To fight 'dropout factories,' school program starts young

Source: USA TODAY



PHILADELPHIA — The day has barely begun here at Feltonville School of Arts and Sciences, a middle school in the city's northeast corner, and Adam Jackson already is using his cellphone, hoping to get a parent on the other end.

The north Philadelphia native, 22, is an unlikely truant officer in an experiment to get more city kids to graduate from high school.

Moments earlier, as he wandered through the sixth-grade homeroom he's assigned to, Jackson noted that two students were absent. As the group made its way to the first class of the day, he slipped into a quiet courtyard, popped his cellphone from a belt case and traced his finger down a list of phone numbers.

"A lot of kids, they see their older brothers and sisters not in school, and it influences them to run around as well," he says.

For years, educators have tried — often in vain — to get more students to graduate from high school on time and boost college-going rates. But few approaches have had much success: Dropout rates in many cities approach 50%, and a few cities — including Baltimore, Dallas, Detroit, Houston and Philadelphia — graduate fewer than 45% of students. On a school-by-school basis, recent research suggests that about one in eight high schools in the USA — many of them in the nation's biggest cities — are virtual "dropout factories" where fewer than 60% of freshmen graduate within four years.

"Historically, we have never really tried to turn around chronically underperforming schools in this country," U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan told a group of charter school advocates last month. "Instead, we have allowed the status quo to languish in underserved communities, sometimes not just for years, but literally for decades."

But a few educators are now taking a hard look at what happens to kids years before they get to high school, where, as it turns out, red flags appear with alarming regularity.

Here at Feltonville, in a run-down city neighborhood, an unusual bid to stem the tide is turning heads in just its second year. It's one of several that focuses on at-risk kids well before they get to high school. Dubbed Diplomas Now, it takes a microscope to students as early as the sixth grade in the belief that by the time they're in high school, it's too late to intervene.

SEEKING SOLUTIONS: Hope in treating juvenile offenders in D.C.

Results of the program, piloted here last year, were so impressive that the program has spread to four more cities: Chicago, Los Angeles, New Orleans and San Antonio. The expansion is being funded with a three-year, $5 million grant from the PepsiCo Foundation.

Jackson punches in the home number of one absent student and stands silently while he waits for someone to pick up.

Finally he introduces himself and, in a soft, deferential voice, says, "I was wondering if Isaiah's going to be in today, or if everything's OK? 'Cause I didn't see him."

Not exactly the typical scolding call from a truant officer. But day after day, calls like that have helped to boost Feltonville's average daily attendance past 92%, a dazzling rate for an inner-city middle school.

Moments later — and armed with a list of 11 chronically absent students — a pair of in-house social workers will climb into a weathered silver Honda Accord and begin driving around the neighborhood, knocking on doors.

"Kids have a lot of resilience — they don't give up right away," says Johns Hopkins education researcher Robert Balfanz, one of the program's creators. "But if you struggle all through middle school, by the time you get to high school you've been struggling for three years. So your frustration level is very (high). You don't have a lot of faith in the system or your ability."

Using data that schools already collect (attendance, behavior and grades in two subjects — English and math), Diplomas Now creates what amounts to an "early warning" spreadsheet to figure out who's most at risk of dropping out. Poor attendance and bad behavior obviously telegraph that a kid is in trouble, but Balfanz says failing math or English in the sixth grade is just as big of a red flag, because the two subjects are key to everything that follows.

Before kids fail everything

"Kids who fail math or English in sixth grade go on to start failing everything in ninth grade," he says.

Once it establishes who is at risk, Feltonville brings in "a second shift of adults" to help teachers, including a small cadre of volunteers such as Jackson — some as young as 18 — to tutor and mentor students, tempt them into after-school classes and refer the most troubled kids and their families to social workers for mental health services, counseling and medical care.

The volunteers check on homework and pester kids and their families about attendance. When kids return to school, the volunteers have assembled the work the kids have missed.

In Philadelphia and the other trial cities, Hopkins is working with City Year, an AmeriCorps program that taps recent high school and college graduates, and Communities In Schools, a national dropout-prevention group.

At Feltonville, the school day begins with a gathering in the courtyard, where City Year corps members try to coax kids into dancing, playing games and burning up a bit of energy. The big idea is that giving kids even a small reason to show up will pay off in better attendance, performance and attitude.

One recent chilly morning, a volunteer has set up a laptop computer with tiny speakers blaring Cupid Shuffle ("Down, down, do your dance/do your dance ..."). Rachelle Jean-Baptiste, the program manager, tries to rustle up a group to dance — but no takers.

