school reform

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

5 States That Have Had Issues with Common Core

Developed by state governors, Common Core Standards are about creating a baseline of knowledge and skills that translates across all states in the nation. One way that equity of education can be assured is through federally-encouraged programs like Common Core Standards.

Despite its noble and auspicious goal, Common Core has drawn criticism throughout the country for various reasons, angering parents, educators, and politicians nationwide. Here are just a few of the many states that have struggled with the Common Core standards:

  1. Indiana

Indiana was the first state to walk away from Common Core requirements.

In a statement, Gov. Pence said that he believed the students in the state were best served through standards developed at a state or local level. Common Core was developed by the National Governors Association and Indiana adopted the standards in 2010 under then-governor Tony Bennett, also a Republican.

This move drove a few teachers to come out publicly against the change.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, math teacher Joel Gramelspacher called Gov. Pence’s move “slapdash” and said that the quick turnaround for new standards would cause anxiety in teachers and would not serve students well. As teachers spent the past few years redrafting lesson plans and adapting their own mindsets to the new standards, and dropping Common Core meant that they had to change course, and quickly.

  1. Louisiana

Louisiana’s Republican Governor Bobby Jindal, who helped develop the PARCC tests, has spoken out publicly against the tests and Common Core standards in general.

“We support higher standards and rigor in the classroom, but every day, concern among parents is growing over Common Core,” Jindal stated.

Jindal’s attempts to drop Common Core requirements in Louisiana have not gone smoothly. He has battled with the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), which wanted to keep the standards. In response, Jindal reduced the spending threshold on a variety of school supply necessities, including computers. The BESE voted to hire outside lawyers to sort out the mess that is Common Core versus state-created standards and assessments.

Those are not the only battles Jindal has fought against Common Core proponents. He has also been sued. A black education group, the Black Alliance for Education (BAEO), funded parents and teachers in a lawsuit against Jindal. The BAEO supported the standards and believed all children deserved access to high-quality education.

Another group sued Jindal, citing that he lacked the authority to withdraw his state from the Common Core national academic standards.

Stephen H. Kupperman, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs said, “We think the governor has overstepped his bounds and doesn’t have any right to do this. We don’t want to hold the children of the state hostage to somebody’s ambitions.”

  1. Oklahoma

Governor Mary Fallin signed a bill to repeal the Common Core education standards in 2014, ridding Oklahoma schools of the new math and English guidelines that were set to go into effect the coming school year.

The bill was passed in the House and Senate the final day of the 2014 session and required the state to return to previous standards that were used prior to 2010 and encourages new ones to be developed by 2016.

The Common Core standards were adopted in 2010 in Oklahoma and also adopted by over 40 states, but the concern was that the standards represent a federal takeover of education. Gov. Fallin worked hard to mollify these concerns back in December — even signing an executive order that states Oklahoma will be responsible for deciding how to implement the standards – but opposition continued to grow.

The business community actually supports more rigorous standards with the intent to better prepare students for life after high school in college or the workforce.

The Oklahoma Academic Standards, which are aligned with Common Core standards in math and English, were to be reflected in tests administered to students’ during the next school year.  State education officials say that over 60 percent of the school districts in the state have already aligned the curriculum with the new standards.

  1. California

Some parent groups in California have urged schools to keep the old key elements of math in place instead of adhering to the new Common Core method of teaching the subject.

Parents rebelled out of fear that their children would not get to take calculus, a subject they believe is key in competition for college admission.

Math educators who back the new Common Core standards insist they provide a needed grounding in math concepts compared with the approach of old math that has led to U.S. students’ poor performance in global math tests and the countrywide phobia of the subject. Common Core organizes math topics into related groups, similar to math teachers in high-performing countries. It focuses on problem-solving skill, not memorization.

Those who back the new standards warn against dividing students into different tracks in middle school.

But many high-performing districts retain the fast pace of old math instruction while adopting the new standards. Saratoga, Cupertino, Pleasanton, and Palo Alto schools pride themselves on high test scores, but maintain some accelerated math tracks in middle school. Those paths put students on track to take calculus in high school.

  1. Tennessee

Two Republican senators filed legislation to repeal common core in Tennessee and create a new panel to recommend different standards for public schools.

The new standards, which have phased into Tennessee classrooms for the past four years, must be in place when K-12 public students enter schools in the 2016-17 school year.

The move to repeal Common Core is designed to guarantee Tennessee students continue to learn and improve by applying the highest standards and wielding state control over education.

The bill cancels the current memorandum of understanding with the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers or Common Core standards for English, Language Arts and Math. Both groups were involved in the push for Common Core standards.

