Uncategorized

By Matthew Lynch

The first step to positive K-12 reform within a school and a district is to find a starting point. Often, data sets are used to determine this – but really, so much more should go into it.

Districts that demonstrate continuous positive results often base their decisions on data alone, as opposed to relying on observations and data together. Schools should regularly evaluate the pros and cons of instructional programs and realize that standardized tests should constitute only a piece of the assessment puzzle rather than the entirety. Continuously monitoring the progress the school’s student body makes will allow the task force to amend the reform plan as needed.

Balancing Reform

Successful schools also take measures to institute checks and balances, to ensure the decision-making process is distributed among a variety of reform participants. Superintendents are charged with the duty of ensuring that the implementation and sustaining of improvement efforts are done in a positive manner and meet the needs of the students. The team leader’s job is to ensure teachers have all of the tools needed to foster the academic performance of students.

Accountability, Too

Districts all over the country recognize accountability as the key to the school’s improvement process. Everyone is expected to perform at optimal levels, or must face the consequences. To ensure that staff and faculty members are able to perform at optimal levels, the school district must provide them with high-quality professional development.

Modify, Modify, Modify

In order to complete the process of school reform, restructuring efforts must be monitored and evaluated. The process of evaluation can be completed in-house, or the leader can hire outside consultants to perform the task. If the task force is willing to evaluate the success of the school’s reform, they must first develop a plan for evaluation.

The team’s evaluation plan should have been developed before the reform was implemented. Performance goals that were created at the beginning of the restructuring process should be used to guide the evaluation process.  The team will need to decide who will collect, analyze, and interpret the data. In order to avoid biased results, it may be in the best interest of the school to hire an outside consultant who may provide a more objective assessment of the reform efforts. The team will also use the results to determine whether or not the reform efforts were effective.

The results may indicate that the reform was not a success. In this case, the best solution is to build upon the small successes and learn from mistakes. Another reform could then be implemented or the unsuccessful reform amended to better suit the needs of the school. School restructuring is a long-term process. Reform occurs on a continuous cycle that must be sustained in order for improvements to be maintained and furthered. Keep in mind that not every restructuring effort bears fruit. Even the best schools have to continue to work in the restructuring process.

Successfully implementing and sustaining school reform is possible. It may not be easy, but with a tremendous effort, the utilization of all resources, and the expertise of professionals, school reform can be successful. The level of success the school is able to achieve will be based on the school’s predicament. Whatever the obstacles, the leaders’ decisions need to be resolute to foster academic achievement. While data is certainly a starting point, there is a lot more that goes into the bigger picture of smart school reform – and districts should recognize that and work towards solutions that not only make sense on paper, but also in real life.

By Matthew Lynch

Most patriotic Americans agree education should be the most important issue in the country. After all, a country that lacks knowledge lacks power…. right? Common tells us that in order to secure a thriving future for our nation’s children, we must become high achievers in the areas of math, reading and science. Unfortunately, the collective concern for education continues to wane. This may explain why education in the United States is considered average when compared to the rest of the world.

Often employed by public officials looking for a platform, the issue of education continues to make headlines, but very little actual progress is being made. In fact, teachers across the country continue to express their dissatisfaction with leadership, salary cuts and a lack of resources. Our children are in crisis; our future is in jeopardy and with each passing day, we become more vulnerable to the darkness of ignorance and unawareness.

According to the Pew Research Center, education ranks among the public’s top ten policy priorities, coming in at number six. At first glance, this may seem impressive, but Pew also reports that in general, Americans have a declining interest in education. Not surprisingly, the economy, job creation and terrorism are the public’s top three priorities, and there’s no question each would have grave consequences if not addressed. While most agree these topics should be focal points of interest, however, many argue the public has lost sight of what should matter most: education.

The reality is our country is guilty of becoming increasingly apathetic about education. As a rule, teachers are grossly undervalued; their significance is continually diminished and their contributions go highly underrated. The majority of school teachers love what they do and consider themselves blessed to be afforded the opportunity to make a difference in the life of a child. Their profound impact on the world of academia, and their willingness to sacrifice high-paying salaries should be applauded. But at what point do we, as Americans, stand up and say that our treatment of teachers is simply unacceptable? When do we decide that a number six priority ranking for education is not good enough – and that our students and teachers mean more to our collective society than that?