Soon, two other corps members bring out a length of rope for a limbo game. A smattering of students, most of them boys weighed down with book bags, join in, bending beneath the rope without ever taking their hands out of their pockets.

So far, results at Feltonville are promising: From 2008 to 2009, the percentage of students with poor attendance fell 52%; those with poor behavior fell 45%; and those earning F's in English fell 80%, and in math 83%.

Though not a cure-all for urban schools, it offers what seems a simple way for educators to focus scant resources on the neediest kids and save time and money on remediation in high school, where many would-be dropouts routinely fail core classes.

The initial research for Diplomas Now comes from a nine-year longitudinal study of 13,000 students, conducted by Balfanz and the non-profit Philadelphia Education Fund. It uncovered the four risk factors.

"Half the kids who drop out are waving their hands in the sixth grade," he says. "They're ... saying, 'Help! If you don't intervene, a bad thing's going to happen. I'm disengaged and I'm on the path of dropping out already. I'm 12 years old.' "

As they drive around northeast Philadelphia, social workers Staci Hardy and Todd Milhollen seem an unlikely pair.

Hardy, 30, African-American and in the driver's seat, exudes a powerful, quiet calm. She says little and rarely raises her voice. Milhollen, 39 and white, talks animatedly and at length about how their system works — with kids and parents.

"We're not like truant officers," he says. "We're just trying to help them see the bigger picture."

But if parents don't cooperate, they can be hauled into the city's truancy court, where they face fines. In the worst cases, a judge can remove kids and send them to a boarding school in central Pennsylvania. Milhollen says he prefers to avoid that, as the process can take a year.

It soon becomes clear that splintered, scattered families account for much of the absentee problem at Feltonville. At the home of one eighth-grader who has missed 28 days, his mother calls the boy's father, who says he sent the boy off to school — maybe he just took the long way getting there. Milhollen makes a note to follow up.

At another house, a mother says, through the crack of the doorway, that her son has had to get medical tests and has only been able to get appointments during school hours.

Before he knocks on the door at a third house, Milhollen bums a few dollars off Hardy to give a kid money for a bus ticket.

At another house, there's no answer, so Hardy opens the mailbox and pops in a pink flyer that urges parents to get their kids to school. This summer, they'll visit churches and community groups "to get them on board more so," Milhollen says.

A 'conveyor belt' of support

The pair began their morning visits in March, and they've developed a reputation for their tenacity. That afternoon, an administrator jokes that families are moving so that Hardy and Milhollen can't find them.

Balfanz made news — and a few enemies — in 2007, after coining the term "dropout factories." He was talking about the 1,700 high schools in which no more than 60% of freshmen make it to senior year.

It's a vivid image and, for an educator who believes in the power of social services, a provocative one. It recognizes the toll that poverty takes in kids' lives, but also puts much of the burden onto schools, not the larger society.

President Obama has championed programs such as New York City's Harlem Children's Zone, which surrounds poor families with services in what its creator calls a "conveyor belt" of support.

Balfanz says there's no doubt that such programs have great promise. "That's ultimately how you beat back poverty — but in the meantime, I'm moving some of those supports into the school, because that's the one functioning institution in many of these communities."

At up to $500,000 a school, Diplomas Now is expensive, but Balfanz says it focuses on just the kids who will end up at the nation's neediest high schools.

The program can be paid for with federal Title I money for low-income students, who are most at risk of dropping out. And, he says, it's flexible enough to be adopted by educational, charitable and social services agencies in most any city.

The 'intensity you need'

"This is the kind of intensity you need to turn around the toughest schools," he says.

One thing at Feltonville is unmistakable: There are a lot of adults in the building. In one sixth-grade English class on a recent morning, there's teacher Kim Somahkawahho, her City Year corps member Ashley Moffett, a special-education aide and another volunteer.

Though she's only 23, with no teaching experience, Moffett acts as a second pair of eyes and ears, with an ability to connect to kids much as an older sister might.

"They tell her things they won't tell me," says Somahkawahho, 46. Because Moffett follows the students through much of the day, she can intervene in disputes, as she did recently when a sixth-grade boy was accused of threatening a female classmate.

The boy eventually admitted the threat and apologized, she says. "It did not turn into a fight with a bunch of people getting involved."

Zabrina Aponte, a mother of six whose 13-year-old son, Odalis, is in Somahkawahho's class, says Moffett has figured out how to get the students to respect her. "I've seen these kids," says Aponte. "Even the worst of them, they're like, 'Yes, Miss.' "

Moffett earned Odalis' trust last November after she worked patiently with the boy and helped him score 95% on a math test — after years of poor grades.

