Eduleaders

Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch

Invitational Leadership Juxtaposed with Other Leadership Models

Let’s look at invitational leadership, as it relates to various models of leadership. Invitational leadership has this is common with participative/distributed leadership: a belief in promoting active participation of all interested stakeholders, as well as the fundamentals of moral/ethical leadership. However, a closer look reveals that invitational leadership is more inclusive and complete, since it addresses the “total environment” in which leaders function. While invitational leadership believes in allowing active participation of all organizational members, it also seeks to achieve a balance of authority and influence throughout the organization.

The transformational and servant leadership styles have been among the best received and most highly praised over the last few decades. In both models, there are similar principles that call upon leaders to lead in an manner that sets an example for followers. As with invitational leadership, these models attempt to help leaders to support their followers in empowering ways.

Invitational leaders accept the basic tenet of servant leadership that those who lead must be ready and willing to serve, but they go beyond this idea in their attempt to describe the values and roles they must serve in their organizations.

Invitational leadership, in truth, holds many of the same beliefs that describe both transformational and servant leadership. One similarity is that of forming and sharing a vision. Invitational leaders seek to invite their associates to share in a vision of greatness, and offer them a vivid but powerful picture of human effort. The three leadership types also share the elements of trust and respect.

Another shared component between invitational leadership and the two models is that of morals and ethics. Invitational leadership is at the heart a moral activity, intentionally showing respect and trust in the leaders themselves and in others, both personally and professionally. In a similar manner, it seeks to empower followers by asking others in the organization to meet their goals in pursuit of their own success. In other words, encouraging others in their quest for self-fulfillment is a characteristic embedded in the invitational leadership model. The authors conclude that invitational leadership is a mutual commitment between colleagues, instead of a series of orders issued from the top down.

While we see many shared components between the invitational leadership model and participative, transformational, and servant leadership models, there are also a few inbuilt and crucial differences. The first of these are the twin elements of optimism and intentionality. Optimism and intentionality are viewed as important characteristics for effective leaders.

The focused effort on values and principles that apply to policies, programs, places, processes, and people are also important for effectiveness in leadership. We then find that these important and unique qualities make the invitational leadership model an excellent choice, especially in these times of critical student need and increased accountability for school leaders. In light of the problems facing today’s school systems, the invitational leadership model could lead to many positive outcomes. Encouraging everyone in the school setting to participate in goal achievement allows for new ideas and fresh perspectives, which are sorely needed in an educational system that is largely old-fashioned and out of date.

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

Distributed Leadership as Task Distribution

In 2004, Spillane et al.’s theoretical description of distributed leadership was based on the performance of certain tasks, and the interactions between shifting combinations of leaders and followers, in the course of performing certain tasks.. Leadership is distributed across the three essential elements: leader, follower, and task.

Task distribution was the focus of a series of studies of distributed leadership in 2007, by Spillane et al. They analyzed patterns of distributed leadership by using the electronic logs of 52 school principals. Data was gathered by prompting the principals with electronic beeps, sounding at intervals throughout the day. They recorded whether they were engaged in leadership tasks, and if they were the ones leading/co-leading those tasks, or if others were doing it for them. The principals also indicated their intentions by choosing from a list, including increasing knowledge, monitoring teaching/curricula, developing common goals, motivating/developing others, or redesigning the teaching and learning.

In their 2003 study of distributed leadership, Camburn et al. also studied leadership as a task performance approach in a sample of schools. They studied distributed leadership by asking everyone in formal leadership roles to report the priority and/or the amount of time they spent on a variety of leadership activities. However, they did not explore the intended or actual influence of these leaders.

Leadership is clearly seen in the performance of certain functions or tasks. So, how do we establish what counts as a leadership task? Camburn et al. use organizational theories as their reference point, by following “A long line of research and theory that conceptualizes leadership in terms of organizational functions and then examines who within an organization performs these functions.” The problem with this approach is that the leadership tasks needed for this purpose may differ from those required to achieve specific goals in an organization. Most organizational theories cannot distinguish between the direct and indirect impact of leadership tasks on outcomes.

Existing evidence linking certain types of leadership to student outcomes is a better resource for determining educational impact. Research has shown instructional leadership tasks deliver more results for students. Robinson’s 2008 meta-analysis of 27 published studies of the impact of instructional leadership on student outcomes confirms this, by showing that the actual impact of instructional leadership was two to three times greater than that of transformational leadership.

