school reform

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

3 Ways to Improve U.S. Students’ Standing Worldwide

The latest international report on student knowledge and success worldwide once again paints U.S. students in a bad light. This is not the first time American students have lagged behind their peers on the OECD PISA global education survey that tests and compares student outcomes in areas like math, science and reading. The results are really just more of the same.

While I take issue with particular parts of the test (leader China reportedly only tested students in elite schools in Shanghai), it is a wake-up call nonetheless. When it comes to American K-12 student achievement, it is not enough to be a big fish in a little pond. To really make a splash and gain international footing, a few things need to change in U.S. K-12 education. Here are just a few:

Teacher support. This starts from administration in individual schools and extends into the community at large. Parents must also respect the role of teachers in order for kids to follow suit. Unfortunately many times teachers are pitted as servants, and not put on the pedestal they deserve. Perhaps I’m biased but what is more important than imparting knowledge to our next generation? Today’s best teachers are not simply reciting facts and expecting their students to regurgitate them; the teachers in contemporary classrooms are “showing their work” so to speak by imparting the life skills necessary for students to find answers on their own and be successful citizens in other ways.

Teachers need backup from the other people in their students’ lives and from their own colleagues and superiors. Traditionally high-performing PISA countries like Sweden, Australia and Japan all have one thing in common – high levels of community support for teachers and involvement from teachers in the course of instruction and curriculum. When new initiatives are handed down in the U.S., like the Common Core standards, teachers should have access to resources to help them reach goals. Teachers need more input in decisions, more access to continuing education resources and more faith from the administrators and families impacted by their classrooms.

STEM emphasis. There seems to be a general societal consensus that science, technology, engineering and math subjects are somehow boring, or uncool. A lot of attention has been placed lately on young women and finding ways to encourage them in male-dominated STEM fields, but I’d argue that young men need the same opportunities. Overall, more American students need to take an interest in STEM topics if we want to be able to compete on a global scale. The rapidly changing field of technology makes this part of U.S. K-12 education even more pressing. As the digital age continues to modify life as we know it, the students in today’s classrooms must have the tools to lead the country in discoveries, inventions and communication technology the coming decades.

Equal opportunities. In country that claims to be based on equality for all, there are still too many achievement gaps in our classrooms. While it should be a non-issue, the color of a student’s skin does seem to impact his or her academic achievement. It is not a direct effect, of course, but still something that needs even more focus to overcome. The best work on closing the achievement gap is in individual schools and I think that makes the most sense. No blanket national program will be able to answer all of the intricacies of why an achievement gap exists in a particular place or school. From a federal standpoint, however, schools should be encouraged to develop programs for eliminating achievement gaps and reaching individual students where it is most effective – their own classrooms.

Why do you think American students lag the rest of the world? What would you add to my list?

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

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

The Four Pillars of Flipped Learning

Note: Today’s guest post was written by Jessica Yarbro, George Mason University, Patrick McKnight, Ph.D., George Mason University, Kari M. Arfstrom, Ph.D. Executive Director, Flipped Learning Network and Katherine McKnight, Ph.D. Pearson’s Center for Educator Learning & Effectiveness.

While various new learning styles are making headway in the classroom, none more than Flipped Learning has made such an impact. In fact, a 2014 survey, conducted by the Flipped Learning Network™  (FLN) and Sophia Learning, revealed that in a matter of two years, the FLN has seen a 700% growth in teachers joining the FLN community, which now is comprised of more than 20,000 educators. Additionally, nearly 100% of teachers recognize the term and almost 80% indicate they have “flipped” at least one lesson in the last school year.

FLN defines Flipped Learning as a pedagogical approach in which direct instruction moves from the group learning space to the individual learning space, and the resulting group space is transformed into a dynamic, interactive learning environment where the educator guides students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.

FLN leaders determined that there is a difference (and that they are not interchangeable) between Flipped Learning and the Flipped Classroom – which has been misused by many. Flipping a class can lead to Flipped Learning, but it’s not a definite. Many teachers may already flip their classes by having students read text outside of class, watch additional videos, or solve extra problems, but to engage in Flipped Learning, teachers must incorporate four pillars into their practice: (F.L.I.P) Flexible Environment, Learning Culture, Intentional Content and Professional Educator.

The Four Pillars

Flexible Environment
Educators create flexible spaces where students choose when and where they learn. Additionally, educators who flip their classes are flexible in their expectations of student timelines for learning and in their assessments of student learning.