Student Achievement, By the Numbers

Here are some facts you may find alarming: according to data collected by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the performance of American students as compared to their international equivalents is mediocre at best. PISA is an international study that evaluates education systems worldwide every three years. This involves testing the skills and knowledge of 15-year-old students in more than 70 participating countries/economies.

Scores from the 2009 PISA assessment reveal the U.S. performs about average in reading and science and below average in math. Some of the top performers on the PISA evaluation were Hong Kong, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Finland, Shanghai in China, Singapore and Canada. Out of 34 participating countries, the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in math. These statistics are staggering.

As reported by the McGraw-Hill Research Foundation, a recent study conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) suggests that if the U.S. could boost its average PISA scores by 25 points over the next 20 years, it could lead to a gain of $41 trillion for the U.S. economy over the lifetime of the generation born in 2010. Therein lies the solution to every major problem facing the American people — including the economy, job creation and terrorism awareness.

Based on research provided by Dr. Steven Paine, a nationally renowned American educator, the OECD has offered a number of simple and practical lessons to the United States. According to Paine, money is not the answer to boosting our country’s international educational status, nor will it bring about a greater classroom experience. In studying the world’s highest achievers — Finland, Singapore and Ontario, Canada — Paine suggests our lack of respect for teachers is the nation’s number one enemy of education. “The major difference between those systems and the one in the U.S. had to do with how teachers are valued, trained and compensated,” he noted.

Paine stated in his report to the OECD, “In Finland, it is a tremendous honor to be a teacher, and teachers are afforded a status comparable to what doctors, lawyers and other highly regarded professionals enjoy in the U.S.” The report also suggested the teaching profession in Singapore “is competitive and highly selective, [a country] that works hard to build its own sense of professional conduct and meet high standards for skills development.” The study of Ontario revealed similar findings.

Paine insists, “The U.S. must restore the teaching profession to the level of respect and dignity it enjoyed only a few decades ago. This will not be easy, particularly in the current economic environment with states and localities strapped for funds. But improving the regard with which teachers are held is not principally about how much they are paid.”

Paine continued, “OECD countries that have been most successful in making teaching an attractive profession have often done so by offering teachers real career prospects and more responsibility as professionals — encouraging them to become leaders of educational reform. This requires teacher education that helps teachers to become innovators and researchers in education, not just deliverers of the curriculum.”

The report concluded that the U.S. has the resources and talent to compete more effectively and raise its level of educational achievement. This is contingent upon our willingness and ability to “demonstrate with action that it truly values education, display an understanding of the vital importance of having an educated workforce that can compete globally, and develop the political will to devote the necessary resources for educational reform.”

To make that happen, every American who cares about the economic future of our nation must come together and work to help make that plan a reality. It starts by giving our teachers the support, and financial compensation, they deserve.

We, the People, must take action to rightly place education where it belongs — as our number one concern. Get involved; make your voice heard and take a stand.

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

By Matthew Lynch

Substantial educational change will never occur until we as a country decide that enough is enough and make a commitment to change, no matter what it takes. When America realizes all children deserve a stellar education regardless of who their parents are, their socioeconomic status or where they happen to live, we will be able to reform our education system. Specifically, Americans have to stop treating minority students in underperforming urban environments like collateral damage.

The disheartening reality is that America has billions of dollars to fight a two-front war, but cannot or will not properly educate its children. If a hostile country attacked the U. S., it would take less than 24 hours for American troops to be mobilized into battle. However, we seem unable to mobilize a sea of educated teachers and administrators to wage war against academic mediocrity, which is a bigger threat to our national security than Iran or North Korea.

Over the last century, many reform movements have come and gone, but in the end, it seems, there have been no substantial changes. Some might even believe the American educational system is now worse off than ever. That’s because the word “reform” is primarily used as campaign rhetoric, and when it comes time to take real action, the politicians simply unveil a grandiose plan with all the bells and whistles amounting to a dog and pony show. There has been a lot of talk about educating our kids, but not a lot of action. This is especially true when it comes to groups of at-risk or disenfranchised students, like minorities.