The five different sets of leadership practices were measured to show different relative impacts. Relative effects were lower in the tasks of establishing goals, strategic resourcing, and establishing an orderly, supportive environment. The effects were average for planning, coordinating, and evaluating teaching and the curriculum, but were huge in relation to promoting and participating in teacher learning and development.

Clearly, using evidence is better than using general organizational theory. We can relate student impact to distributed leadership. For example, teacher engagement during a learning opportunity is far more important that whether or not teachers volunteered for it. Researchers should go beyond measuring distribution of leadership activities. The leaders’ ability to shape professional development should also be assessed, assuring they have qualities associated with better outcomes for students.
After selecting built-in leadership tasks for distributed leadership, evidence must be collected on the patterns of responsibility for the tasks. Thoughtful analysis is needed regarding who is involved, and the degree of knowledge they posses about the tasks. The level of influence leaders have over task performance should also be noted.

The third step investigates the links of these tasks to student outcomes. The most complex and expensive part of the study, it involves modeling and measuring the impact of variables, such as student background, which could dilute the data. Valuable data comes from studying the leadership of teachers, and teacher learning practices, especially where there is prior evidence of improved student outcomes. Careful analysis of these studies, and their association with student impacts, shows us the distribution of leadership practices that is most likely to make a difference to students.

When we look at the influence process itself, we can see the shifts in school and teacher culture needed to support the wider distribution of leadership tasks. This sharing of authority is vital for sustained educational improvement. Literature on teacher influence is plentiful. If distributed leadership is to fulfill its objectives, then it should focus on how those in senior leadership positions can develop a more balanced leadership approach.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

4 Reasons Why Classrooms Need Diversity Education

School climate and school culture directly impact student success. As a result, it is particularly important for the school culture (and the classroom culture) to reflect, acknowledge, and celebrate diversity. Taking these feel-good ideals and making them a reality can be tough for educators, especially with so many other initiatives on their ever-tighter schedules.

But I think that this is so important that as an educator, you must take the time to do it. How to celebrate diversity in the classroom is another article, but for now, I want you to begin your journey with knowing exactly why it’s important.

1. Because the idea of “diversity” is not even that straightforward. Not only must schools recognize diversity evident among broad racial and ethnic groups (e.g., Asian or Hispanic), but the diversity within these groups must be recognized as well. For example Chinese and Japanese students may share common cultural characteristics as a result of being Asian, but will also have distinctly Chinese and Japanese cultural characteristics that differ from each other. The same is true of Caucasian students who come from vastly different family backgrounds, even from the same neighborhoods. In the interest of treating students equally, giving them equal chances for success, and equal access to the curriculum, teachers and administrators must recognize the uniqueness and individuality of their students.

2. Teachers have a particular responsibility to recognize and structure their lessons to reflect student differences. This encourages students to recognize themselves and others as individuals. It also encourages the appreciation of a diverse school population, and brings a sense of connection between disparate cultural heritages within a single school’s culture. It is certainly in the best interest of students and teachers to focus on the richness of our diversity. Recognizing and acknowledging our differences is part of treating students fairly and equally.

3. So that you can facilitate the process of learning overall. One reason for seeking out and acknowledging cultural differences among students is the idea that learning involves transfer of information from prior knowledge and experiences. To assist in this transfer process, it is important to acknowledge the students’ background, and to validate and incorporate their previous knowledge into the process of acquiring new information. All students begin school with a framework of skills and information based on their home cultures. This may include a rudimentary understanding of the alphabet, numbers, computer functions, some basic knowledge of a second language, or the ability to spell and write their names. It also includes a set of habits, etiquette and social expectations derived from the home.

4. So that you can help students assimilate what they learn with what they already know. If a student cannot relate new information to his own experiences, or connect the new material to a familiar concept, he may perceive the new information as frustrating, difficult or dismiss it completely, believing it to be in conflict with his already tenuous understanding of the world. Teachers have the responsibility to seek out cultural building blocks students already possess, in order to help build a framework for understanding. Some educational pedagogy refers to this process as “scaffolding.” Recognition of a student’s cultural differences provides a positive basis for effective learning, and a “safe” classroom environment. Every group of students will respond differently to curriculum and teachers must constantly adjust to be sure their methods are diverse, both in theory and in practice.