Learning Culture
In a Flipped Learning model, in-class time is dedicated to exploring topics in greater depth and creating rich learning opportunities. As a result, students are actively involved in knowledge construction as they participate in and evaluate their learning in a manner that is personally meaningful.

Intentional Content
Flipped Learning Educators determine what they need to teach and what materials students should handle on their own. Educators use Intentional Content to maximize classroom time in order to adopt methods of student-centered, active learning strategies, depending on grade level and subject matter.

Professional Educator
The role of a Professional Educator is even more important, and often more demanding, in a Flipped Classroom than in a traditional one. During class time, they need to observe students, providing them with instant feedback and an assessment their work. While Professional Educators take on less visibly prominent roles in a flipped classroom, they remain the essential part that enables Flipped Learning to occur successfully.

While the Flipped Learning model may not work for every class, the model represents an innovative approach to teaching with the potential to create active, engaged and learning-centered classrooms. FLN’s four suggested pillars serve as ways to help educators successfully implement a Flipped Learning model. What are some other suggestions that you’ve seen being implemented in a successful Flipped Learning classroom?

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

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

Is it Possible to Sustain School Reform Indefinitely?

By Matthew Lynch

The word “reform” comes with the connotation of something with a start and end date. There are reformation eras in history, and policies, and initiatives. The problem with thinking of reform, particularly school reform, on a timeline is that the most successful reform attempts are ongoing.

People involved in the piloting stage of school reform often see what they are doing as something limited by time. Other stakeholders likely share this view, or are of the opinion that the work will stop when the reform money runs out, or that, the new reforms won’t take hold. This generally leads to fragmentation, or a lack of a coherent approach to reform, and as a result, reform efforts often end up sidelined. Unfortunately, this circumstance runs contrary to the realization of in-depth, sustained school reforms.

The cyclical turnover of superintendents and school board members makes it difficult to ensure that others will continue effective systemic reforms begun by one board and superintendent. New superintendents and new school boards often want to make their marks by initiating changes rather than sustaining the strategies created by their predecessors.

This is often the case even when evidence suggests that existing programs are the ones that need to be sustained to meet long-term goals, such as closing the achievement gap or getting all students to proficiency. The new leadership appears to forget that there are no quick fixes or short term reforms that guarantee continuous improvement in student achievement, as they jump to exchange existing efforts for improvement with new ones.

The process of school reform can become very lengthy and on the whole it is expected to stretch across a period of several years. Ironically, school districts are placed under tremendous pressure to turn a new page each year, allowing for only a fraction of the time required for any reform plan to produce results. This is sometimes part of a government ploy when budget cuts are enforced with little notice, or a result of resentful parents streaming to the authorities in opposition to some aspect of the an existing plan.

The process of annual makeovers comes at substantial costs to the states that are likely already operating on limited funds. Cost is not the only issue however. By reinventing the system each year, educators, teachers, and principals alike, have no chance to come to terms with the details of any particular plan before it’s time to implement the next one. As a result, educators are never fully versed on any plan, in effect making the process of reform fruitless.

The role of the school district is to take a long-term approach, define, and articulate the school reform agenda for the district, as they are a crucial source of leadership in implementing and sustaining reform. Their role should be to develop a framework by which sustainable reforms can be measured even if there is a turnover of staff.

A school reform framework should include four key points:

  • improving student achievement
  • fiscal accountability
  • increasing organizational effectiveness
  • building and improving relationships with staff and the broader community.

This framework provides an agenda that the school board and staff can work from and use as a checklist to measure the success of reforms. It also means that when recruiting new staff you should look to hire people whose vision matches the already defined vision of the district, an important factor when it comes to sustaining change over time. Reform then should become a permanent goal of every school system, not something that can be plotted out nicely on a calendar.

 

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

School Security: Just Smoke and Mirrors?

In theory, parents and educators would do anything to keep students safe, whether those students are pre-Kindergartners or wrapping up a college career. Nothing is too outlandish or over-the-top when it comes to protecting our kids and young adults. Metal detectors, security cameras, more police presence in school hallways, gated campuses – they all work toward the end goal of sheltering students and their educators and protecting the most vulnerable of our citizens. Emotions aside though – how much does school security really increase actual safety? And do school security efforts actually hinder the learning experience? It sounds good to taut the virtues of tighter policies on school campuses but is it all just empty rhetoric?

