edreform

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Is “School Choice” an Anti-Public School Sentiment?

There are a lot more options for receiving K-12 education today than when I was growing up. 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.

Do so many options undermine the purpose of public schools though? Should all of the energy that is going into building, naming and analyzing these other schools really be channeled into strengthening the basic schools that the government gave us?

In theory, I suppose there is an argument for refocus of educational pursuits where schools already exist, instead of creating new versions. But that theory hinges on the false assumption that given the chance, public schools would find the motivation, both within and outside school walls, to improve. Since the 1918 decree that all American children must attend at least elementary school, public schools have been considered a basic right. That widespread access certainly led to a better educated public but in the process the privilege of learning has been lost.

Despite spending more on public education than France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Japan, Brazil AND the U.K. combined, the U.S. lags behind these nations in math and science. 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.

Enter school choice – 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.

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.

At the end of January, National School Choice Week will take place. Last year, there were over 3,600 independently-held School Choice events across the country meant to celebrate choice in education.  Parents, administrators, politicians, students and other community leaders are encouraged to hold rallies, open houses or other events to shine the spotlight on choice in K-12 education.

Traditional public schools are not excluded from the events and are an important part of the discussion. It is meant to be a time of K-12 enlightenment, when misconceptions about choice in education are resolved.

So 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.

What is your stance on school choice?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, list, Matthew Lynch

4 Reasons Why We Need More Minority Instructors in Schools and Colleges

The number of minority students enrolled in U.S. schools and colleges is growing at a rapid rate, yet student enrollment is not matched by minority teacher representation.

In this article, I will discuss four reasons it is important to have more minority instructors in our schools and colleges.

1. The numbers don’t match up.

In K-12 schools, black and Hispanic students are two to three times more common than teachers of the same ethnicity. The gap is typically the widest in areas of the country with high percentages of students of color. Meanwhile, nearly 82 percent of public school teachers are white.

In colleges, the numbers are even more dismal. A report from the National Center for Education Statistics found that full-time faculty on college campuses heavily favors white candidates (at just over 1 million) over black (not even 100,000), Asian (86,000) and Hispanic (under 60,000) faculty. These numbers may not mean much out of context however, so let’s take a closer look at why they matter.
While nearly 30 percent of undergraduate students around the nation are considered minorities, just over 12 percent of full-time faculty are minorities. That number drops to around 9 percent for full-time professors of color. Though half of all undergraduate students are women, roughly one-third of full-time professors are women. In 1940, the number of women faculty was at 25 percent, showing just how slowly this particular minority group is climbing. The numbers are going in the right direction, but not quickly enough.

2. Minority students will perform better. Students will perform better when they can identify with and relate to their teachers. Minority teachers are in a position to put a stop to negative stereotypes and act as role models and mentors for students of color. Teachers who can relate to their students’ backgrounds usually are better able to look past biases of their abilities.

Even the research seems to support this point, as a study in Economics of Education Reviews tells us minority students perform better with minority teachers.

3. Minority instructors will influence the culture of the school in the long run. As far as colleges are concerned, yes, it is important to have diversity in student populations but those groups are temporary college residents. Faculty members have the long-term ability to shape the campus culture and make it more in sync with the rest of the real world. This idea can apply to K-12 schools as well.

4. Non-minority students can benefit. Increasing the number of teachers of color will help students who are not of color too. Putting minority teachers in front of children who are not minorities could prevent stereotyping and promote acceptance of diversity and equity.

The education gap is a serious obstacle our country faces – and I think that the “diversity gap” is a major part of our struggle. The education gap is staggering and it is hindering our country socially and economically. We have to find ways to get more instructors of color in our schools. Students perform better when they can relate to their teachers, and teachers who can relate to their students are less likely to have a preconceived idea of how each student will perform.

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

The 4 Dimensions of a Positive School Culture

As today’s school leaders seek to acquire the skills and knowledge that are necessary for effectiveness in current educational institutions, they should realize that there are no simple answers or shortcuts to achieving leadership excellence. The most important task is to find the right combination of qualities and characteristics that will consistently provide the leader with the skills and knowledge required to succeed on a regular basis. To that end, there are four dimensions that are essential to creating a positive school culture – optimism, respect, trust and intentionality.