What are some easy ways you’ve found to promote diversity in your classroom? Leave a comment below.

Also, if you’re interested in learning more about how you can celebrate diversity in class, here are some tips I have for you.

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

The Case for Utilizing the Invitational Leadership Model

The current climate in the education system indicates a rising need for leadership that will surpass all previous models and theories. Many of the concerns raised include increased standards for accountability issues, the need for effective leadership that will live up to the demands of these progressively difficult times. Other concerns include the need for growth in organizational health, perception of the leader as someone who can create real change, and the creation and development of a positive school culture.

Many researchers are now calling for a more participatory approach to leadership in these difficult times in education. Several challenges (e.g., cost restraint, public accountability, globalization, integration of technology, and measurement of student outcomes) require more participatory forms of leadership than those exhibited in the past. The evidence available suggests that the existing theories of leadership don’t fully reflect or explain the current practices of effective leaders. The hope is that more participation on the part of school leaders will help to improve student outcomes.

Current theories of leadership are not good enough to meet the needs of current day leaders. We therefore find that, as public scrutiny and accountability standards increase, a change in leadership theory is likely warranted. In addition to the above challenges, there is growing demand for today’s schools to become institutions of academic excellence, and also for schools that are effective at serving the needs of all interested stakeholders. There is an increased need for caring school systems that serve the best interests of the institution and its various stakeholders. This implies a more profound and challenging responsibility for leaders to understand the growing concerns of those they serve.

The above challenges and concerns are uniquely answered by the invitational leadership model. Invitational leadership can step in to satisfy the need for a leadership model that consistently and completely addresses both the internal and external elements of an organization. Invitational leaders focus on creating organizations that are people-centered and success-oriented, while at the same time dealing with all the other necessary aspects of the organization.

Invitational leaders model school culture through the thousands of daily interactions by which common standards, relationships, visions, expectations, and definitions of what works were created, framed, supported, and tested. Invitational leadership also provides required guidelines and direction to support the organizational growth and success of the school. Invitational leadership contributes positively to the school, because it cares for and supports the efforts of others. The invitational leadership model will serve as a positive source to assist in the preparation of tomorrow’s school leaders.

 

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

Distributed Leadership as Distributed Influence Processes

Leadership is an influence process that changes how others act or think. Therefore, one way of determining leadership is by investigation of its consequences. There are many ways of exercising influence that do not qualify as leadership. These include force, coercion, and manipulation, which are in no way related to leadership. The difference between all these influence processes is based one factor: the source of influence.

These sources of influence— positional authority, personal qualities, and rational persuasion—often separate leadership from any other form of power relationship. Distributed leadership is an influence process, since it embraces the social side of leadership. This is accomplished through an expansion of the specific influence processes that distinguish it from force, coercion, and manipulation. It uses influence processes that make use of the power of ideas, logical thinking, and evidence. This is particularly important in schools, since the professional culture of most schools typically makes it difficult to rely on the power of position alone.

There are some negative aspects of this concept. First, it lacks any educational content, and consequently, provides little or no guidance to the types of leadership practices that are likely to influence teachers, in ways that make a difference to students. Also, this leadership concept has been criticized for not identifying those particular leadership traits that are most likely to improve student outcomes. Instead, it focuses on distribution of leadership. Most of the available research shows that the knowledge needed to identify and define the types of leadership tasks that deliver these credible benefits are found in educational texts, and not in leadership literature.

Yet another limitation of this concept of distributed leadership is that it overlooks some of the ways leadership can be exercised indirectly. Not all interaction is through direct person to person communication. The three sources of leadership influence suggested—acceptance of orders from those in positions of power, response to essential personal characteristics, and acceptance of requests and ideas as reasonable—assume that all leadership influence is exercised through direct face-to-face interaction. This is simply not the case.

However, this conception ignores the most indirect ways in which educational leaders lend their talents to teaching and learning, such as the creation of the conditions that enable independent and unique patterns of thought and actions in others. This leadership practice is known as empowerment, and plays a huge role in the influence process.