America’s schools were originally intended to ensure that all citizens were literate but it seems today that in some districts, and for some students, even this concept is not taking place. When you add on the additional constraints of K-12 education today, it becomes quickly clear why some students fall through the cracks and are not able to achieve the type of education that should be a right for all American children.

Americans must have the courage to realize that in order for us to remain a world power, we must institute change. It is not enough for just some of our kids to succeed; each one must make it across the high school graduation stage, knowing what their peers also across the country also learned during the journey. The risks have never been greater: the future of our country and its children is at stake.

Education reform is possible, but it depends on what the nation is willing to do to achieve its educational goals. Will America develop and pass effective educational legislation aimed at creating viable solutions to the problem at hand? Or will America continue to develop legislation, such as No Child Left Behind, that operates under the fallacy that 100% of our students will be proficient in their core subjects by the end of 2014? The bar for education should be set higher, but there has to be exceptions and differentiated goals in order to effectively accommodate all the differences among teachers, students, administrators, and school cultures.

School reform can no longer rely mostly on inputs—that is, giving schools more resources and more support. In order for schools to really help the students on hand, the past must play a role and so must the individual needs of the school.

Do standards and accountability work?

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. Standards emphasize performance objectives and require high levels of accountability from educators.

Required reform and accountability, particularly those which impose sanctions similar to those imposed by NCLB, often create much stress and anxiety. This certainly has been the case since NCLB went into effect. 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 the above are not easy. Obviously, achievement can only be guaranteed if we assess it in some way. However, current assessment models are flawed.

Research exists to suggest 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 created an environment where teachers expected disabled students to perform better, which in turn encouraged 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 the performance of the vast majority of students.

What’s the argument surrounding accountability?

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. All of this discussion of accountability and standards is intended to bring us to a place where schools are performing better and our children are learning.

Researchers at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas observed positive strides toward improved learning outcomes among a variety of middle schools. The researchers believed that improvement strategies must not only improve learning, but also develop responsiveness and social equity. While studying middle schools, they found that teachers at high-performing schools were using teaching strategies that required students to think critically, and strategies that involved the use of real-world problems.

These teachers were not simply teaching abstract ideas or teaching to the test. They noted that student achievement can be improved when students receive recognition for efforts such as note-taking and doing homework, as well as having the opportunities to work collaboratively in groups and engage in active learning like the testing of hypothesis.

These findings show that the type of assessment or accountability that NCLB brings is not the be all and end all of the teaching equation. Rather, the quality of instruction is the biggest part of learning. It is paramount that we continue to work toward a more balanced solution, finding ways to encourage quality instruction, while also monitoring results.

Inputs alone cannot properly reform a school or district; it takes constant monitoring and understanding of the student population to effect change that will positively impact the students it is meant to serve.

By Matthew Lynch

While gifted may seem an enviable status, there are many myths and misperceptions at work.  Many gifted students feel isolated and misunderstood by their peers—and sometimes their teachers.  It is true that gifted students often work well independently, but many teachers do not realize that these students need monitoring and encouragement as well.  Students who are identified as “gifted” are not consistently the highest achievers or the best-behaved students.  By contrast, giftedness can often result in apathy, lack of effort, and resentment.

Take a look at just a few of the ways that gifted students are often misunderstood:

• Although many gifted students are also graced with qualities of altruism, perfectionism and an advanced sense of social justice, many of these students are highly skeptical, and may challenge a teacher’s knowledge of the curriculum or the teacher’s authority.  While gifted students may raise questions on a higher level and produce a great argument, they often ignore deadlines and details.
• It is not unusual for gifted students to be dominant and disruptive in a class discussion, especially if they passionately and radically disagree with the majority opinion.  These students may reject a group project and go off to work on their own, knowing they can do a better job by themselves.  They are often stubborn in their beliefs, which can lead them to resent a teacher who tries to create an environment where all perspectives are tolerated.
• It is not actually true that gifted students populate the majority of honors and advanced placement level courses in high schools.  Honors classes often include a mixture of students with high interest who are willing to work hard; students who are distracted by the behavior of their on-level peers; students whose parents have asked that they be placed in honors classes; and students who took the class because their friends are in it.  There are many gifted students in the regular on-level classroom as well.
• Another myth about gifted students is that they are “unilaterally” successful.  Many students have disabilities or deficiencies, which affect their learning in one area of study, but this does not rule out the giftedness in another.  For instance, a student who suffers from dyslexia, and struggles in a basic American Literature class, may be identified as gifted in mathematics.  This student shows up late for class without his book, sits sullenly in the back of the classroom and appears to blame you for his “D” average.  When the bell rings, this same sullen student bursts from your classroom, brandishing his AP calculus notebook as if it was the Nobel Prize.  This student has what is known as a dual exceptionality—they are gifted and learning-disabled, simultaneously.