Recently the University of Kentucky came under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union for plans to install 2,000 security cameras on campus. Representatives at UK say the move is a response to the increasing randomness of school violence at all levels of the learning process and a way to better ensure student safety. The ACLU says it is a blatant violation of privacy.

I say it is money wasted because all the security cameras in the world would not have prevented the largest school tragedies of recent history, from Sandy Hook Elementary to the Virginia Tech massacre. Security cameras and other monitoring devices give us a false feeling of security and an actionable course when there are no answers to pointless questions.

While extreme, UK’s camera monitoring plans are in sync with what is happening in K-12 schools across the nation. In the 2009 – 2010 school year, 84 percent of high schools had security cameras for safety monitoring. Over half of all middle and elementary schools had them too, with 73 and 51 percent respectively. Despite this, the National Center for Education Statistics reports that the percentage of high schools with controlled access to school buildings during normal hours is lower than that of middle and elementary students. Though not expressly stated in these findings, it would seem that in the case of high schools, cameras are more of a way to catch rule-breakers after the fact than a way to prevent violence and other criminal activities.

Students are not the only ones who are the subjects of safeguards like surveillance cameras.  Teachers, administrators and other staff are also vital when it comes to putting school safety into place – and in the case of teachers, they are on the front lines of what is going on with students. Limited access to K-12 campuses is meant to protect outsiders from harming the many people who are supposed to be there. But what about student-versus-student violence, or student-versus-teacher physical altercations? In 2011, 12 percent of high schoolers reported being in a physical fight at school that year. Nearly 6 percent reported carrying a weapon, like a gun or knife, onto school property in the month preceding the survey. By the time a security camera picks up on the fact that a student has a knife or gun, is there really any timely way to prevent the inevitable.

Given the fact that state spending per student is lower than at the start of the recession, how much should schools shell out in the way of security costs? Perhaps the best investment we can make to safeguard our students and educators is in personal vigilance. Perhaps less reliance on so-called safety measures would lead to higher alertness.

What role should school security play on K-12 campuses, and should it be a financial priority?

 

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

The School’s Role in Sex Education and Preventing Teenage Pregnancy

By Matthew Lynch

For how progressive Americans claim to be, conflicting messages about sex abound. Young people hear messages about abstinence until marriage alongside the messages about the importance of using protection during sexual intercourse. Ashamed to ask legitimate questions, youth often turn to their peers for information about sex instead of to their parents and other trusted adults.  At the same time, they are bombarded with sexual images from the media. With all these conflicting aspects of sex, is it any wonder the youth of today are confused?

As of today, the federal government will only fund programs that teach abstinence until marriage and one third of all American schools teach this type of sex education program. Many schools do teach comprehensive sex education, which promotes abstinence until marriage, but also address issues of protection against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).  Recently, President Obama proposed ending funding for abstinence-only programs and instead funding comprehensive sex education programs, but he has not made much progress in that regard, as social conservatives seem to continue to reign when it comes to the topic.

It’s not difficult to see why the programs need to be changed, though. The rates of teen pregnancy and STDs are higher in the United States than in any other developed country and it is only getting worse.  Sexual activity among teens occurs at high rates, which suggests abstinence-only programs are not working.  In fact, these programs are woefully out of date, inaccurate and severely biased.  Sexual activity, pregnancy rates, and rates of STDs either stay the same or increase after teens have taken these abstinence-only programs.

The number of babies born to teens has decreased in recent years, but the actual rate of teenage sexual activity has increased.  Teens are demanding information beyond that offered through abstinence-only programs. Many states are willing to forego federal funding, in order to offer comprehensive sex education programs that include up-to-date and non-judgmental information.

One of the newest approaches, and one that is expected to be more successful, is the Baby Think it Over program.  In this program, students are given the responsibility of caring for a “baby” for an extended period of time.  This is a newborn infant and the computer program that goes with it makes it “cry” at regular intervals. The computer will alert the instructor if the baby has been mistreated or neglected.  This is a good program to teach students what it is like to have the responsibilities of a parent.

Other approaches include building a support system for pregnant teens and bringing the family onboard.  In this way, the negative reactions to teen pregnancy are replaced with the kind of attention that ensures the teen mother and the baby are well cared for, and that pre-natal and post-natal education and care are available. During both the pregnancy and the birth of the child, teen mothers are able to live stress-free environments with the love and support of their family. This level of support increases the possibility that the teen mother will finish high school and find the means to support herself and her baby.