A more powerful model is needed for measuring educational worth, if studies of distributed leadership are to give a greater understanding of how it can improve current teaching and learning processes. Recent research into distributed leadership has expanded the unit of analysis from that of leader-follower, to include the interactions among leader, follower, and other aspects of the situation, like the tools that guide and regulate teachers’ work. In summary, the concept of “distributed leadership as distributed influence” helps us distinguish between leader-follower interactions and how they produce change; this is a determining feature of what qualifies as leadership.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

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

Student surveys: Measuring what tests cannot

Student surveys are being viewed by an increasing number of school officials, policymakers and researchers as the most effective tool currently available in measuring social and emotional goals for schools and their students. Qualities such as student-teacher relations, student engagement and growth mindset are not only being examined, but incorporated into accountability systems. This means that along with test scores and graduation rates, student state of mind will come into play when rating schools.

Researchers are convinced that students’ attitudes regarding learning, their skillfulness in working well with others and ability to self-regulate and persevere account for more than half of their long-term success.

Students will now be able to rate themselves on important indicators of achievement, such as social awareness and self-management. It has been documented that short, 20 minute surveys, in addition to teacher reports can accurately predict test scores, GPA, suspension and attendance outcomes.

Several school districts have joined forces with Panorama Education, a for-profit startup to analyze and administer these school surveys. With Panorama’s tools, schools are able to ask questions about what they deem important. Guidance is also provided by the company on which type of questions are backed by the best research. Access to questions other school systems have asked and what they have done to improve results is also provided.

Many school leaders find these non-academic factors crucial and are searching for means to document their progress. Increasingly, schools are viewing the academic component and standardized test results as only a fraction of the puzzle.

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

Beyond Principals: Leadership Assessment Tools for All Educators

As the end of the school year approaches, plans are already being made for the fall in schools throughout the nation. Much-needed summer improvements will take place, along with retiring teachers cleaning out their classrooms and new ones coming in. For areas that observe the traditional “summers off” school calendar, those months are still busy ones on schools grounds. Along with the physical maintenance of schools during the time when students aren’t on the premises, what if schools did some non-physical improvements too?

Two education college professors from The University of Wisconsin-Madison and a consultant from the Wisconsin Center for Educational Products and Services have developed a survey-based system that calculates areas of strengths and weaknesses in schools, and creates an action plan for improvement. The Comprehensive Assessment of Leadership for Learning, or CALL, does not single any particular educators but rather takes a snapshot of what is happening as a whole entity. It is a smart assessment tool to implement at the end of the year and then brainstorm actionable steps on improvement when school is back in session.

The survey and results-delivery system were born of necessity. More than ever, schools are in need of transformational leadership that creates learning opportunities for students but also prepares them for the real-world economy. The pressure has never been greater, particularly as Common Core Standards and other state-based ones heighten accountability for teachers, administrators and other instructional staff. The belief used to be that principals were responsible for all the leadership roles within a particular school but that theory is starting to fade. While principals certainly need solid leadership traits, distributing those responsibilities can actually lead to stronger school systems that are able to better support student bodies.

The problem with existing leadership assessment tools is that they only evaluate people on an individual basis, instead of looking at how school personnel can work together to achieve maximum effectiveness. CALL was developed with funds from the U.S. Department of Education and tested in more than 150 schools containing thousands of educators. The survey itself has over 100 questions and takes around 40 minutes to complete and is thorough in its approach, thereby making it more of an “activity” than a “survey.” It has five main areas of concentration, including:

  • Focus on learning. Essentially, this portion looks at the way school leaders practice what they preach. Do school leaders do classroom visits, and engage with students? Do they participate in the team-building and leadership programs that they design for others? Collaboration and staff buy-in to school learning initiatives is an integral part of this portion of the survey.
  • Monitoring teaching and learning. School leaders should be able to not only make sense of their student performance, but know how to communicate it to teachers. Monitoring of school successes does not need to mean constant micromanagement; rather, leaders should understand the scope of their students’ strengths and weaknesses and know how to empower improvements.
  • Building nested learning communities. While educators are ultimately responsible for their own teaching successes, school leaders must provide the support and resources to make effective teaching possible. Leaders should have ways to measure teacher/student performance and be willing to put improvement plans in place.
  • Acquiring and allocating resources. Time spent on whole-school, grade-level and subject-matter reflection is just one aspect analyzed in this part of the survey. If external leaders are part of a school’s leadership and decision-making process, then they are asked to give input on this section. The school’s communication with its community through things like social media, and email, are also assessed in this portion. How are schools making the best use of their resources?
  • Maintaining a safe and effective learning environment. Above all, schools must be safe places for students, teachers and administrators. This starts with the basics, like cleanliness, and extends to factors like schools as safe havens for the students who may be struggling. The safety of students and their perception of being in a “safe” place do make a difference in learning effectiveness and this portion of the survey analyzes ways in which schools can maximize that fact.