In 2014, Common Core critics demanded a delay in the state’s testing based on the new standards after conservative grounds charged Common Core was the work of President Obama and amounted to a federal effort to take over education.

The standards were developed and underway long before Obama became president, but the administration embraced the standards intended to put states on the same page with respect to what students should know in English and math.

Inequality of resources and opportunities for American K-12 children runs rampant and affects every member of society. When children are not given basic access to the same education as their peers, the country cannot progress the way it should.  This was what Common Core was meant to address. But are these standards really the best way to create a better standard of education in the U.S.?

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

The Five Attributes of Successful Schools

Students across the globe need effective schools. While the American school system as a whole may be falling behind international standards, there are still some schools that stand out.

Sure, the context of schooling will impact attributes that contribute to effectiveness in specific schools. But at the same time, there are attributes that contribute to effectiveness across schooling contexts. If we understand the attributes of effectiveness, we can observe which attributes exist at successful schools.

There are five common attributes that make up an effective school.

  1. Leadership

The first attribute is quality leadership. Students perform better when the principal and school board members provide strong leadership. Effective leaders are visible, can successfully convey the school’s goals and visions, collaborate with teachers to enhance their skills, and are involved in the discovery of and solutions to problems.

  1. High Expectations

The second attribute is having high expectations of students as well as teachers. High expectations of students have repeatedly been shown to have a positive impact on student performance. Students are somewhat dependent on the expectations placed on them during this period of their lives, as they are still shaping their personal sense of ability and esteem. Teachers who are expected to teach at high levels of effectiveness can reach the level of expectations, particularly when teacher evaluations and professional development are geared toward improving instructional quality.

  1. Ongoing Evaluation

The third attribute of a successful school is the ongoing screening of student performance and development. Schools should use assessment data to compare their students with others from across the country. Effective use of assessment data allows schools to identify problematic areas of learning at the classroom and school levels, so that teachers can generate solutions to address the problems.

  1. Goals and Direction

The fourth attribute of a successful school is the existence of goals and direction, According to research, the successful school principal actively constructs goals and then effectively communicates them to appropriate individuals (e.g., students, teachers, and the community at large). School principals must also be open and willing to incorporate innovation into goals for school processes and practices. So it’s important to invite input from all stakeholders in the process of developing school goals. Student performance has been shown to improve in schools where the entire school community works toward goals that are communicated and shared among all in the learning environment.

  1. Secure and Organized

The fifth and final attribute of a successful school is the extent to which the school is secure and organized. For maximum learning to occur, students need to feel secure. Respect is a quality that is promoted and is a fundamental aspect of an effective and safe school. Successful schools also have a number of trained staff and programs, such as social workers, who work with difficult or troubled students before situations get out of hand.

Apart from the five attributes of a successful school already mentioned, the size of the school seems to be an attribute in the school’s effectiveness. Research has found that the smaller the school, the better students perform, especially in the case of older students. This is the rationale behind the concept of schools-within-schools. Students in smaller learning environments feel more connected to their peers and teachers, pass classes more often, and are more likely to go to college. Schools-within-schools involve creative use of the same teaching workforce to provide additional opportunities for learning for smaller groups of students or specialized teaching to students who require extra attention.

This environment could be created in the form of divided streams for mathematics education. Students who want to pursue studies in the humanities would need a mathematical education grounded in statistics and graphical representation, because this focus will be more relevant and prevalent during their postsecondary education career.

Students who intend to pursue a career in engineering or applied physics, for example, would have completely different needs, such as a greater focus on calculus and highly theoretical mathematical concepts like number theory. Creating schools-within-schools for these students would have lasting and measurable benefits for them, as well as benefits for the teacher, who could teach smaller groups of students and offer greater individual attention to student queries and difficulties.

A number of school districts view preschool education as an attribute that will influence overall effectiveness across all schools located within the district. Evidence suggests that children with preschool experiences fare better academically and socially as they enter kindergarten and beyond. Experiences in literacy and numeracy among early learners not only prepare preschoolers for a kindergarten curriculum that has heightened expectations of prior knowledge, but also help identify early learners who need additional support to ensure they have positive learning experiences later.

Additional attributes that influence effective schools include time to learn, teacher quality, and parental trust. Research supports the view that the more time a student spends learning, and the more efficiently that time is used, the higher their achievement. Schools that find creative ways to extend learning time will likely be more effective. Furthermore, schools with high-quality teachers also tend to be more effective.