It’s important for educators of all types to understand what truly constitutes a gifted student – and to realize that the label does not always mean a perfect student who has no academic issues. By guiding gifted students through understanding, they will achieve more and teachers will better be able to educate them.

By Matthew Lynch

The rate of obesity among children is skyrocketing.  By the age of four, one in five children are obese.  Obese children are at a higher risk for diseases such as diabetes, arthritis and heart disease. They also tend to have low self-esteem, poor grades, and are less likely to attend college (particularly girls). Children from low-income families and those of Hispanic, African American and Native American heritage are at a higher risk of falling prey to obesity.

There are a variety of reasons this is happening – poor diet and lack of exercise are just two.  Sedentary behaviors are also on the rise. The average American youth watches 1,500 hours of television per year and they go to school an average of 900 hours per year – the math right there should tell you something about where our kids are learning the most, and how it is being absorbed.

During the 1500 hours of television watching, experts tell us that children are mostly eating high calorie snacks.  Additionally, American society is riddled with fast food, refined foods and processed foods that calorie laden.

Schools as enablers

Television and other activities at home are not the only factors to blame, though. Our K-12 schools are also playing a role in the rise in obesity and unhealthy lifestyles among kids. To start with, many schools lack physical education programs, with a mere 4 percent of elementary schools, 8 percent of middle schools, and 2 percent of high schools offering daily physical education.

A mixed message

Perhaps the most oddest point when it comes to the rising rate of obesity is this: American culture teaches children that thin is better, and that you simply cannot be too thin. Rising rates of anorexia and bulimia among young women and men are the result of poor messages about body image that children frequently hear. These eating disorders generally begin between the ages of 11 and 13, particularly for girls.  In fact, nearly half of all girls from grade 1 to grade 3 want to be thinner. The top wish for girls ages 11 to 17 is to lose weight.

Obviously, messages American children receive from the media and society in general need to change.  Young girls learn that to be attractive and to be a success, you must be thin. Boys receive similar messages and learn that thin and muscular is the preferred body type.   As a result, boys as young as 10 years old are bulking up at the gym and many young men are taking steroids to build muscle, at great detriment to their overall health.

So on one hand, children learn that they need to remain thin to be attractive and successful. But on the other hand, they do not have the resources to establish healthy eating habits on any level – and schools are really no help.

For schools to really get behind a healthy approach to body image, diet and exercise, an atmosphere that promotes acceptance of self and the importance of overall health should be established.  Classroom and learning materials should portray different body types and images.  Ensuring students know a thin body isn’t necessarily a healthy body and that healthy bodies come in all shapes and sizes is also important. It is not enough to simply tell them though; students need to be equipped with healthy lifestyle tools to make the right choices when they are on their own.

How do you believe Americans can better address both the obesity and unhealthy body image issues that run rampant among K-12 students?

By Matthew Lynch

The U.S. lags behind France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Japan, Brazil AND the U.K. combined in math and science, despite spending more on public education than these nations. In addition, only 25 percent of high school graduates have the literacy skills they need to get a job. What’s more, every 26 seconds a U.S. student drops out of high school. In the democratization of education process, indifference to learning has risen and the standards at public schools have dropped.

Based on these stats alone, change is inevitable and greatly needed. One way that Americans are trying to improve the overall educational experiences for K-12 students is through making available more choices beyond districted public schools. Long gone are the days when parents had to pick between the public school in their district or paying pricey private school tuition out of pocket. The rise of public charter and magnet schools, state-led voucher programs, online learning, and homeschooling options has meant that parents now have no reason to settle on the closest school or pay a premium to avoid it.