  1. Optimism

Optimism is the belief that people have untapped potential for growth and development. The optimistic leader is an individual who is capable of reframing problematic situations as opportunities and considering the impossible to be merely difficult. School staff are pushed towards success by a leader who is both encouraging and enthusiastic, qualities that are vital for effective leadership. When an administrator is enthusiastic and positive, spirit becomes contagious and spreads. Attitude is contagious! When leadership remains positive at all times and is constantly communicating visions for the school that are uplifting and visionary, they are building a positive school environment.

Optimism does not, however, mean that negative behaviors aren’t dealt with. Administrators should never be afraid to confront negative issues, but rather should face them head on and attempt to turn negative attitudes and behaviors into positive ones. This is the core of optimistic school leadership. One good rule to implement is “Praise in public, constructive criticism in private.” This allows leaders to continue to pursue optimistic leadership while confronting and engaging problems in a constructive and productive way. It is undeniable optimism contributes tremendously to increase members’ desire to work while assuring excellence and success.

  1. Respect

Respect is the recognition that every person is an individual of worth. The value of respect in the area of leadership is basic to organizational effectiveness. It denotes the simple belief that people have worth and value and should therefore be treated as such. When respect is a central pillar to school culture, it represents school leadership recognizing the fact that all individuals are valuable and therefore must be respected. This creates not only an inviting and inclusive school culture, but also fosters diversity and offers every individual within the school setting the opportunity to flourish. so as to create an inviting and inclusive workplace where diversity is seen as the norm and every individual has an opportunity to flourish. Respect is commonly identified as a critical element of overall leadership effectiveness. When a school principal shows respect for his or her staff, a positive atmosphere is created that brings about excellence and satisfaction within the school. Respect is absolutely pivotal to the successful acquisition of effective leadership.

  1. Trust

Trust is the possession of confidence in the abilities, integrity, and responsibilities of ourselves and others. Trust is a crucial component of effective leadership. Trust nurtures all of the other dimensions of effective leadership. Trust is an important value, and it contributes directly to the success of an organization. On the other hand, lack of trust is a barrier to cohesive teamwork and efforts. Trust is at the heart of any functioning cohesive team. In its absence, teamwork is all but impossible. Therefore, building trust is quite a critical element that any successful leader should have.

  1. Intention

Intention is a decision to purposely act in a certain way so as to achieve and carry out a set goal. It is having knowledge of what we intend to bring about as well as how we intend it to happen, thus giving clarity and direction to our work. Intentionality is the ability of individuals to intertwine their inner consciousness and perceptions with their actions. It is simply having an end in sight. The ability to be purposeful and focused is a very significant aspect of building a positive school culture. Leaders of effective schools are more distinctly purposeful in their vision and mission than are the leaders of less effective schools. Thus the leaders of effective schools are more likely to believe strongly in the aspect of intentionality than the less effective school leaders. Everything that an administrator does must be with clear intent. If you don’t know where you’re going you’re never going to get there. As a leader it is critical that everything is done with purpose. As with the other characteristics, intentionality is a key element that school leaders should adhere to in their desire to bring about effectiveness, long-lasting change, and excellence in their schools through a positive school culture.

These four dimensions of a positive school aim to include all interested stakeholders in the journey towards student success. The messages of optimism, respect, trust and intentionality are sometimes transmitted by interpersonal action, but are mostly disseminated through the institution’s policies, programs, practices, and physical environments.

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

Why the business community cares about Common Core Standards

By Matthew Lynch

In the education community’s frantic pace to stay accountable with each other and the government, I think some other aspects of our society get inadvertently left out of the education process. The business community is one. If you think about it, business organizations SHOULD be very concerned with the quality of education in our schools, starting as young as preschool and stretching through the college process. These students are, after all, our future workers and the drivers of the American economy.

That’s why I’ve really enjoyed a new video series put together by the Committee for Economic Development that emphasizes the importance of educational standards, like Common Core, on America’s future economy. Education and business, the videos argue, are forever intertwined and should rely on each other for success. Spend a few minutes watching this particular video on “Education Through the Lens of Business.”