Schools able to hire teachers from high-quality teacher education programs are more likely to be effective. But school effectiveness can also be influenced by the frequency, relevancy, and quality of the teacher professional development offered by the school or school district. Teachers who haven’t had the opportunity to attend prestigious teacher education colleges still have several opportunities to develop after embarking on their professional career. Support for these initiatives at a school or school district level tends to improve overall teacher quality, regardless of their college of origin.

Trust and parental participation are also features of a successful school. Trust between all parties of the school community is vital for enhancing the school’s effectiveness because it supports the prospect that parents and teachers believe in each other’s motives and actions. Parental participation is also important because it sends the message to
students that the adults in their lives—both teachers and parents—believe
in the importance of education and are willing to make time to support
students’ educational experiences and efforts.

How well does your school embody the five attributes of a successful school?

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

Math Learning, Tutoring Comes Home to Families

Math concepts are difficult for students. parents and educators. Even teachers who are trained and skilled in math struggle to give a classroom of students the one-on-one attention needed for mastery. Parents are then expected to pick up that slack at home, often with little time to do it and no training in the way math concepts are taught today. The combination of difficulty (or perceived difficulty) and lack of time needed for custom math learning in the classroom and at home leads to many students getting lost in the shuffle from one concept to the next.

The statistics are telling. In the most recent round of testing performed by the International Association for the Evaluation of Education Achievement, American students were outscored in math by 13 other countries, including Canada, Japan and Korea. The test showed little improvement in American student success in math from the time the first tests were implemented in 1995. Math, it seems, is still outsmarting teachers, parents and students, despite all the efforts to strengthen the math skills of the American public.

Educational technology is evolving so quickly, though, that there has to be a way to narrow these deficiencies. Recently I had a chance to try the personalized math help platform LearnBop, launched initially for teachers and now available for parents to use at home. The new LearnBop Family platform is a math-centered learning management system covers K-12 math topics, including algebra I and II and geometry. Students are given learning paths that they can tap on their own and at their own pace, providing a path for customized learning that complements what teachers are already doing in the classroom.

Screenshot 2016-06-28 13.08.03

LearnBop Family is not a question and answer platform. The material is adaptive, meaning it reacts to the actions of the students, and adjusts lesson plans. LearnBop Family helps every student with each individual problem they attempt, and then it tutors students step-by-step when a problem is incorrectly solved.

An independent study found that students who used the LearnBop platform alongside classroom instruction for an hour each week saw math growth of 40 to 66 percent higher than the average for their grade. LearnBop students also showed 7 to 9 percentage points more growth on post-assessments compared with peers not using the platform. The study also found that LearnBop was effective across gender and ethnicities, too.

That final stat is important because years of educational research tell us that students who come from advantaged backgrounds perform better academically. The reasons for that are obvious enough — parents from  middle and higher socioeconomic backgrounds tend to have more time to help kids learn and often have attained higher educational goals. LearnBop family levels that playing field by giving the same one-on-one, attentive treatment to students from all backgrounds, providing equality in resources for the students using it.

Screenshot 2016-06-28 13.12.56

The thing I really loved about the LearnBop concept is that the content and delivery style was developed by teachers. I’ve often thought that some learning management systems lack that realistic, human touch that goes a long way with students. If learning material is really meant to mimic a teacher, then it just makes sense that an actual teacher should be involved in the content creation process.

LearnBop Family is reasonably priced, at $15 per month or $150 per year, and with each new subscription, another one is donated to student who needs the resource but does not have the means to pay for it. I like that LearnBop recognizes that though its price point is low (individual tutoring costs $15 or more per half hour), there are still students who come from backgrounds that cannot afford it, which I think speaks volumes to the heart of the company.

Screenshot 2016-06-28 13.09.03

Math learning is difficult. One-on-one teaching is impossible in today’s classrooms. Parents want to help their kids but are often ill-equipped when it comes to math concepts. LearnBop Family faces both challenges head on with its learning management system with proven results. If you want to learn more or get your own kids started, head to the LearnBop Family website.

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

Students and Free Speech: What is a School’s Responsibility?  

 By Matthew Lynch

Apart from the Fourth Amendment, the most important amendment pertaining to student rights is the first one.  The Free Speech Clause prohibits any new law that might curb students’ freedom of speech. While the Bill of Rights have been around for quite some time, the first high-profile case involving students’ rights when it comes to free speech erupted in 1969 in the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District case.

It involved the sensitive issue of the conflict in Vietnam.  Certain students decided to put forth their objections to the war by wearing black armbands.  This apparently was not received well by school authorities, and they decided to take the strict action of suspending any student who wore a black armband.  The case made it to the Supreme Court and the school district was ruled against. It was a groundbreaking ruling, and the school’s stand was criticized outright.