But, can public schools thrive in a school choice environment? I think so, yes. Options like charter, magnet, private, online and homeschool curricula are not meant to undermine the nation’s public schools but to build them up through shared quality standards. There is room for all choices in K-12 schools and students benefit from the options.

School choice is not simply about non-traditional public schools though. The movement goes much deeper than that and empowers parents to take the reins of their children’s learning paths. Since 2007, the number of K-12 students enrolled in online public schools has risen an astonishing 450 percent. Home schooling is also on the rise as 1.77 million K-12 students are homeschooled – a number that has more than doubled since 1999.  Parents are pushing back against simple acceptance of educational opportunities based on geography; they are still choosing traditional public and private schools but only after educating themselves.

Giving parents the freedom to choose their child’s school is a movement that strives to improve education at ALL schools through the old-fashioned business concept of competition. Public charter and magnet schools are tuition free, just like public schools, but must make some promises in their contracts in order to stay open. If these schools of choice habitually do not reach their goals, they close. Can the same be said of public schools? The accountability level that these young additions to the public school arena bring ensures that students achieve more – and if they don’t, those schools do not stick around long.

However, the logistics of allowing parents full power to choose schools outside of their districts for their kids can be a headache. There is also a fear that low-performing schools would see abandonment by students if another public school option with a higher ranking were available. While a hit against herd mentality, shouldn’t individual students have the option of a better school if it exists and is close enough for them to attend? Therein lies one of the major debates in school choice – who knows what is best? Trained educators/administrators – or individual parents?

The point can be argued either way, but parents are demanding the right for choices within the public school system. The benefits and/or consequences (if any) remain to be fully realized.

Do you feel that school choice helps or hurts public options?

Note: The following guest post comes to us courtesy of Dr. Kiela Snider, who has served as an educator in California for over 23 years and has held her current position as principal for Palm Springs Unified School District for the past 12 years. In 2000 she joined the ranks of National Board Certified Teachers (Early Childhood Generalist).  She believes that children learn best when they are in a learning environment that has been shaped by best teaching practices. This was evident in 2007/2008 school year she led 100% her staff in completing either the National Board Certification or Take One! program.  The results of this ongoing commitment resulted in school wide reform at Julius Corsini Elementary that included exiting Program Improvement Year 5, decrease in teacher turn-over, and increased parental involvement.

In the summer of 2005, I was named principal of Julius Corsini Elementary School. It was a tough assignment for a first-time principal. Located in Desert Hot Springs, CA, Corsini was the lowest performing school in the state’s third most dangerous city. Few expected me to last longer than a year – let alone completely turn around the school.

Desert Hot Springs is exactly 100 miles outside of Los Angeles, and the low cost of living has made it attractive to many gang members looking to escape scrutiny from the LAPD. Like the town, Corsini did not have much going for it either. There was so much gang activity that the local news station used images of the school became every time it reported on gang-related crime even if the students and the school had nothing to do with the incident. A housing boom more than doubled the school’s population from 500 to 1,100 students almost overnight, and parents grew weary of an unproductive and unsafe school system they saw as swallowing their children.

Teacher turnover was a staggering 75% each year, and few of the remaining 25% truly wanted to continue working there. Corsini became known as a dumping ground for ineffective teachers, and many teachers in the district considered placement there tantamount to punishment.

During my first two years, test scores continued to drop.

I may have been only 32 years old, but I did not lack preparation. I joined Corsini shortly after completing certification through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. With a decade of experience educating students from low-income communities under my belt, I chose to pursue the advanced teaching credential because no one else in my district had completed the rigorous peer-reviewed process. I was looking for a challenge. Board certification forced me to articulate exactly what I was doing in the classroom and, more importantly, why I was doing it.

While Board certification improved my teaching practice, I found that my training helped me coach and support my teachers—the perfect skills as I transitioned to my role as administrator. It also emphasized a continuous analysis of one’s teaching practice so that teachers can identify and replicate what’s working and what’s not.

I used this approach at Corsini, and I included all of my teachers in the process. To be honest, it wasn’t a skills issue. Only the best teachers can do well in this type of environment. Through observation and evaluation, I concluded that low morale among faculty was the primary source of the school’s problems. They were simply tired of feeling like they were struggling—both their students and themselves.