Math has always been his toughest subject, Aponte says, and this year Moffett has quietly, persistently urged Odalis on, even when he was sick of math.

"When she sees him falling off, she'll come over and tap him on the shoulder and say, 'Come on.' As a working mother, I appreciate that there's another person rooting for my child, pulling for my child."

Teachers Facing Weakest Market in Years

PELHAM, N.Y. — In the month since Pelham Memorial High School in Westchester County advertised seven teaching jobs, it has been flooded with 3,010 applications from candidates as far away as California. The Port Washington District on Long Island is sorting through 3,620 applications for eight positions — the largest pool the superintendent has seen in his 41-year career.

Even hard-to-fill specialties are no longer so hard to fill. Jericho, N.Y., has 963 people to choose from for five spots in special education, more than twice as many as in past years. In Connecticut, chemistry and physics jobs in Hartford that normally attract no more than 5 candidates have 110 and 51, respectively.

The recession seems to have penetrated a profession long seen as recession-proof. Superintendents, education professors and people seeking work say teachers are facing the worst job market since the Great Depression. Amid state and local budget cuts, cash-poor urban districts like New York City and Los Angeles, which once hired thousands of young people every spring, have taken down the help-wanted signs.

Even upscale suburban districts are preparing for huge levels of layoffs. School officials and union leaders estimate that more than 150,000 teachers nationwide could lose their jobs next year, far more than any other time, including the last major financial crisis of the 1970s.

Juliana Pankow, who just graduated from Teachers College at Columbia University, has sent out 40 résumés since January. A few Saturdays ago, she went to a school in Harlem because she heard the principal would be there (she was invited back to teach a demonstration lesson, but it may be for naught since the city has a hiring freeze). Now, Ms. Pankow said she might have to move back in with her parents in Scarsdale, N.Y., and perhaps take up SAT tutoring.

“I can’t think of anything else I’d rather do,” said Ms. Pankow, 23, as she waited outside the principal’s office at Pelham Memorial last week, among 619 people applying for one English position. “Which is a problem, because I might have to do something else.”

At Teachers College, so many students like Ms. Pankow are looking for work that two recent job fairs attracted a record 650 students and alumni, up from 450 last year. Last month, the college added a job fair focusing on schools in Harlem.

But job postings are down by half this year, to one dozen to two dozen a week, mostly in charter schools, said Marianne Tramelli, the college’s director of career services.

Charter schools, which are publicly financed but independently run, are practically the only ones hiring in New York and elsewhere because of growing enrollments amid expanding political and economic support for school choice. Even so, they do not have nearly enough jobs to go around.

In New York, where the Success Charter Network is hiring 135 teachers for its seven schools in Harlem and the Bronx, some of the 8,453 applicants have called the office three times a day to check on their status. Veteran teachers have also offered to work as assistant teachers.

“It’s heartbreaking — there’s much more desperation out there,” said Eva S. Moskowitz, a former councilwoman who is the network’s founder and chief executive.

KIPP, another charter school network with 82 schools nationwide, has received 745 applications since January at its seven schools in the San Francisco Bay Area, compared with 385 last year.

At the University of Pennsylvania, most of the 90 aspiring teachers who graduated last weekend are jobless. Many had counted on offers from the Philadelphia public schools but had their interviews canceled this month after the district announced a hiring freeze.

“We’re trying to encourage everyone to hold on,” said Kathy Schultz, an education professor at Penn. “But that’s very difficult because students have taken out loans and want to be assured of a job.”

Michigan State University has pushed its 500 teaching graduates to look out of state. As local jobs have dried up, it started an internship program in Chicago, a four-hour drive from campus. Professors now go with students to the annual campus job fair to make sure they do not hover around the Michigan tables, but walk over to, say, North Carolina, Texas or Virginia.

“We have a culture of people wanting to stay here and teach where they went to school, but we also want them to get jobs,” said Suzanne Wilson, the chairwoman of the department of teacher education.

Along with five other former teachers, Jade Stier, 27, finally gave up and enrolled in a nursing program last fall, after three years of looking for an elementary school job. She sent out hundreds of résumés, only to land one interview a year. She settled for working as a substitute teacher, earning $85 a day with no benefits.

“Spending $50,000 for an education you can’t use is really frustrating,” Ms. Stier said. “I definitely miss teaching, but I felt like I had no other choice.”

If there is an upside to the shortage of teaching jobs, it is that schools now have their pick of candidates.

Teach for America, which places graduates from some of the nation’s top colleges in poor schools, has seen applications increase by nearly a third this year to 46,000 — for 4,500 slots. From Ivy League colleges alone, there are 1,688 would-be teachers.