The Court did make some concessions when it comes to what schools can and cannot allow when it comes to free speech, citing that the right to free speech could be exercised, as long as it did not disrupt the educational process in any way.  Any protest or activity that interfered with normal school activities, or disrupted the peace of the school, even in the slightest manner, can be curbed lawfully.

Since that ruling, there have been other cases to hit the courts where students claimed infringement on their right to free speech in school settings. In the 1988 Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlemier case for instance, the court ruled that school administrators have every right to control and check the content published in school sponsored newspapers and magazines. The justification given was that these form a part of the curriculum and everything that could possibly influence students deserves to be scrutinized by school authorities.

The case involved a newspaper published by the journalism class at Missouri’s Hazelwood High School.  The articles published discussed issues such as divorce and pregnancy; content school authorities determined was inappropriate for high school students. Authorities also feared that the fictitious names used in the articles were not enough to guard the privacy of the students whose opinions were published, and lives discussed in the newspaper.  However, the students who were involved thought differently, and believed that the discussion of such topics was appropriate for students of their age. The students did not win this particular free speech fight.

So how should schools proceed when it comes to free speech rights?

While the First Amendment without a doubt endows students with freedom of speech, this does not mean that they can behave in any manner they please.  It is very much within the jurisdiction of the school authorities to prevent or prohibit students from indulging in certain activities that may potentially pose a threat to a school environment conducive to learning.

Take the Tinker case. The school was denied the right to prevent students from wearing black armbands as a mark of their protest, but at the same time, they were free to suspend or take suitable punitive action against students who acted in a manner that disturbed the positive learning atmosphere.  If a student was caught indulging in activities such as igniting political commotion or voicing his or her opinions in a manner that disrupted teaching and learning, he or she could justly be suspended by the school and the law made every provision for that to occur.

Similar decisions were made in the case of the Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser in 1986, and the Jones v. State case in 2002.  The former dealt with the court upholding the suspension of a student who delivered a nominating speech that involved comments of a sexual nature about a fellow student.  Similarly, in the latter case, the court took the clear stance that students’ use of fighting words and threats was prohibited in schools.  The category included racial epithets, lewd and offensive speech, immature conduct or true threats that could possibly lead to harming another person.

Exercising free speech is not just limited to student behavior. It in fact extends to the realms of student newspapers, plays and literature.  While students do enjoy their due rights, teachers have some control.  The following falls within the school’s authority when it comes to curbing freedom of expression that may be disruptive to the learning environment:

  • Teachers or school authorities are required to collect concrete proof against students indulging in indecent speech, potential disruption or other unacceptable activities before taking action against them.
  • Students must be provided with due process when any sort of punishment is involved.
  • The banning of indecent, inappropriate and unacceptable material is acceptable by the school in cases where it contradicts the mission of the school.
  • School authorities have the final word on deciding the time and place of the distribution of certain materials.
  • The school newspaper must be run subject to legally defensible guidelines.
  • The nature of the school newspaper must be decided beforehand.  If it is decided to be an open forum rather than a curriculum-based letter, the students ought to be provided with due rights to express their opinions.
  • A well-established procedure for reviewing newspaper submissions ought to exist to make the process smoother.

In the end, schools must decide what parts of free speech are inalienable rights of the American K-12 experience, and which things are detrimental to the learning experience for all. It’s a fine line but one that is a privilege to even deal with in our democracy.

What “free speech” actions do you feel are inappropriate for K-12 students?

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

From Sexting to Bra Snapping: How to Protect K-12 Students against Sexual Harassment

A study entitled Hostile Hallways, conducted by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) revealed that as many as 82 percent of the students in America admitted to being subjected to some form of sexual harassment during their schooling years. Most cases involved student-to-student harassment, as opposed to teacher-to-student harassment.

Females were in a worse position, with 1 in every 4 girls reporting that she had faced sexual harassment; with boys, it was 1 in 10 cases.  The nature of harassment inflicted on female students ranged from being made the victim of sexual jokes, to unwanted physical attention, to being subject to attempts to lift skirts or snap bras. For male students (although many of these issues were applicable to female students as well), the spreading of sexual rumors and challenging other boys’ sexual orientation was a common form of sexual harassment.  Lunchrooms, hallways, school buses and playgrounds were the hot spots for these forms of harassment.  Since the study was conducted and its results made public in 1993, schools have made serious efforts to curb this menace that may have once been viewed as simply “kids being kids.”

