edreform

Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers, Uncategorized April 21, 2016

3 Tips to Keeping Teacher Jobs in the Midst of School Reform

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.

Here are some useful tips that will help you preserve teaching jobs while reforming schools:

Remember – a high teacher turnover is expensive. 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.
Pay attention to who you hire so that you can reduce teacher attrition. 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.
Become creative with spending on new resources. 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.

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform April 21, 2016

School Reform on a Budget

A major mistake made by reform groups is to table educational reform efforts 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 reform efforts. Many school reform efforts are cost-effective and can be implemented by resourceful educators. When there is a lack of money, reform is contingent upon the faith and commitment level of the faculty and staff. Money should not be wasted on model programs and unsubstantiated trends. Reform groups will have to work diligently and efficiently to implement the chosen reform efforts properly and effectively.

When school reform is needed and schools have limited resources, spending money on curriculum can be intimidating. The curriculum chosen will need to be a good fit for both teachers and students. Math and reading should be the first concern, because they are the building blocks for other subject areas, as well the most frequent measure of future success. Success in these two areas bode well for success in other subjects at all grade levels.

Teachers’ professional development is a key factor for successful school reform as well. When analyzing reform 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. Another low-cost/no-cost option is to hire professors from neighboring colleges and universities to provide professional development services to your district as a form of community service or to fulfill requirements to obtain or maintain tenure.

In the end, schools operating with limited funds to support reform efforts will need to be both resourceful and creative in order to effect positive change. Forward thinking leaders, committed and imaginative teachers, and a supportive community can contribute to change that improves the educational experiences of our children.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch April 19, 2016

Smart Seating Charts: The Key to Better Student Performance?

Teachers have long known that not every student is perfectly suited to traditional classroom setups, but with budgets tight, doling out individual attention is not always a reality. What if there was a way to make the traditional classroom setting work better for everyone though?

Research has found that classroom seating arrangements have a great impact on student performance and behavior. A study done by Angela Hammang at Montana State University found that when carefully crafted seating charts were in effect, teachers were twice as successful reaching students and that the attainment of lower ability students was doubled. In her research, Hammang experimented by moving students around in different seating charts to help them find their optimal place, in this case it was a biology classroom, based on learning styles and personalities. She also looked at groupings by gender and past grade performances. In all cases, the students performed at a higher level when the teacher assigned seating in a calculated manner. Students on the underachieving end of the spectrum showed the most improvement when classroom seating was developed with thought, and not simply assigned based on the alphabet or another random manner.

It’s clear that finding the right classroom seating assignment benefits students and educators, but how can it be accomplished without asking too much of the teacher’s time? How can the guesswork be removed?

A Simple Solution to Classroom Seating

Duncan Wilson has 16 years’ experience as a teacher who was looking for a way to streamline classroom practices to make the most of the time he spent with his students. He met software engineer Gintautas Sasnauskas a few years ago, and together they formed Edukey Education Ltd in 2011 to put the technology behind some of Wilson’s ideas. His first project? Software that guides educators through the process of assigning classroom seating based on reasonable conclusions about the students. ClassCharts is available to all teachers for free and allows for collaboration between classrooms and among teachers. It gives students the best chance at success, no matter what classroom they are in. Since the software became available in 2013, more than 70,000 teachers have signed up and more than 2.5 million students are in the system.

The software was developed based on the following truths that Wilson experienced in front of the blackboard:

Positive student behavior is necessary for an optimal classroom experience for the children in it.
Students’ personalities and how they interact with each other impacts their learning potential. Grouping students with complementary personalities leads to higher levels of achievement.
Tracking student behavior, and sharing that information with other educators and administrators, allows for better resources and intervention.
Teachers who are familiar with the names of all their students improve the self-esteem of those children and can better assign praise when it is due.

Aside from the “warm and fuzzy” feelings between teachers and students, and students and their peers, that intuitive seating charts provide, there are some practical implications too. There is more data than ever available on students and provided to educators – so much so that it can all be overwhelming and useless without the right implementation.