Here in Pelham, a well-regarded district where teaching salaries range from $50,000 to $134,000, high school administrators and teachers have spent recent weeks winnowing applicants’ résumés. Candidates with grade point averages below 3.0 were eliminated (3.3 in some departments), as were those who missed the April 30 application deadline. Almost 200 were invited for interviews.

“It’s very difficult,” said Jeannine Clark, the high school principal in Pelham. “More so than in years past because there are so many very qualified candidates.”

While Ms. Clark and the English supervisor were meeting with prospective teachers last week, candidates for the social studies job were down the hallway typing a 40-minute timed essay on the French Revolution. Upstairs, interviews for physics and biology teachers were being conducted.

“People will come in here begging for anything,” said Dennis R. Lauro Jr., the superintendent, who started closing his office door this year because out-of-work teachers would drop in unannounced to hand him résumés. “We’ve never seen these kinds of numbers before.”

Top candidates will be asked to return several more times to meet with Dr. Lauro, parents and students and to teach a demonstration class.

Ms. Pankow is hoping she will be among them.

“It would be unbelievable,” she said. “I would love it here, but I’m not necessarily putting all my eggs in this basket.”


Source Articles: nytimes.com

223,190 Kids Legally Beaten in US Schools

For the first time in over 18 years, Congress has held hearings on the use of Corporal Punishment in U.S. Schools. In the coming weeks, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (NY) will introduce a bill to institute a federal ban of corporal punishment in all US Schools. [source: US Congressional Hearing]

Every 20 seconds of the school day, a child is beaten by an educator. Every 4 minutes, an educator beats a child so severely that she seeks medical attention. According to conservative reporting to the U.S. Department of Education 223,190 students were the victims of institutionalized violence at least once in the 2006-2007 school year, of which over 20,000 sought medical attention. [source: Office for Civil Rights at the US Dept. of Education; Congressional Testimony]

Pre-school age through high school, students are being beaten with boards, belts, paddles, and whips... in public schools... in the United States... and while corporal punishment has been repeatedly shown to be ineffective and has deleterious effects on students, the practice continues and is legal in 20 states.

The iron age practice of "corporal punishment" is still legal in 20 states and there are no federal laws prohibiting it. The National Association of School Nurses defines corporal punishment as "the intentional infliction of physical pain as a method of changing behavior. It may include methods such as hitting, slapping, punching, kicking, pinching, shaking, use of various objects (paddles, belts, sticks, or others), or painful body postures."

From infractions as dangerous as forgetting a pencil to prom dress code violations, students are being beaten across the country. All of this, of course is without any due process, court hearing, and often the parents have no say in the matter. Did I mention that corporal punishment is outlawed in the US legal system, and even felons convicted of rape or murder can sleep soundly knowing they will never be subject to the same kinds of beatings we routinely doll out to our children in public schools. Not to mention that 97 out of the 100 largest US School districts have banned corporal punishment. [source: Center for Effective Discipline]

The United States stands alone in the developed world -- Canada, Europe, the UK, Australia and 102 other countries have long since outlawed the practice. [source:] The United Nations, Parent Teacher Association, American Civil Liberties Union, American Association of Pediatrics and countless other organizations have strong positions against the use of corporal punishment. [source:Center for Effective Discipline]

The American Psychological Association opposes the use of corporal punishment in schools and asserts that corporal punishment is violent and unnecessary, may lower self-esteem, is liable to instil hostility and rage without reducing the undesired behavior and is likely to train children to use physical violence.

In fact, the majority of research suggests that corporal punishment has little to no positive long term effects, actually decreases the effectiveness of other forms of punishment, and introduces a whole mess of other complications including increased drop out rates. Why then do some schools insist on using an ineffective, outdated practice? Since 30 states currently outlaw corporal punishment, what is so different in the lagging 20? Are the students somehow worse behaved? Are the teachers less capable of non-violent classroom management?

The United States must join the rest of the developed world and implement a federal ban on corporal punishment. Dodging the issue and leaving it up to the states is irresponsible and neglectful to the hundreds of thousands of kids physically abused by the education system every year. The "States Rights Gambit" didn't work for slavery or segregation, and it won't work for this either.

As a nation we may be in violation of international law by our non-compliance with the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - which we signed and ratified in 1992. The UN's Committee on the Rights of the Child found that "[c]orporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment are forms of violence and States must take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educatioal measures to eliminate them" [source: A Violent Education: Corporal Punishment of Children in U.S. Public Schools]

You can help spread awareness around this issue by sharing this article with friends, blogging about it yourself, and joining the Facebook Group

Additionally, contact your state representatives office, and let them know you support a Federal Ban on Corporal Punishment - this is a real chance to leave a human rights legacy you can be proud of.