It really is true that “it takes a village” and understanding how each educator in a school can best contribute to its success leads to stronger student outcomes, and stronger schools. By implementing the in-depth CALL survey, schools can see exactly HOW to get where need to be when it comes to school leaders.

If you are interested in learning more, you can register to join a free webinar on CALL. The webinar will discuss the theory behind CALL as well as provide a demonstration of the CALL automated data feedback report system.

This is a great opportunity for schools to obtain data on leadership effectiveness in order to support school leaders’ professional growth and school improvement.

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

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

The 4 Attributes of Transformational Leadership

Leadership – it’s not just giving orders. The role of school administration is about more than just making schedules and disciplining children. Transformational leadership offers administrators the opportunity to drive organizational change and to create strong schools by fostering a culture of learning and growth in educators that then gives children an environment in which to grow.

It’s not difficult to see how Transformational Leadership would fit well into the school setting, as its attributes line up perfectly with the goals of education. In fact, when transformational leadership is applied to school setting the results are quite remarkable. So what are the attributes of transformational leadership, and how can administrators go about implementing them?

1.    Idealized/Charismatic influence

A leader must be able to inspire the people who they are leading. How? Through language, etiquette, mannerisms and lifestyle. Those being led must have great amount of trust in their leader in order to allow themselves to be guided. Living by example is essential, because just as this model demands that educators look beyond self interest, by extension the leader must look beyond their own self interest as well. High levels of integrity and moral values are absolutely essential.

In order for leadership to be transformational, a charismatic leader has to spread out responsibility and to take it on without compromising. That means that their followers must follow because they are committed to the cause and confident in their leader’s ability to get things done. Charisma isn’t some ethereal quality that’s limited to politicians and movie stars – in the real world it is derived from respect and a visible projection of responsibility. The other point here is that followers will follow other followers. If a leader is able to distribute tasks and have those tasks completed effectively by subordinates, then others will latch onto that and naturally follow. In effect a leader can grow their charisma by utilizing their resources effectively.

2.    Inspirational Motivation

The top goal of a transformational leader is to get the full support of everyone involved, all with an eye for the common goal. The best way to do this is to be open and honest about challenges. When people feel that their leader is willing to face known issues rather than brushing them aside, they become invested. The aim is to develop that sense of belonging within the school culture, which then supports everyone involved.

Transformational Leadership takes the compartments out of the school. Rather than teachers being focused only on what’s going on in their classrooms, their vision becomes expanded to see how their relationships with others in the school affects the outcomes of students. There is an investment in the success of other teachers, who are all working toward the same goal of brightening young minds. The core of transformational leadership is employee commitment, which then creates opportunities for the goals of the entire school environment to be achieved.

  1. Intellectual Stimulation

Education is at it’s core about getting those neurons to fire. Leaders who encourage their employees to stay rational in the face of emotional challenges that come with the educational setting are creating an environment that will have less conflict and more growth. Innovation and hard work are encouraged through intellectual pursuits like problems solving. Just as keeping students intellectually engaged in the classroom keeps them on track, so too does keeping teachers intellectually engaged keep them on track.

It’s so important that there is an understanding that education is about growth. Any good teacher will tell you that teachers learn as much from their students as their students learn from them. There is an organic understanding among educators that teaching and learning are partners. Educators cannot help their children to grow if they are not growing themselves, and in fact educators want to grow. Educational leaders should use this desire for growth to keep their followers actively engaged.