ClassCharts uses data rich information to present teachers with the key data that they need to make informed seating decisions and to tackle behavior issues. When integrated between classrooms, teachers can see how the behavior of their students ranks other places and together educators can create plans to guide students toward higher achievement. Schools that upgrade from the free version to the whole-school option give administrators and other school leaders the opportunity to see which students may need the help of extra learning resources. There are even options for informing parents of behavior issues, negative or positive, to keep them abreast to how their children are performing at school.

A New-Fashioned Approach

Most teachers have probably implemented seating charts at one point or another, and perhaps have put some of the ClassCharts concepts into play. It quickly becomes clear to a teacher when two particular students will not be productive near each other or when a certain student would fare better at the front of the classroom. The technology behind ClassCharts goes far beyond the seating basics though, and even calculates factors like students who receive free lunch, or have special education needs. The priorities of an individual school are also taken into consideration when ClassCharts creates a seating chart. All of the variables that a teacher would normally have to weigh are simply input and processed. Simple. And effective.

It’s interesting how something that seems as simple as a seating chart has such complicated implications for student achievement. With smart seating chart implementation, though, students can perform at a higher level and teachers can enjoy the good behavior that accompanies it.

Do you feel like seating charts positively or negatively impact your classrooms?

Take time to look at www.classcharts.com. I promise that you will not be disappointed.

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

Matthew Lynch published in OpEducation, Policy & Reform April 14, 2016

Why Voucher Systems Fail

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding a P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

Slate has the following article on Sweeden’s school voucher system and its failings .I have a few thoughts on this. The Slate author seems to be amazed that a generally left-wing country like Sweden could adopt a voucher system. To the extent that Americans…

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers April 11, 2016

Report: No improvement in public education since 2009

The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress has some shocking news: since 2009, there has been no improvement in math and reading performance among our nation’s high school seniors. Despite the trillions of dollars we have hurdled into our schools, our students aren’t better off in those subjects.

How can that be? It seems to me that the problem lies in that we simply teach to the test. We train thousands of students to learn a few of the “core” subjects so they score well on tests – but that doesn’t really make the students better educated. Higher test scores in any subject does not mean these young adults are smarter. Think about the utterly essential part of success: learning how to write well. This is a prime example of a subject that no multiple-choice test can measure.

To really learn, students must have the thirst to drink from the fountain of knowledge. They must feel compelled to understand problems and have the urge to find the solution, even if that means they answer incorrectly. Yes, the core subjects are important for students to learn – but let’s not forget about literature, music and the arts – and the other subjects that help teach students to explore.

What the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress tells us is alarming. How have ten years passed, and these trillions of dollars not rendered any improvement in math and reading performance among high school seniors?

There are some schools out there that are taking a better approach at teaching today’s diverse student population but so much more needs to be done. What public education needs is the ability to implement more practical models of teaching to guide students instead of following master plans devised to ensure students test well.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform April 9, 2016

3 Reasons to Create a Gender Inclusive Learning Climate for Girls

In a responsive model of instruction, teachers seek out and include examples of achievements from both genders. While women have come a long way since the days of Dr. Edward Clarke, it is still difficult to find a curriculum that reflects an equitable picture of female accomplishments. Progress has been slow to incorporate gender-fair terminology into textbooks.

The accomplishments of minority women, women with disabilities, local women from the community, and working class women all are important to help present a complete, realistic and equitable picture of female role models in society. It is valuable for young women to see the variety of ways in which females can impact their communities and their society, regardless of race, ethnic background or financial status. Teachers help overcome gender inequities and change present perceptions by presenting accomplishments, and experiences, of both men and women.

Let’s look at three reasons to create a more gender-responsive learning climate for girls in our country.

Girls are not yet confident about their math and science skills. As discussed by Daniel Calder, according to a study conducted by Dr. Edith Sand, a Bank of Israel economist and teacher at Tel Aviv University’s Berglas School of Economics, and one of her colleagues, the idea that women are less skilled than men in mathematics discourage women from pursuing STEM careers.

To sum up the study, three groups of Israeli students were given two exams. For one exam, the tests were graded by scorers who did not know the students. For the other, the teacher who was familiar with the names of the students scored them. When the test was graded anonymously, the girls outscored the boys, but when the test was graded by a teacher who knew the student, the boys outscored the girls. Interestingly enough, this effect was absent in tests that did not have to do with mathematics.