This article is the first article in a series on Corporal Punishment in the United States by Anthony David Adams, Founder of DetentionSlip.org

Obama Scholarships for Moms: For Working Mothers Who Want to Improve Their Future

There are some bright spots that should encourage you to look to the future even though the US economy is going through some tough time right now. The government hopes to encourage women to go to college through Obama scholarships for moms. Mothers of all types have the chance to get a quality education that will no doubt benefit their families and future employers. Federal aid called Pell Grants make Obama scholarships possible. The Obama administration made some changes to Pell Grants to put emphasis on getting moms to go back to school. Pell Grants worth more than $5,000 can now be awarded. That's an increase of more than $1,000 over the previous maximum for Pell Grants. Because these grants are meant to help low-income students, that means many single mothers are eligible. The government is encouraging moms to go back to school to deal with this. Both working mothers and stay-at-home moms can benefit from having money to help them go to college. For even more incentive, there are other benefits to encourage moms to go to college. A lot of students choose to study at large colleges and universities. For a single mom who didn't have this option, it may have prevented her from going to college. However, the Pell Grants will take this into account. Whether a working mom wants to attend college part-time or a stay-at-home mom wants to take online courses, these specially targeted grants make it possible. You can study what you want, anything from nursing to education to business. The important thing is not the major but rather that single moms have more opportunity. For single mothers, an Obama scholarship may be just the break to start on a new path. Applying for a scholarship involves a few simple steps. Remember that you need to go online to fill out the application for federal student aid called the FAFSA. The application is free and there is a lot of information available to help you learn what is out there for you. The American Opportunity Tax Credit program states that the first $4,000 of your education is free, so keep that in mind. It's important to think about this and the possibility of getting a grant when you're weighing your options. Single, working moms and stay-at-home moms have a tremendous opportunity. They can now advance their education by attending college. Government grants and free opportunities do two things. They help moms better care for their families, and they increase the money that moms can make as key members of the workforce. The Obama scholarships help women have the chance to improve their family's future as well as their own.

Major achievements in IT education in India

The norms of IT education in India have been quite improved. Today, India can boast as one of the preferred study centers for IT education to the rest of the world. With a big leap in the economic sector, Indian IT education has also observed a radical change. There have been various major achievements in IT education in India. Indian IT institutes at present have evolved out and revamped the over all trend of IT education in the entire country. Some major achievements in IT education sector in India are discussed here under-

First and foremost, most of the IT institutes provide provision for enterprise training in India. Enterprise training in India is significant for both IT and non IT students. This particular facility helps IT students to launch their career on the right track with the right study program.

Secondly, industrial training in India is one striking facility provided in the reputed IT institutes in the country. IT institutes which provide industrial training in India ensure the quality and standard of IT study to the trainees. Besides industrial training, provision for corporate training in India is also provided to IT students. Facility for corporate training in India can groom the professional skill of the students while undergoing their technical study program.

Another major achievement in IT education in India is the facility for Cisco Certification. Cisco Certification ensures trainees that they have undergone a standard IT training program from a reputed IT institute. Cisco Certification is mostly provided during course certification. Course Certification is the final assurance to the students that they have successfully completed a particular IT training program and have cleared all the related exams and formalities.

Post-training or course certification, there is no dearth for jobs in the market for IT passed outs. It depends upon the study program of a particular individual to choose his own discipline adhering to his skills. So, as an IT passed out (and as per the related study program,) one can become a software engineer or a system administration or a network engineer. System administration comes under hardware program and the discipline revolves around the knowledge of the underlying hardware platform and also requires significant knowledge of the particular operating system used by that server.

With the growing need for skill development in India, IT education has undeniably achieved various milestones over the years. Students have an open choice to choose the desired field of IT study i.e. program for software, hardware or networking study. With an outbreak in the study for enhanced skill development in India, IT education has in fact scrutinized a radical growth.

Introduction of Distance Learning

This introduction of distance learning must have been a monumental moment for all those who had lost all hopes of going to regular colleges and were given a breath of fresh air to take up something through correspondence that would make life much easier and would help them take their academic profile forward. In today's Information Age, learning is no longer confined within the four walls of a classroom. The instructor, armed with a textbook, is no longer the sole source of educational experience. Information resources are everywhere, often separated from the learner by time and space. Distance learning defines the process of connecting learners with these remote resources.