Defining sexual harassment

Deciding what falls under the label of sexual harassment and what doesn’t is very subjective.  The actual definition of sexual harassment reads “unwanted and unwelcome sexual behavior which interferes with your life.”  This wording lends itself to some interpretation and ambiguity in terms of schools’ responses. A six-year old boy was suspended for sexual harassment in North Carolina 1996 for kissing female classmate on the cheek. On the other hand, there are serious cases such as Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education where a fellow student of a fifth grader started groping her to “get in bed with her.” The school failed to take any action against him despite repeated complaints from parents.  Quite understandably, putting cases of alleged sexual harassment into clear-cut categories is not possible.

Today, sexual harassment between students is even more widespread because of the viral nature of the internet and sexting. A photo that a young man sends his latest crush can quickly become fodder for a school-wide joke when it appears on a social media account or is texted to a large group of other students. It is also much harder for students to get away from harassment because their school lives follow them more closely than ever outside classroom hours, due to technology. It is also difficult to know where a school’s jurisdiction ends when it comes to harassment between students that takes place outside of school hours.

The problem of sexual harassment in schools is persistent.  Schools can act more responsibly on the issue by formulating proper and specific sexual harassment policies and providing special training programs for teachers, students and other administrative staff.  Seeking the support of parents is also beneficial. The challenges around implementing sexual harassment policies are made even more difficult because students shy away from reporting incidents, for fear of suffering additional consequences or being ridiculed.  The solution is to create a safe environment in the school so that such instances of harassments simply do not take place and the students feel secure, although this is often easier said than done.

Parents – at the ones who are actively involved in the lives of their students – can also take a stand by teaching their children to avoid sexual objectification and joking of all types. It will take a large cultural push to really implement change but the next generation of K-12 students deserves a harassment-free experience.

How do you think we can reach students with a no-sexual harassment message?

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

Technology and Mentorship: Addressing the Problem of Urban Students

Students in urban schools tend to have stereotypes attached to them. Rather than see these students as individual learners, many urban kids and their schools are often thrown into the “lost cause” category. Problems like deteriorating buildings and overcrowding often become too overwhelming for reformers.

In a 2009 article in the Harvard Political Review, writers Tiffany Wen and Jyoti Jasrasaria discuss the “myths of urban education.” The article points out that many people are quick to label urban schools as lost causes without actually investigating individual issues or how they can be resolved. The authors also shed light on the juxtaposition of the basic American ideal that anyone from anywhere can make it big with some hard work and the reality of urban schools. If urban students are truly not at a disadvantage, per the American dream, then why do they graduate from high school at a rate of nearly 20 percent lower than their suburban counterparts?

Overcrowding as enemy

In an Education Week guest blog post, urban music teacher Mike Albertson said that “overcrowded classrooms are one of the most common qualities of urban schools.”

He went on to say that the students themselves are not the actual problem in urban schools but that the overcrowded conditions are to blame for many perceived behavior issues and academic disengagement. More likely, it is a combination of high student-to-teacher ratios and behavior problems.

Studies have found a correlation between overcrowding and lower math and reading scores. Teachers also cite overcrowding as a definite contributor to student behavior problems. Too many kids in classrooms means too little individual instruction. It also means that academic time is spent dealing with issues that distract from education. Overcrowding is only one problem that contributes to urban student disadvantages but one that deserves the spotlight.

Bridging the Urban-Suburban Gap

As with all aspects of K-12 improvement, finding the answers to higher achievement for urban students is a complicated process. I believe that technology can work to teacher and student advantages though. The implications of mobile technology in K-12 classrooms are still being realized but one thing is certain: more individualized learning is now possible. In cases where overcrowding is detrimental to learning experiences, mobile technology can serve as a placeholder teacher in terms of directing students and keeping them engaged in learning when the physical teacher is unavailable.

More student guidance is also necessary. Statistics tell us that not only do urban students more often come from tumultuous home lives, but they are often punished more harshly for the same infractions than suburban peers. Over 68 percent of all incarcerated adult American men do not have a high school diploma.

Removal from school, while potentially the easiest short term solution, feeds the school-to-prison cycle that is built primarily in urban schools. Mentorship programs would go a long way toward directing urban students toward higher academic engagement and graduation rates. Many colleges have implemented mentorship programs for at-risk students, like first-generation college students, so why can’t K-12 schools do the same?

With budget cuts a perennial complaint, though, more money for K-12 mentorship initiatives is unlikely. The bottom line is that urban students need more individual attention in order for their academic outlooks to improve. Technology has the potential to reach a wider number of students but the human connection is what will have a lasting positive impact on urban students.