Apparently, teachers to unconsciously overestimate the mathematical talents of boys while underestimating the mathematical skill in girls. These same boys tended to score higher than these same girls on matriculation exams, even though these were the same girls who had outscored these same boys on mathematical portions of anonymously graded tests.

Girls are not going to college to pursue STEM careers. Over twice as many boys in high school take computer science advanced placement tests than girls every year. It is not uncommon for the boys at STEM high schools to outnumber the girls by three to one. Yet the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the job outlook in STEM fields is expected to grow at double the rate of other fields. The jobs of today, and the future, are in science, technology, engineering and math. This means that girls could miss out on the best job opportunities for them after college.

From preschool, boys and girls need more encouragement in STEM areas. If both genders are treated equally from the start, and held to the same standards, there will be no need for gender-specific schools as they get older.

Girls need to see their potential and value their accomplishments. Blame the magazines, the movies, the models — blame Barbie — pin it on the pin-up girls, but the fact remains: girls struggle with the mixed messages about body image. Particularly impressionable adolescent girls struggle with bulimia, anorexia and the obsession with weight, and sometimes self-inflict injuries and other damage to their bodies.

Many girls who are bulimics and/or cutters have indicated that these actions are the only aspects of their lives over which they have control. Teachers lack the ubiquitous influence of the media to manipulate girls’ self-image. Advertising often pitches to the fundamental needs of the subconscious mind. Sex sells, to be frank — and while we cannot deny it, we do have some means to counter it.

Girls must be guided to see their potential in areas other than the physical. One helpful strategy is to acquaint young girls with the accomplishments of great women, including: Phyllis Wheatley, Marian Wright Edelman, Rosa Parks, Clara Barton, Mary Shelley, Jane Addams, Shirley Chisholm, Elizabeth Blackwell, Sacagawea, Wilma Mankiller, Isabel Allende, Deborah Sampson Gannett, Dolores Huerta, Frida Kahlo, Maya Angelou, Sonia Sotomayor, Margaret Sanger, Unity Dow, Sally Ride and other women who overcame great odds to be strong and successful.

Each of these women is a standout figure in history or in society because of her hard work, her inner strength and her determination. In a society where supermodels and sex appeal are overvalued, adolescent girls must be reminded of their important inner qualities.

Why do you think girls might need curricula that are more sensitive to their needs?

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform April 8, 2016

Texting, Tweeting and Terrible Grammar in K-12 Schools

Internet and cell phone cultures have brought a whole new meaning to American slang. Not only are kids these days speaking informally, but now those relaxed rules of grammar are sneaking into written words too.

The Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life project asked middle and high school educators about their thoughts on digital tools and the impact on student writing. Over two-thirds of the respondents said that writing platforms provided through Internet and cell phone use have improved student creativity. Students also have more outlets for collaboration which encourages improvement and “putting it out there” in terms of writing that may have been closeted to notebooks or diaries in pre-Internet generations.

The biggest problem with these digital avenues of composition, according to surveyed teachers, is the blurring of lines between formal and informal writing. Abbreviations are common, particularly on platforms like Twitter that have a 140-character limit. Most smartphones now have no limits on texting characters, but students that owned phones with the 160-character limits of just a few years ago have already formed short, abbreviated habits. In the digital realm, short and sweet is the key – even if a grammar, punctuation and writing formalities fall by the wayside. The same is not true of educational writing pursuits though, as K-12 writing instructors must prepare students for the demands of strong, professional writing in college and the workplace.

A report released by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills found that over 26 percent of college graduates have deficient writing skills. These findings were not based on graduation assessment exams, but compiled by interviewing actual employers. These employers said that many college-educated employees could not even accomplish the basic writing tasks of the job proficiently. How are these students earning college degrees if their writing is not up to par though? With the average U.S. student accruing $35,200 in college debt, it would seem learning the basics of writing, at least above a “deficient” level, would be a given takeaway.