Learning is a lifelong pursuit where training and retraining become strategies for both individual and corporate success. Distance learning uses communications technologies to harness the vast array of resources available and stimulate the development of lifelong learning skills. A variety of technologies are used for distance learning, including video, audio, computer, audio graphics, and print. There are a variety of distance learning solutions for every educational need. Distance learning applications should begin with a clear understanding of the learner, as well as the educational needs and objectives of the organization.

Technology options can then be considered that best address those understandings. A comprehensive distance learning solution will often be a combination of technology options, creating a set of learning tools that meet the needs of both the instructor and the learner. As an introduction to the technology, let's explore some needs and objectives of several segments of our society that are including distance learning solutions in their strategies for today and the future. If there is one constant in today's business environment it is the constant of change. Distance learning gives everyone a chance to study and go forward and also have himself acknowledged as a very well read and widely knowledgeable person.

Companies are recruiting candidates who have the skill to deliver and in case distance education is able to do that, then it has to be considered at par with all those regular degrees. At the same time, companies are becoming more global and more diversified. If business and industry are to compete, survive, and prosper in today's highly competitive global environment, continuous training and retraining is critical. The concepts of lifelong learning and just-in-time knowledge are important business strategies. One key to success is the application of cost effective and continuous means of distributing that training.

With all these permutations and combinations in place, distance learning has always been a big favorite amongst students of all strata and has always ensured that those students who cannot continue with regular studies have the option of sitting at home and taking care of the academic part of their profile. Trust distance education to provide the candidate with the best of everything and also render him the advantage of being at par with the best. The degree will make the student highly competent and will also take his academic credentials to a whole new level altogether.

Obama Grants - Brought In To Encourage Moms to Earn a Degree

While the government under the Obama administration is putting emphasis on helping working mothers return to college, many people may not know exactly what Obama grants are. There are many existing government benefits that are being given attention that in truth are just reworked federal programs such as ones which help to assist working mothers to attend college. The Pell grants a huge asset is making many potential student moms pay attention like never before. The Federal Pell grants has existed over many years making it one of the many familiar types of government financial aid for the furtherance of college. One has to agree that a huge benefit of the Pell grant is the lack of repayment normally required for student loans making it an attractive benefit. Pell grants are generally awarded to students seeking an undergraduate degree who have not already earned a bachelor's or professional degree. These two characteristics are ideal for single, working mothers, which is the cause of all the excitement over the Scholarships for Moms program. Although there is no specific program by that name, President Obama and his administration encourage moms to attend college using the money available to them through Pell grants. In addition to being a monetary gift rather than a loan, Pell grants don' t place restrictions on other sources of financial aid that you can receive. Both federal programs and private non-federal organizations can be applied to in order to cover further educational costs. The Pell grant provides the highest amount of $5,350.00 during the award year which begins on the 1st of July 2009 to the 30th June 2010. Although it is unlikely to cover all your college needs you can as mentioned supplement through other resources. Furthermore, if you are awarded money, its use is not limited to paying for tuition. Other expenses which are acceptable in connection to your education are such things as books, laptops, travel and housing. The Pell grant program and its benefits have been showcased since attention to education has been highlighted through the Obama administration making the ¦scholarships for moms' a must. If you are a single mother who is working and wishes to become a student and earn a degree such a federal program fulfills all those specifics. College no longer has to be just a dream because of family or financial needs. The Obama grant obtained through the Pell grant program has created an opportunity for many to take advantage of further college education. This is especially true for working mothers. Single mothers working full-time are specifically being encouraged by the current administration to take advantage and earn a degree. The current administration is heartily cheering for single, full-time working mothers to apply for college and earn a degree. Your future could be much brighter than you realize.

Teen convicted of Mass. school stabbing gets life

The lawyer for a teenager convicted of first-degree murder for stabbing another student to death at their suburban Boston high school asked a judge Friday to strike down the state law that requires a life sentence without parole for his client, who was 16 at the time of the killing.

The motion came as John Odgren, now 19, was formally sentenced in Middlesex Superior Court. The sentencing came one day after a jury rejected a defense argument that he was legally insane when he stabbed James Alenson, 15, to death in a bathroom at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School on Jan. 19, 2007.

Members of the Alenson family filed victim impact statements with Judge Jane Haggerty, but the statements were not read in court.

Though a juvenile at the time, prosecutors tried Odgren as an adult under the state's youthful offender law. His conviction of first-degree murder carried an automatic life sentence without the possibility of parole, meaning he must spend the rest of his life in prison barring a successful appeal or commutation by a future governor.