What is the key to urban school improvement?

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

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

New Models and Trends in Resource Allocation

Many investigators have requested new methods to determine spending to gain a better understanding of priorities, organizational investments, proposed strategies, and to measure the distribution of resources . Completely new expenditure models have been pioneered by manufacturing theorists, including activity and program-based costs, which help form fiscal data to make it easier to compare to strategic decision-making. In education, several reports have demanded new methods of expense record-keeping as a way to modify district strategy; mostly to verify the real expenses involved in individual schools, programs, or services.

Though the models demonstrate some differences regarding the terms of the categories used, all of them propose assigning a larger percentage of costs to specific types of students and schools. For those interested in resource data in relation to the context of educating students, it makes sense to review central and indirect costs associated with joint district resources, as well as resources that are typically school-based. Less important costs are associated with district leadership, other operations, and non-educational services like transportation, food services, school facilities, and maintenance systems.

Reforms related to accountability have placed a focus on performance inequalities between white students and students from minority group backgrounds, and also between students having needs that result from disability, poverty, or limitation in English proficiency. Many policymakers stress that the first stage in tackling these achievement gaps is to align fiscal policy with student needs. But as policymakers change their established funding formulas to fulfill the needs of different students, they do so without evidence. In the first instance, there is little explanation of the way resources are currently allotted to different subgroups.

Basically, for a state policymaker attempting to allocate funds to particular student types, no baseline data exists on current expenditure to each type of student within their own districts, or schools within other districts. School districts in most states do not fully track costs by student type or to the school level. Even where these data are tracked, they are not published for policymakers trying to pin answers down.

There is also difficulty in accessing comparisons from other states regarding spending. Accurate ways of defining or reporting expenses influenced by student needs are not available, which makes it impossible to compare data between states. Furthermore, policymakers have not determined how to flow funds from one level of government to the next. For example, funds may be designated by the federal government for students living in poverty, with the goal of enhancing resources at schools having high concentrations of poverty.

However, by the time funds are dispersed through state and local streams, they may not reach their intended target. Finally, only limited documentation exists on different decisions for assigning funds, and the way those decisions relate to policy goals. Allocations meant for students with limited English proficiency (LEP) might be realized as a fixed dollar amount per LEP student, reimbursements for spending on bilingual education services, distribution of staff full-time equivalents (FTEs) to high-needs schools, or as funds for other areas. Research has not yet described the ways these different decisions influence either what is finally spent per pupil, or how efficiently that funding reaches the intended students. It is obvious that a more efficient system is needed for tracking funds after they reach their intended destination. With thorough record keeping and well-defined guidelines for how money should be spent, this murky territory will become much clearer.

 

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

 

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

Creating and Sustaining Educational Change 101

Edpolicy, edreform, school reform, put kids first,

When considering school reform, it may be advantageous for administrators to think of their schools as businesses. If the structure of the school were to reflect the business model, we would work from the assumption that students in the school system are customers, schools are the businesses, teachers are the employees/supervisors, and the administrators are the CEO’s.

In any business, the customers needs always come first. The reputation for customer service is the best advertising a business can receive. Keeping this savvy business strategy in mind, the business of the school should be to create learning opportunities that lead to greater academic achievement. If educators make lessons fun while adhering to the curriculum, the graduation rate will increase dramatically. If children feel safe and entertained, they will want to come to school. It is the educator’s task to make sure students learn to love to learn, while it is the administration’s task to support their efforts.

The most critical question administrators must confront is: where do we begin? Beginning reform by tackling several goals at once is noble, but not recommended. When trying to start reform in a complex environment such as a school, administrators need to focus on one task at a time. When making decisions, the administration needs to be sure to complete all steps of the reform in sequential order, using a strategic way of thinking.

In some cases goals can be independently accomplished. Departments will be able to achieve short-term goals while accomplishing the larger goals. In education, the improvements that matter the most are those that directly concern children. In order to create the necessary improvements, school districts must be reformed in ways that will sustain change. The ability of a school district to sustain reform should be of the utmost importance to the superintendent and the board of education.

Three conditions must be present in order to sustain reform. First, administrators must come to an agreement concerning the issues that have made it necessary for school reform to take place. They must be open and honest and refrain from blaming others for the issues that exist. All individuals directly and indirectly involved in the school reform must share a common vision.

Administrators should try to come to a consensus regarding the purpose of education and the roles of the faculty and staff.  They also need to agree on the rules and guidelines that will support the implementation of the reform, while respecting cultural beliefs of the faculty, staff, and students. Finally, administrators must communicate the current issues of the school and the vision for the future to stakeholders. Those who support and participate in reform need a clear vision of the common goal. Administrators must paint a reform picture that alleviates fears, and entice all to buy into the vision.