The deficiency is not the fault of the colleges and universities though, at least not totally. Students are showing up for college without the skills needed to write well and with schools assuming they already know the basics. The 2011 book Academically Adrift found that less than half college students felt their writing had improved at all in college. Less than half also said they were never required to write a paper longer than 20 pages. In a nutshell, the writing proficiency that half of these students exhibited as seniors in high school was the same four years later, despite the so-called rigors and high cost associated with a college education.

While colleges could certainly take a hint from these numbers, the work of remedial writing education is not the responsibility of colleges. It falls on the teachers that come long before the adult years. These teachers face an uphill battle though, especially in an age where formal writing is often confused with everyday communication. The tools for creativity in the writing process may be better than ever, but the constraints of digital communication are hurting students’ composition and their attention spans too.

How can students who have essentially made a lifestyle of short, segmented, slang-ridden writing conform to the formal communication still expected in the real world? It starts with teachers who set high standards and do not waver. In the long run, the fear of losing a student’s interest by insisting on high writing standards is a small one compared to the implications of college graduates viewed as writing-deficient by the people who sign their paychecks.

How can K-12 teachers win out against the negative impact of digital communication on formal writing?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Testing April 7, 2016

Top 6 Reasons Most Americans Have No Faith in the Education System

By now, just about every American parent has seen the reports that American schools rank well below schools in countries such as China and Japan. Or maybe they’ve heard President Obama declare a “dropout crisis.”

The abundance of news reports and discouraging case studies has created panic among education stakeholders, who want to know why American school systems are failing. Many Americans believe that only a small percentage of leaders understand the complexities of the school system, and that those who do understand use their knowledge to justify the mediocre performance of our teachers and students.

It’s not hard to see why this is the typical opinion. Maybe it’s because:

1. The American school system is the best-financed system in the world, but is one of the lowest performing in the developed world.

2. The American school system as a whole has an appalling performance record. For children living in urban environments, the story is even more alarming. Students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are often educated in dilapidated schools where the too many educators lack the credentials and skills necessary to perform their duties adequately.

3. High student-to-teacher ratios are found in most urban schools, and these schools often lack the resources to deal with the diverse challenges they face, including unruly student behavior.

Education has been called the great equalizer, but for students living in poverty-stricken urban areas it is little more than a babysitting service and a place to get a hot meal.

4. No Child Left Behind was a giant mess. Many people question whether the No Child Left Behind Act has contributed to achieving academic success. Although NCLB was well intentioned, it has not lived up to the hopes of government or schools. In the eyes of some, NCLB has actually contributed to subpar academics becoming even worse. If American educators and school personnel do not make a concerted effort to develop effective measures to hold schools accountable for the education of all of our children, then the education crisis will continue.

There is an exception to every rule: some urban school systems are providing a quality education. Unfortunately, however, only a small number of school systems meet the state and federal government student performance requirements.

5. For underperforming urban school systems, a lot of the “plans for change” are full of hot air. At least, they often seem to be.

The problem usually lies with the inability to sustain existing reform efforts and initiatives. Mayors and school superintendents in these areas often concoct grandiose reform plans that are merely political devices meant to woo voters into believing they genuinely care about educational reform.

It is sad and sobering to realize that often, politicians create school reform to gain popularity and votes. It is discouraging to realize that our children’s futures might be used as a political device to win elections.

6. Finally, people are too busy trying to play the blame game. Politicians are not the only people at fault for the shoddy education American children are receiving, but no one will take responsibility for subpar educational environments. If administrators were asked who was at fault, they might point to a lack of parental involvement and too few quality teachers.

If teachers were asked who was at fault they might also cite a lack of parental involvement and ineffective administration.

If parents were asked who was at fault they might blame teachers and school administrators.

Society in general seems to conclude that the lack of quality teachers, effective administration, and parental involvement are all factors contributing to educational failure.

Whatever the reason, Americans have become the laughing stock of the free world when it comes to K-12 education. The solution, of course, is for the country to unite and work together to carry the responsibility of enriching and continuing America’s future via educational excellence without playing the “blame game.” But, realistically, where does that begin?

Please leave your thoughts in the comments section.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform March 31, 2016

Does school choice help or hurt students?

Last week over 10,000 schools and organizations across the country celebrated National School Choice Week with yellow scarves, marches on state capitols and a variety of independently planned events in all 50 states.