By taking a “see no evil” approach to sex education, we are providing a severe disservice to our youth. More informed teens will make more informed decisions, and they deserve the chance for that.

How do you think sexual education in the U.S. can be modified to better fit today’s society?

 

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

Can Schools Succeed without Enough Money?

Free, public education in this country comes at a price. When the country hits turbulent financial times, like the recent recession years, it takes its toll on the quality of education available in our K-12 schools, and it can even take decades for the true deficiencies to show.

When town and city administrators are forced to curtail the hiring of new teachers, or force the retirement of older teachers, class sizes then increase.  The teacher-to-student ratio expands accordingly meaning less face time per student, reducing the overall effectiveness of educational institutions.

An economic crisis does not just affect the schools in terms of budgets.  Financial difficulties within students’ families also play a huge role in the educational problems of the United States.  With more parents scrambling to make ends meet, there is less parental involvement with their children.  As a result, students may become unmotivated and slack off on assignments.  They may become problematic at school, meaning more time and effort from school administrators, leaving less time to improve their various systems.

Most American homes are dual-income, with both parents working one or more jobs to try to meet their financial obligations. There are also many single parent families, where the time for work and domestic tasks takes away from one-on-one educational work with children. In nearly every family situation, the time parents have to give their children any type of grounding in basic knowledge is severely limited.  The result is children starting school without much of the very basic knowledge children had in generations past.  Without that early foundation on which to build, children find themselves forever running at a deficit.

Furthermore, testing regimens for our children are anything but uniform. Some children are over-tested to an extreme; States like Massachusetts may be venerated for their stringent policies and standardized testing, but that level of stringency does not necessarily carry over to other states. In fact, many other states are not nearly as rigorous in their own testing procedures, preferring to do only what is required to ensure that they receive federal education funds, and nothing more.

This level of inconsistency then becomes yet another problem for students.  Given the economic climate of the nation, many students may find themselves moving from state-to-state as their parents pursue employment or better jobs.  Inconsistency among state’ standardized testing procedures may result in students who have relocated suddenly finding themselves under a lot of pressure to do better than what was required in their previous school.

The Difference between Then and Now

In generations past, children starting school came into the system with far more knowledge already in hand.  They knew their letters, they knew how to count, and some of them already knew the fundamentals of reading.  This, of course, stems from the fact that most families had a parent who stayed home during the day and was therefore able to spend more time with the child. There were also less electronic distractions from the basics of reading.

Teacher retention is also difficult, stemming from economic factors. A number of the accelerated teacher certification programs, such as weekend and online programs, have good intentions but are turning out teachers that are unprepared to the meet the challenges that they soon will face in troubled classrooms.

Although these teachers are inexpensive since they are brand new and have not worked their way up to better pay scales and benefits, they are more likely to jump ship and leave the school system instead of staying to nurture their profession. Of course, the next group of teachers to replace them is new and inexperienced, too, but provides fresh bodies in the classrooms at an inexpensive level – so the cycle repeats itself. This is good for the budget, but not so good for long-term performance, morale, and achievement.

Certainly, the economic situation affects the task of balancing budgets, by the school system, government entities, and parents. Conversely, more money does not necessarily mean more improvement – but not enough causes a host of its own problems too.

America spends more per student than any other nation in the world, and yet we see meager results. With this kind of money being pumped into the system, why are our school systems in the state that they are? There’s no arguing that our schools need to be well funded in order for our children to succeed, but clearly our schools need to do a better job utilizing the funds that they already receive too.

How can public schools continue to thrive, even in difficult economic times?

photo credit: horizontal.integration via photopin cc

 

 

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

Parental Involvement: Strengthening Communication is the Key

The Information Age has brought with it a lot more options for communication, but in the process has fragmented it. Teachers now have more avenues than ever when it comes to connecting with parents, but all of this communication can be overwhelming. Between emails, Facebook group pages, text messages, phone calls and send-home flyers, information can be easily lost in translation between educators and parents – and students are the ones who then suffer.

Each piece of communication is an attempt to reach parents and keep them updated on what is going on in the classroom and what their kids are learning, but instead it all collectively just becomes challenging and confusing.