Communication is the key to running and sustaining a successful school when creating concrete reform. All participants and key administrators must agree to communicate with each other their understanding of the school reform, including their concerns. The administrators and participants must have a shared understanding of the issues the district faces, as they must learn to articulate, analyze, and explain the issues in a similar way.

There needs to be a common vision concerning students, schools, and the allocation of resources. Administrators must also anticipate new trends and issues preventing reform. Once the obstacles have been identified, it is the duty of the administrator to articulate these trends and issues to the powers that be, i.e., superintendents and school board members. Finally, the most important communication between administrators and staff is how to create reform that provides a quality education for all students.

Communication must also take place among the school district, superintendents, and the board of education in an intentional and ongoing manner. They must continuously reflect in an open and honest way on the effectiveness of the reform, and successfully communicate between departments in the case of promotions, retirements, or sudden resignation.

When creating school reform, administrators should consider communicating with community members. Community members and parents have a lot to contribute when it comes to school reform and they should be encouraged and allowed to do so. Parents and educators undoubtedly have a genuine concern for the needs of students. Why not place the important decisions concerning our students in the hands of the people that have the children’s best interests at heart?

Administrators should also consider teachers as a major part of school reform. Reform is considered a success or a failure based on the students’ performance, but teacher performance is inextricably linked to student performance. Through positive teacher-student relationships, genuine learning can take place in the classroom. Teachers know their students and the educational practices that work best in their classroom.

In schools across the nation, the people in the best positions to create positive outcomes have little to no control over the changes that are made and how they are implemented. Too often, the most critical decisions concerning the educational system are made by people without the capacity to understand the inner workings of the individual school and what it takes to ensure no child is left behind.

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

3 Ways to End Anti-Gay Bullying

With the Supreme Court’s decision this year to recognize same-sex marriage and promote marriage equality, it is clear that attitudes toward individuals who are LGBT are changing. However, anti-gay bullying is still an issue today, and is a major concern especially with cyber-bullying on the rise.

Furthermore, biased and homophobic comments are rampant in many schools, with a staggering 90 percent of LGBT students experiencing verbal harassment related to their sexual orientation.

Regardless of a teacher’s personal ideology, as educators we are bound to uphold a code of tolerance and acceptance. Here are three ways to ensure that LGBT students feel safer and more accepted at school:

  1. Disallow discrimination based on sexual orientation. The National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development have all passed resolutions asking their members and all school districts to step forward to improve the educational experiences of LGBT students. These resolutions call for providing a safe environment, support groups, and counseling options for LGBT students and by employing anti-harassment rules and practices.  In nine states, the state government has instituted legislation prohibiting the harassment and discrimination of LGBT students. We need to continue this trend until every state has these rules in place, in every district and school – no exceptions.
  2. Expand “inclusion” policies.  There are some schools in which LGBT students are accepted and accommodated.   Same-sex couples are invited to school dances and there are unisex washrooms for transgender students.  School districts in some states include LGBT students in non-discrimination policies with the goal of making schools safe places for all students, parents, faculty and staff.  However, there are also states where it is illegal to even utter the word homosexual and in which the word homosexual (or lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender) can only be portrayed in a negative light within the classroom.  This makes it difficult for teachers to teach about sexual orientation diversity or to make their classrooms and school environment safe and accepting of LGBT students.  Regardless of location, teachers can explain to students that they don’t have to agree it is okay to be gay or lesbian, but they do have to agree that it is not okay to discriminate against them.
  3. Promote LGBT student groups.  It is important that all students, regardless of who they are or their sexual orientation, have a safe environment in which to learn and grow as an individual.  Gay and lesbian organizations have been at the forefront of trying to create safe and accepting environments for LGBT students.  Students have also taken up the cause and student groups have begun springing up in schools all over the country.  There are currently approximately 4,000 Gay-Straight Alliance Groups registered with the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN).  These groups are alliances between straight and LGBT. They work together to support each other and promote education as a means for ending homophobia.

By schools taking the reins on this issue, real change will eventually be realized.

What are you suggestions on how we can improve the school environment for LGBT students?

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

Education: “The saddest thing in life is wasted talent” (from A Bronx Tale)

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

Public schools are engaged in underachieving and under-educating. Low goals are set but rarely reached.