What is being taught in our schools today matters to the business community and it should. I’ve heard the argument that teaching our kids in a way that prepares them for the competitive global workforce is treating them as “commodities” and not like children. I suppose there would be some merit to that if science hadn’t proven time and time again that kids thrive in learning environments and that the economic status of your life impacts its quality immensely. Setting our kids up to succeed economically on the world stage not only benefits our nation as a whole, but provides those kids with lifelong skills that will elevate their own quality of life through adulthood.

I look forward to seeing more initiatives like this one in the business community. You can view the rest of my commentary on the CED video series here.

Check out:

How Common Core levels the educational playing field

A look at how strong educational standards help the U.S. economy

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

3 Unusual Statistics about the U.S. Educational System

As a former public school educator, and someone who watches public school policy closely, I believe the K-12 system here in America is on its way up. I see improvements as schools raise accountability standards, offer more social services, and focus more intently on high school graduation and college prep. Our schools are better preparing students academically and for productive lives.

But it is not that simple. The statistics and research I’ve reviewed over the past few years show mixed results when it comes to the educational system. I will discuss three unusual—even contradictory—facts in this article.

  1. Parents with children in the public school system are happy with the education system…but the general public is not.

Nearly half of American adults are pleased with the operation of the K-12 public school system in the nation. A recently released Gallup poll finds that 48 percent of Americans say they are “somewhat” or “completely” satisfied with the public K-12 system in the U.S. The poll has been conducted since 1999 and that highest satisfaction rating in this category was 53 percent in 2004.

Respondents with children who are actually in the public school system currently showed higher levels of satisfaction (57 percent) with the system than adults as a collective group. Parents who answered how satisfied they were with just their oldest child’s education were at almost 75 percent.

The fact that many parents in the poll responded positively to public schools and members of the general public responded negatively was labeled an “optimism gap” by the Gallup poll staff.

The results of this poll tell me two things: One, American confidence in the public school system has a ways to go to reassure the general population that it is doing its job; and two, that those who actually interact with the public schools are less influenced by things like news stories when it comes to shaping their personal opinions.

  1. 80 percent of students are graduating high school…yet less than half of these students are ready for what’s next.

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

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

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

  1. We spend trillions of dollars on education…but we have not seen any improvement in public schools 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.

 

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

The Future of K-12 Assessment

Many educators view standardized testing as a necessary evil of the improvement process. More cynical educators view it as a completely useless process that is never a true indicator of what students actually know. Proponents of K-12 assessments say that without them, there is no adequate way to enforce educator accountability.

Love it or hate it, K-12 standardized testing is not going away. It is just changing.

The No Child Left Behind Act uses standardized testing results to determine progress and outline areas for improvement in K-12 schools. This standards-based approach to education reform has often been attacked for its disconnection with what kids should really know and what they are simply required to regurgitate for the sake of a test.

The Gordon Commission on the Future of Assessment in Education released a report in March that outlined steps needed to make K-12 assessments vehicles “providing timely and valuable information” to both students and educators. Among the recommendations made by the 30-member commission was a permanent council to evaluate standardized testing be created. The report also calls for a 10-year research study intended to strengthen “the capacity of the U.S. assessment enterprise.” The Gordon Commission Report admits that the assessments of the future are not yet in existence but that their creation needs to begin now.

Commission chairman Dr. Edmund W. Gordon said:

“Technologies have empowered individuals in multiple ways — enabling them to express themselves, gather information easily, make informed choices, and organize themselves into networks for a variety of purposes. New assessments — both external and internal to classroom use — must fit into this landscape of the future.”

Based on the report, and what we know as educators, what do future standardized tests need to include to be successful in an increasingly digital classroom?