What if parental involvement could be streamlined and reach parents in ways that work best for them?  A central location where information, messages, files and photos could live and be easily accessible to parents, teachers and admins from anywhere? This is exactly what ParentSquare delivers,  an innovative two-way communication and collaboration platform purpose-built for educators and parents.

How ParentSquare Works

ParentSquare is a simple to use, private communication platform that streamlines communication via web, email, text or mobile app. The easy-to-use interface offers two-way messaging, file and photo sharing, event and volunteer sign-up and more. With tabs for messages, events, people, photos, files and other options, parents can log into one system and have all the information they need. In short, ParentSquare makes school-to-home messaging simple, empowering parents to take a more active role in the academic success of their kids. Some of the standout features of ParentSquare include:

  • Two-way messaging
  • Text, email, web and mobile apps ensure schools reach every parent
  • Collaboration tools
  • Safe place to store photos – Unlimited photo upload and parents can see and download the full resolution pictures
  • Family-friendly features – easy to sign up to volunteer/bring classroom supply, ask a question, share photos and calendar
  • In addition to classroom communication, Parents can join and interact with school groups like fundraising committees or ELAC.
  • An instant Spanish translation option, removing this language barrier in homes where it may otherwise prevent parents from being completely in the know regarding their kids’ academics.
  • A people directory that gives contact information for important figures at the school and allows for messaging them within the platform
  • Statistics – A dashboard that shows who receives, reads and engages in the messages.

How it Helps Teachers and Administrators

The ParentSquare platform increases efficiency and strengthens communication in schools by:

  • Cutting costs. Forget daily reminders that need to be printed out and placed in folders. ParentSquare makes it all digital.
  • Reducing teacher stress. One message can be input into the ParentSquare system and then distributed a number of ways, including web, text, email and mobile apps. Messages can also be scheduled in advance helping teachers plan their week in advance.
  • Increasing parental involvement. Using the ParentSquare platform to sign up volunteers or ask for needed items in the classroom assures that no school need falls between the cracks of missed communication.

When it comes to fragmented school-to-home communication, there can be a lot left to chance. ParentSquare combines messaging functions into one simple platform and offers collaboration tools that encourage greater parental involvement in the schools that use it. Knowledge truly is power – and ParentSquare allows parents to have more of it through an effective system that ensures stronger lines of communication.

For more information on how ParentSquare works, visit ParentSquare.com.

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

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

3 Easy Ways to End the High School Dropout Crisis

Recent high school dropout rates appear to be on the decline. But the numbers are still too high to stomach, especially with all of the alternative options high school students now have to finish their diplomas outside traditional classroom settings. At this juncture in U.S. K-12 progress, the dropout rate should be so small that it’s barely even worth mentioning.

Let’s look at ways to reduce the high school dropout rate to insignificance, once and for all.

  1. Get the business community involved. High school dropouts have a real economic impact. We can’t deny this. In fact, the nation as a whole will miss out on an estimated $154 billion in income over the lifetimes of the dropouts from the Class of 2011.

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

The report Building a Grad Nation 2012 found that between 2002 and 2010, Georgia showed high school graduation rate improvement from 61 to 68 percent, in part because of involvement from the business community. In that eight-year span, the number of “dropout factories” (schools with 60 percent or lower graduation rates) fell from 1,634 to 1,550. Making graduation numbers an issue of economic stability, and having backup from business leaders, is just one step toward reducing dropout numbers.

  1. Provide support outside of the classroom. Risk factors for dropouts include coming from low-income or single-parent families. Teachers simply cannot address the academic and emotional needs of every student within normal class time, so programs need to be in place for students who are at risk for dropping out. A pilot program in San Antonio called Communities in Schools has set out to accomplish this through offering on-campus counseling services for students on the fence about dropping out. The program offers a listening ear for whatever the students may need to talk about, from lack of food or anxiety about family financial woes. Of the students in the program in the 2012 – 2013 school year, 97 percent obtained a high school diploma instead of dropping out. While students can certainly talk about their studies, the main point of the program is not academic. It is simply a support system to encourage students who may be facing life obstacles to keep pushing forward to finish high school. These programs are often what students need to feel accountability toward the community as a whole and also worthiness for a high school diploma.
  2. Promote earlier education for everybody. Much of the attack on the dropout rate happens when teens are already at a crossroads. In truth, the learning and social experiences they have from birth influence their attitudes about education, society and their own lives. Perhaps the dip in dropout rates in the past four decades hinges on another statistic: from 1980 to 2000, the number of four-year-old children in the U.S. enrolled in preschool programs rose from half to over two-thirds. Pre-K learning is only an academic right (free of charge) in 40 states and in 2012, total funding for these programs was slashed by $548 million. Instead of putting money where it belongs – upfront, at the beginning of a K-12 career – lawmakers could be contributing to a higher dropout rate, and economic cost, in future decades.