"It's crazy that Massachusetts is one of the few places on the globe where someone who commits a crime as a child is sentenced to life in prison without parole," Odgren's attorney, Jonathan Shapiro, said following the sentencing.

Shapiro asked Haggerty to declare that the automatic life sentence violated the constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The judge said she would consider the motion later.

Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone would not comment directly on Shapiro's motion, but he said the trial was fair.

Prosecutors portrayed Odgren as a calculating killer who brought a carving knife to school, picked his victim at random and stabbed Alenson multiple times, the fatal wound puncturing the boy's heart.

The defense said Odgren suffered from Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism, and mental illnesses. They cited his fascination with Stephen King's series of books, "The Dark Tower," and said he had lost touch with reality.

Odgren's father testified that his son, who had a genius-level IQ, was anxious and would not socialize with other children. He was teased and harassed at various schools he attended and talked of suicide at age 9, his father said.

Shapiro said his client would cling to a stuffed bunny during recesses at the trial.

"When he was first arrested, the only thing he wanted when he was put in his cell was his teddy bear or his rabbit," Shapiro said. "Three years later, those are things that comfort him. Unfortunately, they are not allowed in prison."

Odgren buried his head in a coat and did not look up during the brief sentencing hearing.

Shapiro said he feared for the teen's well-being in prison and would push for him to receive mental health treatment. He said if Odgren had trouble coping at school, he would almost certainly have trouble coping in prison.

Odgren will begin his sentence at the state's maximum-security prison in Walpole.

Diane Wiffin, a spokeswoman for the state Correction Department, said Odgren would be evaluated before it was determined at what facility he should serve his sentence. He will also undergo a full medical and mental health assessment, she said.

Alenson's parents declined to comment after sentencing. They have filed a lawsuit against the consultant for the special needs program at Lincoln-Sudbury, saying the program should not have allowed Odgren to go into an open school setting because he had a history of violent behavior against other students.

Leone said the case should lead to discussions about school safety. Following the conviction Thursday, he said there were "red flags" and warning signs that were either missed or unheeded, but he would not specifically say whom he blames.

Making Higher Education Work for Africa’s Competitiveness

Higher education should play a critical catalytic role in Africa’s economic growth, according to African policy makers and experts from the public and private sectors gathered today at a crowded seminar held under the umbrella of the World Bank-IMF Spring Meetings.

“We have made a lot of progress on primary education, but we can’t stop there,” said Obiageli Ezekwesili, World Bank Vice President for Africa. “Africa’s population is seeing a ‘youth bulge’, and so we simply cannot avoid tertiary education—it has to be the bedrock of Africa’s development.”

Ezekwesili, herself a former education minister from Nigeria, highlighted some of the challenges in expanding higher education in Africa. These include the need to strike a balance between democratization of access to higher education and the quality of education provided; and to ensure that higher education turns out graduates with the right skills for the job market.

“We cannot continue business as usual—education must meet the needs of the economy,” she said.
Africa urgently needs doctors, nurses, agriculturists, engineers, administrators, lawyers, and business leaders, according to Christopher Thomas, who manages World Bank education projects and analysis in Africa. Yet higher education faces financing constraints, and graduates often remain unemployed.

“There are no easy answers to the question of how Africa’s higher education institutions can grow and thrive,” said Thomas. “But we do know that good policies, strong political will, resources, leadership, and public-private partnerships are necessary.”

Ministers of education from Burkina Faso, the Gambia, Senegal, Mali and Mauritania, who remained at work late into the evening in their countries to join the seminar remotely, all agreed that the basic issue was that all countries needed a base of human resources, although needs varied in each country.

“In the Gambia, we went for thirty years after independence without a university,” said Mamadou Tangara, Gambia’s Minister of Education. “We are facing a huge resource gap, and we cannot emphasize enough the role of higher education in development. Higher education policies of today will determine our society of tomorrow.”

Ezekwesili noted that the private sector had a major role in expanding access to higher education in Africa. In Ghana, public universities were at one time so stretched that they had to admit as many as 1,500 students in a single class with no teaching assistants. But with the rise of the private sector, about 50,000 more students were enrolled in universities in Ghana in 2007.

Peter Okebukola, a Nigerian regulator, suggested three other steps to boost enrollment. “We should also think about setting up open and long distance universities, expanding degree programs beyond universities to polytechnics and other non-degree institutions, and encouraging multi-campus universities,” he said.
Speaking about quality and relevance, Prof. Teuw Niane, the Rector of Gaston Berger University in Senegal, stressed the importance of professors being adequately qualified to teach students, and of connecting regularly with private companies to make sure that young graduates have more access to employment.