  • More assessment of HOW to obtain knowledge. Dr. Gordon touched on this point when he mentioned access to information and networking. There is more information available than can ever possibly be processed, so the way that this and future generations of students make informed decisions matters more than ever. Assessments of the future will need to ask more questions about the how of knowledge and not just focus on the what.
  • Higher levels of digital access. All facets of education are being impacted by the rapid evolution of technology and assessments are not immune. Not only should educators be able to tap into digital resources for assessment preparation, but students should be able to take assessments using the technology that makes them most comfortable. Filling in bubbles with number two pencils needs to become an assessment relic, replaced by convenient, streamlined technology options.
  • More critical thinking options. This goes hand-in-hand with how to obtain knowledge, but takes it a step further. Everyone can agree that applied knowledge is crucial to the learning process so standardized tests need to do better when measuring it. Every child needs to be able to articulate what he or she knows, not just repeat it.

Assessments in K-12 learning are sure to change in the next five years, and beyond, in order to adapt to changing classrooms. There will never be a perfect formula for assessment, but educators should never tire trying to make standardized testing as applicable and helpful as possible.

What changes would you like to see in K-12 assessments?

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

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

Superstar Teachers – The Super Cure for Closing the Achievement Gap?

As I wrote on Wednesday, I’ve spent some time lately combing through the pages of Diane Ravitch’s book The Death and Life of the Great American School. As a public school reformer myself, I appreciate her informed, unique look at the state of the P-12 system in the U.S. Considered a liberal early in her career, she was initially a supporter of reform issues considered “conservative” today like the No Child Left Behind Act and the establishment of public charter schools. She has since returned to her roots, at least enough to call herself an Independent, and attacked some of the most popular theories for reform.

I talked about the way that schools of all types (traditional public, private and charters) game the system when it comes to accountability standards in my last post – a myth that on the surface may look like learning is truly being achieved based on predetermined standards and practices like teaching to the test. Today I want to look at another myth of the contemporary P-12 system that Ravitch also dispels in her book: the myth of the Superstar Teacher.

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 like Ravitch, 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.

I also 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.

What are your thoughts on the roles of teachers? Are there enough “superstars” to transform the system?

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

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

3 Issues that are hurting the American Educational System

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.

From overcrowded schools to lack of parental involvement, there are many obvious problems within the education system that immediately come to mind when thinking of how to improve education in America. But some issues fly under the radar. Here are just three of those factors that, when addressed, could make the US more competitive on a global scale:

  1. The amount of time students spend in school

Let’s look at where American schools rank right now when it comes to days in school versus time off. Thirty states require schools to have a 180-day calendar, two ask for more than 181 school days and the rest ask for between 171 and 179 days on the official school calendar each year. Minnesota is the only state in the nation that has no minimum requirement for number of days students are in the classroom (though the state averages 175 school days). This means that in states with the lowest day requirements, students are out of school for more days than they are in it (as many as 194 days per year), a number that contrasts greatly with other developed nations.
Korea has the highest required number of school days, at 225, followed by Japan at 223 and China at 221. Canadian requirements are close to the U.S., at 188 days, and England is at 190 days. When all developed nations are considered, the international average for days in school is 193 – a full two weeks+ higher than most of the U.S.

But are all these days considered equal?

How long are the school days in places like Korea, China and England? It varies, but it is not uncommon for Korean high school students to spend 16 hours each school day in classrooms. That is more than twice the amount of time that American students spend at school, and perhaps a bit too extreme. Yet Korean students consistently rank at the top of developed nations when it comes to subjects like math and science, vastly outpacing U.S. students. By contrast, in England school-aged children spend 6.5 to 7 hours at school – the equivalent of American students (but, remember, they spend more days in the classroom).

President Obama is in favor of more time in the classroom.

In 2009, he stated that the amount of time students currently spend in school places us at a competitive disadvantage. “Our children spend over a month less in school than children in South Korea. That is no way to prepare them for a 21st century economy.”

Predictably those comments have received some pushback in the years since, both from parents who believe their children are already under too much pressure at school and need every single day off they are allotted, and from teachers unions who want to know how educators will be properly accommodated for the extra time spent in classroom instruction. The idea of adding more time to student school calendars is an unpopular one – but I’m not sure that is reason enough to rule it out.

  1. The lack of respect we have for the teaching profession.

According to the Pew Research Center, 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. These topics should certainly be focal points of interest. However, some of these priorities are related to or even dependent on the quality of education in this country.