It’s time to stop making the high school dropout issue something that is confronted in the moment. Prevention, as early as pre-K learning, is a long-term solution.

Can you think of any innovative ways to reduce the high school dropout rates?

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

3 Developments on No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. Fifteen years have blown by since the last time No Child Left Behind was updated. That’s a significant period of time when we are talking about the treatment of our students in every school of the nation.

But just because No Child Left Behind has not been updated does not mean that it has been forgotten. In fact, there are some relatively recent developments. Let’s take a look at three of them.

  1. “No Child” Waivers extended to 2018. The Department of Education has released a letter stating the new guidance for securing waivers from No Child Left Behind, President George W. Bush’s education reform law, for three or even four more years. The waivers stop states from being tied to the rigorous expectations of Bush-led Adequate Yearly Progress, but in turn, each state must adhere to education reforms encouraged by the Obama administration.

The DOE informed chief state school officers that they would be eligible to apply to renew their waivers through the 2017-2018 school year.

The Bush-era law has been due an update since 2007. In 2012, the administration began granting waivers to state if they met certain requirement such as adopting college- and career ready standards and developing teacher and principal evaluation systems based largely on how much students learn.

Currently, 43 states and the District of Columbia have received waivers from No Child Left Behind, which allow them to forego certain accountability requirements law in exchange for implementing education reforms backed by the Obama administration.

Some education advocacy groups were pleased with the emphasis placed on ensuring states have a plan to improve student achievement for all groups of students — including students with disabilities, those from low-income homes and English language learners — and prohibiting states from giving schools high scores on state accountability reports if they have large achievement gaps.

The requirements also sparked some widespread criticism across the political spectrum.

  1. The Senate attempted to rewrite NCLB. According to The Washington Post, No Child Left Behind faced a 600-page rewrite. The Senate HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) worked on adjusting language and amendments that would seriously alter the bill’s impact.

Some of the revisions include a pivot towards allowing states to assume control over how teachers are evaluated and would drop the federal definition “of a highly qualified teacher.”

The bill  also gives additional support for charter schools by providing “incentives for states to adopt stronger charter school authorizing practices.”

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. But this time seems to be different. The bill has a bipartisan tone and any amendment that did not have support from Democrats and Republicans was withdrawn during the bill’s mark up.

Yet those amendments will likely appear again when the full Senate has an opportunity to vote on the measure. Republican Senator Tim Scott has an idea  to funnel federal money meant to help poor students into a voucher system that any child attending a high-poverty school may use to transfer into a new school district.

His amendment failed in committee but he will reintroduce on the Senate floor.

Other inclusions and provisions included are an update to federal testing requirements, the peer review process, and an alteration to funding for early childhood learning programs.

  1. The Senate approved the changes to the law in July, a move that finally sets up negotiations with the U.S. House on updating the federal law on education.

“The Senate-passed measure would prohibit the federal government from setting performance targets or requiring specific standards such as the Common Core curriculum. It would make states responsible for establishing systems of accountability, including how much weight should be put on testing to determine whether schools are succeeding.”

According to ReviewJournal.com, the bill faces critics that believe it doesn’t reach far enough to help “minorities and low-income students.”

It is highly unlikely that the Senate’s bill will end up being passed as the final version as there is too much wrangling left to do with the House.

But besides that point, what may catch the eye of educators as they follow along with the progress of No Child Left Behind is how heavily it leans on allowing states the make final decisions on education.

Instead of receiving direction from the federal government, each state may end up having the ability to create policy surrounding how it decides to approach education. If you think about it, that is a scary prospect and would go completely against the idea of national standards.

Even that, though, is sure to change before the final version actually passes.

What do you think of the changes being made to No Child Left Behind?

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

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

Public schools last frontier to equality?