  1. Individualized Consideration

Creating relationships is essential, and that means two-way communication. Followers who feel heard and valued are much more invested in the process and interested in pursuing the larger, organizational goals. Not to mention this individualized process allows leaders to then know the strengths of the people within the organization, so as to better structure the group for success. In a school setting, this translates to interactions beyond the mandatory observations and meetings. Administrators who seek connection with their staff in smaller, more regular ways are able to build trust and a sense of shared service that leads to a better and more productive relationship overall.

Best practice for a transformational leader is to have opportunities to work with individuals on a one-on-one basis in at least some form. While in large settings this might be more of a challenge, nonetheless it is the individualized communication that creates the right environment for transformational leadership. There are myriad ways to make this happen, without having to pile on undue stress or time commitments. Transformational leaders employ creative means to create those relationships.

References

Transformational leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by James Burns (1978), and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of James Burns’ work on transformational leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

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

Reasons for the Emergence of Distributed Leadership

Two explanations have been offered for the emergence of distributed leadership. The first is the failure of the “charismatic hero” associated with transformational leadership. The second is that school leaders now handle tasks of much greater complexity. . It is not the heroic leader who makes an organization function well, but rather the “mundane,” everyday activities that matter.

Distributed leadership is well within the broader policy spectrum for public services. In a government’s emerging model for public services, we see the three modes of leadership that the government favors. These are hierarchy, market, and network. If we overlay the school setup on the government model, then we see where the schools’ “capability and capacity” fits in relation to the network regime of governance, where distributed leadership is positioned.

Distributed leadership can therefore be said to be similar to the broader policy process, since government will construct a need, goal, or objective that would require both school actors and non-school actors to distribute their efforts between organizations and/or within organizations to achieve this end. It also provides a cultural reference to the official structural similarities of two traditionally separate organizations.

Distributed leadership fits well with the merging or networking of work-based activities according to current trends on inter-agency working in schools; with the joint production of personalized needs and solutions; and finally with the changing workforce . All these efforts seek to merge the professional cultures of different groups.

With the above in mind, the emergence of distributed leadership is not only a reaction to the recent policy shifts; it also reflects changes in contemporary culture. Organizations can no longer control their workers through the so-called rational or bureaucratic structures of the past. Those out-of-date methods inhibit the kind of independent work that relies on solidarity, respect, or mutual trust, since all they end up doing is bringing about authority conflicts.

The present focus on distributed leadership is not so much related to the cultural turn toward taking emotions into account, like transformational leadership, but is more of an example of management theory resonating with a contemporary shift toward the weakening of traditional logic. Organized social structure, as a result, has given way to a “network culture.”

These new changes also indicate a change in the knowledge economy. We have begun to see a form of “socialism” in education, proven by the use of terms such as “universal education” to symbolize the trend toward viewing education as something other than a market commodity in this age. Governments around the world are now keen to set up a policy that ensures that literacy is achieved by all, with no regard to social status. The role of the school leader is therefore shifting from economic management to social management.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

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

3 Real Facts About Behind the Senate’s Refusal to Consider Climate Change Education

The latest version of “No Child Left Behind” had a section that would have created climate change curriculum for K-12 students.

However, the Senate said “no” to this portion of the bill.

Why did this happen? Let’s look at the facts behind this decision.

  1. According to theHill.com, the measure failed 44-53.

“The measure, from Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), would have created a grant program for school districts to “develop or improve climate science curriculum and supplementary education materials,” according to the amendment text. It failed on a 44-53 vote.”

  1. Chair of the Senate H.E.L.P. Committee (Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) Lamar Alexander said that he wasn’t fond of the measure because it further inserts the federal government into public education. But that wasn’t all…
  2. Alexander believes in climate change but is afraid that allowing the amendment to pass would, in essence, create a slippery slope due to political partisanship.

Interesting that politics is the reason why a measure like this failed. Climate change is real and has been proven by simple science. While the development of the curriculum hopefully wouldn’t grow around partisan ideas, giving baseline information on climate change and its impact on the earth seems fairly logical.

Explaining why temperatures in the ocean continue to rise, why the polar ice caps are melting, and why tornadoes have gotten more powerful is information all students should know. This attack on climate change as “made up” is not helpful to anyone — least of all the next generation of adults who will deal with this on an even larger scale.

Hopefully the Senate tries again with rewritten language and passes the measure. Our students need to learn about climate change and at an early age.

  • no reactions
0
Share