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.

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 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.”

  1. A lack of regard for arts education

According to First Lady Michelle Obama, an estimated 6 million children have no access to arts education, and another 6 million have a “minimal” exposure. In schools such as the New York City public schools, a significant percentage of schools have no arts teachers.

The arts may not be considered as important as math and science, but it is still very important for student engagement and learning. A school in the lowest income district in all of New York participated in a four-year arts integration program that took students from basically no arts learning to multi-faceted lesson plans with arts inclusion. The results? An 8 percent improvement in Language Arts scores, 9 percent improvement in math scores and less absenteeism.

Can you think of any other little-known factors that might have an impact on the U.S. educational system?

 

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

4 Factors to Consider about Teaching Jobs and 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 a few things to think about when evaluating school reform:

  1. Reform just isn’t possible without a united front of educators and administrators. A shared vision is challenging to create and maintain without stable leadership, and a supportive culture from the staff.  It is a simple fact of life that high staff turnover can create instability and have a negative impact on efforts to establish a consistent learning environment for students. High staff turnover is also quite costly, particularly when the recruitment of teachers, and then the training of new teachers in the intricacies of the reform effort are considered.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Sometimes, 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.

What do you think? Is an austerity approach (trying to have as few teachers as possible) better than one that places a higher importance on the teachers than on the budget?

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

Garden-Based Learning: A Return to Simpler Food in K-12 Schools

The idea that nutrition and educational performance are directly related is nothing new. Free school breakfast and lunch programs are often credited with higher levels of student achievement in the schools where they exist. Non-profit children’s hunger programs intended to feed at-risk students on the weekends are sprouting up all across the country. There is a connection between what a child eats and how that child performs academically.

This idea extends beyond simply filling a child’s belly though. An understanding of food and its role in lifelong physical and psychological health is also important because it addresses more than the immediate. Quality of life and longevity are impacted by food lifestyle and healthy eating habits that are formed early in life. In a culture where children grow up with a skewed concept of where food originates, it is up to schools to step in and provide guidance. With very limited resources for academic basics, though, how can schools find the time, money and expertise to root students in smart food knowledge?

One way is to have actual gardens on school property, however small. The Center for Nutrition in Schools at UC Davis found that garden-based learning does more than just improve nutrition knowledge. Students who participate in garden programs on school grounds have higher overall academic achievement and experience elevated self-esteem and social skills. These findings show that getting out of manufactured classroom and  setting/digging into the dirt makes quite the positive impact on K-12 students. The benefits of gardening extend beyond the fruit in hand.

Many schools that have embraced student-led gardening programs rely on inspired parents to run them though. The award-winning gardening program at Surfside Elementary on Florida’s Space Coast is the personal project of school mom Erika Maier who admits to spending about 25 hours or more every week on holistic food initiatives. Teachers who can tear themselves away from teaching FCAT requirements for a half hour each week are able to take their kids outside to get dirty planting their own food in the ground. When the plants reach fruition, the kids help harvest and eat them.

The School Garden Project of Lane County, Oregon boasts 30 gardens at K-12 schools in five districts. Over 800 students are taught to “create, sustain and use onsite gardens” every year.” By simply showing the basics of food growing, students have an informed approach to eating without an official lesson in “healthy eating.” For many K-12 students, working in a school garden is the first time they are making a real-life connection between the items they see in the grocery store and their original location.

Organizations like the Edible Schoolyard promote the principle that food is an “academic subject” and that it is the responsibility of schools to develop sustainable farms with whatever resources they have available. Those crops should then be used in school lunches and classroom celebrations. The theory is that students who are empowered to grow their own food will then be more connected to what they eat and have the ability to make smarter choices.

These fringe movements are becoming increasingly main stream. Though not a mandated portion of K-12 curriculum, a cultural return to proactive approaches to good health – like smart eating habits – is evident. The more educational technology improves, the bigger the need for garden-based learning and other back to basics programs. Like so many other facets of happy, healthy living, K-12 students need the knowledge to make informed choices.

But do schools have the resources to be part of the movement, or will they need to rely on volunteers to make it happen?

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

  • no reactions
0
Share