Commentary from Bruce Deitrick Price

When you talk about wasted talent, people immediately think of an individual wasting his or her talent. It’s always a sad story but an individual story. A person makes bad decisions. Little by little that person is on a road where he will not be able to develop his talents to the fullest.

But what about a society where children have their talents wasted for them? Not by a lobotomy or by drugs. No, their talents are squandered by systematic planning and careful effort. The technical name for this is social engineering. A more popular name is “deliberate dumbing down.” Savor that melancholy phrase. And now let us ask, but how could it happen? Here’s the general blueprint:

If the kids can run a 100-yard dash, you make them walk. If they can dance all day, you make them sit in a chair. If they can learn a new language every year, you don’t teach new languages. If they can learn to read and enjoy books, you don’t teach them to read or you give them books you know they will hate. If they like math, you find ways that are difficult and cumbersome, until finally they can no longer learn to do math. In short, you use methods that don’t work. That’s how you give every child a handicap, a limp, a disability, something that will keep them from reaching their potential.

Public schools in America have been skilled at this for decades. That’s why the 1983 Nation at Risk report  could conclude that our public schools are so bad they must have been designed by a hostile foreign power. Very hostile.

When you look at the resulting mediocrity, and the counterproductive approaches used to achieve this decline, you start thinking about what might have been. You realize you are looking at a landscape full of waste and sadness. You think of Bruegel’s panoramic vistas of dying and destruction. In some of those famous pictures, everyone is  visibly wasting away, if not already carved up. Or you think of broken and blasted terrain like the battlefields of World War I, where all the soldiers seem to be walking wounded. Everywhere there is a sense of defeat.

Don’t you imagine exactly such images when you read that “Nearly Half Of Detroit’s Adults Are Functionally Illiterate”?

But now we’ve stepping on the gas. The Common Core has ratcheted the whole process to a new level. Many children start their school years unhappy and never recover. They come home each day depressed or anxious. They mutilate themselves. They fall sleep crying at night. They have nightmares. According to one of the century’s most memorable headlines, “Little kids cry and pee their pants.” (See short video for why this is happening.)

Louis CK famously summed up the insanity: “My kids used to love math. Now it makes them cry.”

(Quick memo to our obtuse Education Establishment: school should be fun; you’ll get better results that way.)

Robin Eubanks maintains a website called Invisible Serf’s Collar where she  argues that slavery is the insistent motif  throughout public education.  Children have metal collars around their necks. Perhaps you can’t see them. But you will notice that the children are becoming intellectual cripples. One blog post, several months back, was titled “Censorship Before the Fact: Prescribing What the Child Does and Believes Invisibly.”

Well, isn’t that the whole essence of slavery, that humans are not allowed to have a life of their own or thoughts of their own?

Look what we are losing. Americans once prided themselves on their freedom to choose, to develop in different directions. The schools were supposed to enable that individuality. But John Dewey, starting 100 years ago, crusaded against individuality. He wanted all the little children to be similar, even interchangeable.  The school’s real job is to hammer down the differences, and extinguish the individual sparks.

Naturally there is a great deal of waste. That’s Dewey’s goal, whether he wants to admit it or not. Imagine millions of children all of whom will be 25% or 50% less than they could be. Try to add up all that loss, in the child’s life and society’s life.

That’s not to say there is suffering. If a person is brought up in the twilight, they do not miss bright days. They have never seen them. No, the children are just slowly squeezed and shaped to fit a smaller mold.

Behold the mediocrity and unnecessary failure, all created by policies instituted by our Education Establishment. You have to be impressed by how  implacable they are. People all over America are lamenting the crazy homework that children bring home. The kids are crying  and the mothers are upset. Does the Education Establishment apologize? Does Bill Gates say he’s sorry for causing all this pain? Does Jeb Bush back away from Common Core? No, they just make excuses and keep on grinding down the public.

The saddest thing in life is wasted talent. Our K-12 schools are full of it.

Only one policy can save us. We must try to raise every child as high as each child can be raised. Forget Dewey. Don’t be fooled by so-called “social justice”  as that is often merely code for leveling.

We can do so much better. Kids have to master the 3 R’s and then they can learn geography, history, science, the arts, and whatever else you want.  This is precisely what everyone has been doing around the planet for thousands of years. It’s not rocket science. You want rocket science? That would be the weird, perverse voodoo that our Education Establishment uses to slow everything down.

As noted, we can easily do much better. The question really is, how long will Americans put up with the current nonsense?

———————

Bruce Deitrick Price explains educational theories and methods on his site Improve-Education.org. For tips on initiating reform, see his: The Bill of Rights for Students 2015.

  • no reactions
0
Share