Working with my teachers, we determined the best professional development option to address the faculty’s needs. The main complaint from the faculty was that typical teacher training does not make connections between theory and practice. However, I knew of one program that fully focused on practical application.

In the spring of 2007, every faculty member agreed to pursue their own professional growth program through the National Board. It generated immediate results.

Within one year, Corsini student test scores on California’s Academic Performance Index increased 13% percent by an average of 55 points. The following year, scores rose an additional 30 percent in reading and 16 percent in math. Teacher turnover rate dropped to nearly zero.

Attendance at parent-teacher conferences more than doubled from 45 to 95 percent. In 2010, Corsini was one of only six schools nationwide to receive the prestigious National School Change Award from the National Principals Leadership Institute.

I give all of the credit to the National Board Certification. Teachers didn’t see the process as a chore—but as a tool for building a true learning community. Corsini’s story is not a fluke. Nearby Joshua Tree Elementary School tried the same approach and achieved similar results. The school’s principal is Daniele Snider—my sister.

This was more than enough proof for the school district to transfer me to Desert Springs Middle School in 2011, a feeder school for Corsini, and where I was able to see the fruits of my efforts first-hand from the well-prepared students arriving from my former elementary school. I took a slightly different professional development approach at Desert Springs than I did at Corsini. Veteran teachers have the option and support to pursue National Board certification, but it is not a requirement for all new hires.

Like Corsini, Desert Springs Middle School has seen a dramatic jump in test scores. Last year, we saw a 40 API point gain and math scores doubled in proficiency. The school moved from the bottom 20% of similar schools to the top 60%. We make it very clear that there is a standard of excellence that is not an aspiration–but an expectation–for all teachers.

In the three years since I have left Corsini, I am happy to say the school continues to excel academically under new leadership and the foundation I help to lay nearly seven years ago remains strong.

More rigorous math and science requirements for high school graduation are in place, and simultaneously dropout rates in the country are up.

Research back to 1990 showed that the US dropout rate rose to a high of 11.4 percent when students were required to take six math and science courses, compared with 8.6 percent for students who needed less math and science courses in order to graduate.

The dropout rate is up to 5 percentage points higher when gender, race and ethnicity are considered.

William F. Tate, vice provost for graduate education and dean of the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences says that part of the problem with adding math and science courses to requirements was that a significant number of students weren’t prepared to meet the revised requirements.

Andrew Plunk, a postdoctoral research fellow in the psychiatry department at Washington University School of Medicine, says the study highlights that the one-size-fits all approach to education requirements is not ideal due to various demographic groups, states and school districts that are all different.

When educational policies cause an unintentional consequence like an increase in students dropping out, the effects reverberate far beyond the classroom walls.

“Communities with higher dropout rates tend to have increased crime,” says Plunk. “Murders are more common. A previous study estimated that a 1 percent reduction in the country’s high school dropout rate could result in 400 fewer murders per year.”

While I do feel that the high drop out rate could be blamed on math and science courses, I don’t feel that the US should ease up on those requirements. I think the key is to better prepare the students. We need to make sure the students are ready for the requirements and aim to help all students graduate high school.

President Obama has outlined an ambitious education agenda stating, “The challenges of a new century demand more time in the classroom.”

He highlights that this reform correlates with the economic crisis and says that a well-educated workforce will improve the nation’s future prosperity.

The President wants to see changes — which translate into longer school days and more days of the year in classrooms — in early childhood education. He says he will pledge new grants to states for programs to help children prepare for kindergarten.

He discussed a longer school calendar in the US, noting that children in America spent a month less in school than their South Korean counterparts.

Obama broadened his views on the topic too, saying he  hopes to see improvements in K-12 including less difference between the 50 states when it comes to “benchmarks for academic success.” He explains the goal of the No Child Left Behind Act is higher standards and hopes to see reach these goals through the help of the Act.

He also wants to recruit and retain better teachers. Obama advocated merit pay for teachers, despite the opposition from allies in the teachers union and Democratic Party. He also said states and school districts should work to eliminate low quality teachers from the classrooms.

In addition, Obama proposed increases in Pell grants to keep up with inflation rates.

I like the education reform that Obama outlined. Most of the ideas he’s pressing would do a lot of good for US students and beyond, especially when it comes to classroom time.