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding 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.**

A guest column by Constance Evelyn

America’s landmark legislative actions illuminate a core mission of providing a free and appropriate education for all students attending public schools.  The common thread among these legal precedents is the objective to ensure equitable access to high quality instruction cementing literacy as the most basic human rights principle.  Inherently, is the notion that the sanctity of childhood is precious and should be protected.  These virtues are essentially upheld in Brown vs. Board of Education, PL94-142, and The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) as indicators that as a country we value the future of all children.  Indeed that we understand the very fate of our democratic nation depends on a passionate dedication that public education is possibly the last bastion in ensuring equal access to becoming learned.

Philosophically, I’m aware that my perspective is based in my life experience as perhaps many others may attest. Bias is personal; and mine is partly borne from being the only mixed race, foster child attending our local elementary school.  I should say that graduating as the valedictorian did not help an already tenuous situation.  Flagrantly displaying intelligence in my neighborhood was not necessarily smart.  And fortunately, I learned this rather quickly.  However, achieving at the highest levels was a non negotiable in my household, and therefore, my grades, demeanor, and in particular the preferential treatment I received by teachers told the true story.  I was mercilessly bullied, chased home from school, and called hurtful names.  The most frequent tag was ‘white girl’.  I often recounted to my mother that this part of the verbal attacks was particularly painful because she taught me that it communicated more about the ignorance of my offenders than any other intentions they may have had.  After years of this harassment and the school’s suggested remedy of having me skip a grade as solution for my being young, black, and gifted, my mother came up with a new plan.  At eleven years old, I was enlisted in a clandestine scheme that would forever change the trajectory of my life.   Mom decided that a better response to challenge my intellect was sending me across town to the high performing intermediate school.  It took me almost two hours in one direction to access high quality education in 6th grade.  There was no ‘skipping’ except for the three bus transfers involved in my travels.

Many things astounded me within a week’s time at my new school.  When I walked into sixth grade, the students said out loud, ‘Who’s that black girl?’ Secondly, I was the only African-American student in this class and the other two tracks that had been devoted to high performing students.  Soon there were many other observations I made, but the most startling of my discoveries happened on my ride home from school on the ‘special’ bus.  There actually were other African-American students in the sixth grade attending this school!  As I mingled with them, I realized that many of them were in the same class, 6-8.  When they asked what class I was in, I changed the subject.  I was even ‘smarter’ by now, and I knew that I should let them get to know me, before I let them identify what kind of student I was.

As public school educators, we must regard our charge as both a moral imperative and obligation.  This commitment will foster a clear understanding of what we have come to believe is our purpose for serving students.  Our decisions about this are usually equal to our assets.  Essentially, the pledge is straightforward. High-quality educators have a mindset that warily recognizes the menacing nature of mediocrity and the sustenance of low expectations.  A good teacher approaches her work with a sincere faithfulness in response to the pledge that, all children should have a right to a sound education.  In turn, our confidence in all students’ ability to achieve at the highest levels emanates from this respect.

And then there is the case of leadership.  Great leadership should propel the work of removing barriers and creating multiple pathways for all children to achieve success.  No child should have to leave her neighborhood to access a rigorous education.  Nor should his education be denigrated by tracks that lead to an erroneous certificate of completion.  It is unconscionable that any young person would necessarily travel four hours a day to forge their entitlement to good teachers, appropriate curricular resources, and coursework enabling them to open doors that would have otherwise been unapproachable.  And no American, should have to know the shame and guilt of never learning to read.  This is the fundamental promise of public education.

As a Superintendent, I am one of hundreds of school leaders faced with the many challenges presented by capped budgets and, notwithstanding, the most economically and racially segregated public school systems we’ve been charged to manage in recent history. Simply put, doing more with less has never been this harsh.  The urgency of this status is magnified in the knowledge that sixty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, resource allocation formulas remain broken and, at least in New York State, the hardened perpetuation of outcomes for underprivileged students is grossly predictable.

The challenge for everyone involved in the education of children is commitment.  Unwavering support for the idea that we must all contribute to a common value system that conveys high standards for student and educator achievement, organizational and individual growth, and the underlying truth, that a ‘good’ school can always be better.

________________

Constance Evelyn has a Bachelors of Arts in Psychology from the College of Staten Island, a Masters of Science degree in Special Education PreK-12, and Supervision and Administrative degree from Long Island University. She currently serves as Superintendent of Schools in Auburn, NY.

  • no reactions
0
Share