In some instances, these gatherings were met with resistance from teacher’s unions who accuse the organizers of the week of trying to create a hostile environment for traditional public schools by touting a family’s ability to choose other options. I don’t know the official motives of the week itself but it does bring up a point I’ve discussed before: Does the school choice movement hurt public schools?

Mississippi, which ranks last in student achievement in the nation, does not have charter school options just yet. It seems to me that any attempt to offer solutions to this cycle of student non-achievement would be welcomed, especially since public charter and magnet schools have shown some success in other low-performing states. On the other hand, by essentially privatizing education are we taking away precious resources from public school reform and hurting the students who stay in them?

National School Choice Week does not just emphasize magnet and charter schools. The official releases from the organization call it an all-inclusive “celebration of educational opportunity” that encompasses traditional public schools, magnet schools, charter schools, private schools, virtual schools and even homeschooling. No type of schooling is promoted over another and all positive celebrations are accepted.

By highlighting all the options, are parents more empowered (and students set up better for success) or are we undermining the great equalizer of our youth — the public school system?

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Parental Involvement, Policy & Reform March 30, 2016

Understanding Parental Involvement

When we discuss parental involvement in schools, we often concentrate on ways in which parental involvement can help schools perform better and how parents can help their children excel in learning. It is a well-known fact that parental involvement can help students achieve success in school; however, it is difficult to measure how much parental involvement is required of parents in order for them to help their children to improve their learning skills and performance.

Parental actions that obstruct the learning process and other educational goals are equally immeasurable. Comprehending the impact of parental involvement requires understanding deficiencies that reduce student performance, and providing parents with tools to diminish their effects. This same principle applies to understanding the ways that schools can encourage parental involvement in low income communities. Situations like these necessitate sensitivity to ethnicity, race, religious affiliation, linguistic challenges, single parenthood, and familial characteristics.

Parents are often influenced by their ethnic background when trying to help their children improve academically. It is imperative that school personnel understand the importance of the family’s cultural characteristics in the educational process. Schools should structure parental involvement programs that take advantage of the strong qualities individual parents bring to the schooling process, as a means for promoting improved relations between parents and the school. Interactions between parents and school personnel are meant to provide information and assistance to both the school and parents.

It is important to monitor how parents act on the instructions, information, and advice offered through such programs. Due to various cultural differences, some families may succeed in obtaining the maximum possible benefit of such interactional programs, while other families may fail to utilize these opportunities. Another factor to consider is the possibility of conflicts between parent’s cultural and linguistic background, and the social, linguistic, and cultural values existing in the school.

Schools often promote common ideals of a capitalistic culture, and, in doing so, present the impoverished, minorities, the disabled, and immigrants, as inferior. The success of parental involvement programs often depends on reaching parents living within different political, economic, cultural, and social realities. In order to help parents make better use of parental involvement programs, it is necessary to attend to these differences, and incorporate ways to meet the varied needs and expectations of parents within the parental involvement program.

The success of parental education and involvement programs depends on the ways parents can make use of their social, human, and financial resources to help their children perform better at school. Parents can also help their children improve their learning skills by providing attention to their children’s studies and participating in meaningful collaboration with school personnel and authorities. Historically, schools have played a major part in improving social conditions. Collaboration between schools and parents can help alleviate the challenges facing students who are living in families that have a lower socioeconomic status.

Policy makers must realize the importance of public schools and their role in facilitating the prosperity of our nation. Federal and state agencies have initiated various programs to improve the relationship between schools, parents, and communities. In order to increase parental involvement and reduce barriers that restrict parents from participating in the education system, it is essential to offer parent education for impoverished parents or parents with disabilities, so that they may learn better ways to boost their children’s learning skills.

The value of parental involvement programs has been well established. Effective parental involvement programs are best achieved when the program originates with the study of the school community, and then proceeds to develop instruction, and provide advice and information that reflects the circumstances, needs, and potential contributions of families who are a part of the school community.

Schools must be prepared for the fact that one outcome of effective parental involvement programs will be the desire of parents to become partners in the decision-making process existing in schools. Thus, school personnel must possess a genuine belief that shared responsibility for multiple aspects of the educational enterprise will result in improved learning environments for children and youth.