, class management and actual learning modules are better.

Other Technology Perks

There are so many ways that academics are enhanced by technology that simply did not exist ten years ago. Today, students can benefit from online learning modules if a major illness or suspension keeps them at home. For students who are struggling under the academic and social pressures of traditional schooling, online learning provides a way to stay on track from the comforts of home. Online learning is just a brushstroke on the contemporary portrait of learning technology. Within classrooms, teachers can encourage students to work individually on a computer or mobile devices, freeing up some time to work in-person with those who might need the extra attention.

Teachers can also communicate more effectively with parents and students regarding upcoming assignments, supplementary lesson plans, and areas where students could benefit from extra practice. With browser-based technology, and cloud-based options, teachers can provide easy access to information and parents and students can log in at their convenience.

Technology is transforming the teaching process into one that is more interactive as well. Instead of waiting to see how much a student knows at the end of a term, progress can be measured in real-time – and adjustments can be made. Teaching is becoming less instructor-centric and more of a collective process.

What do you think? Did I leave any benefits of classroom technology out?

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