Many participants agreed that students who can afford to pay for higher education should be asked to do so. “Parents and youth must be willing to make some sacrifices,” said Joseph Duffey, of Laureate, a private company that seeks to make higher education affordable and accessible through a global network of partnerships.

“It is clear that sharing costs is fundamental,” said Ezekwesili, “Those who can pay should pay, but there should be a mechanism to help promising students who cannot afford to pay.”

The other side of the coin, according to many participants, is that both public and private institutions need to be more accountable and transparent, offering measurable results to parents and students. For example, information such as the number of their graduates that find jobs within a year of graduating should be available to the public.

Participants also discussed the need for quality assurance and regulation. “Accreditation should measure output but reward innovation,” noted Patrick Awuah, President of Ghana’s Ashesi University. “Accreditation can easily stifle innovation,” he said. “For instance, universities should not be evaluated only on the basis of the paper libraries, but also their electronic libraries.”Boukary Savadogo, Division Chief, Science and Technology Education, at the African Development Bank, emphasized that education must be approached in a holistic way, recognizing the connections between all levels from primary to tertiary.

“Tertiary education is a sine qua non for Africa’s development,” concluded Ezekwesili, “We all recognize the importance of a resurgence of tertiary education in Africa.”

The World Bank and Tertiary Education in Sub Saharan Africa from World Bank on Vimeo.

Pay Kids to Do Well in School? I Vote Yes

For lots of reasons not necessarily laid out here. If we are going to make them do work they don't want to do, why not pay them? We get paid. And if they like it and they get paid, well. . . . And see Sidorkin.

The kids had much in common. In all four cities, a majority were African American or Hispanic and from low-income families. So why did the results vary so dramatically from city to city?

One clue came out of the interviews Fryer's team conducted with students in New York City. The students were universally excited about the money, and they wanted to earn more. They just didn't seem to know how. When researchers asked them how they could raise their scores, the kids mentioned test-taking strategies like reading the questions more carefully. But they didn't talk about the substantive work that leads to learning. "No one said they were going to stay after class and talk to the teacher," Fryer says. "Not one."

We tend to assume that kids (and adults) know how to achieve success. If they don't get there, it's for lack of effort — or talent. Sometimes that's true. But a lot of the time, people are just flying blind. John List, an economist at the University of Chicago, has noticed the disconnect in his own education experiments. He explains the problem to me this way: "I could ask you to solve a third-order linear partial differential equation," he says. "A what?" I ask. "A third-order linear partial differential equation," he says. "I could offer you a million dollars to solve it. And you can't do it." (He's right. I can't.) For some kids, doing better on a geometry test is like solving a third-order linear partial differential equation, no matter the incentive. . . .

So what happens if we pay kids to do tasks they know how to do? In Dallas, paying kids to read books — something almost all of them can do — made a big difference. In fact, the experiment had as big or bigger an effect on learning as many other reforms that have been tested, like lowering class size or enrolling kids in Head Start early-education programs (both of which cost thousands of dollars more per student). And the experiment also boosted kids' grades. "If you pay a kid to read books, their grades go up higher than if you actually pay a kid for grades, like we did in Chicago," Fryer says. "Isn't that cool?"

Why Are 25 Hedge Fund Managers Worth 658,000 Teachers?

That is the question Les Leopold asks in this Huffington Post entry.

Here is his opening paragraph:

In 2009, the worst economic year for working people since the Great Depression, the top 25 hedge fund managers walked off with an average of $1 billion each. With the money those 25 people "earned," we could have hired 658,000 entry level teachers. (They make about $38,000 a year, including benefits.) Those educators could have brought along over 13 million young people, assuming a class size of 20. That's some value.

Leopold writes

The wealthy will have placed an estimated $2 trillion into hedge funds by the end of this year. (That's about $6,500 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.)

And there is more. . .

It is now tax time, so consider also this: income from hedge funds is not taxed as ordinary income, but as capital gains, 15%. As a teacher at the upper end of the pay scale,my incremental rate is 28%, or almost twice the rate of the income from surplus funds of the rich placed in hedge funds. And of course I pay 7.65% in payroll taxes, making my burden 35.65% compared to the 15% on the earnings from investments in hedge funds.


I think we face a crisis in this country. This year rather than hiring hundreds of thousands of new teachers to teach our young, the future of this nation, schools will be laying off tens of thousands of teachers, increasing class sizes, dropping electives, eliminating support services, perhaps canceling extra-curricular activities.

But in time of major financial crisis for the entire nation, the super rich continue to get rich, without necessarily contributing anything of value to the economy.

And you and I paid for it. Don't believe me? Let me quote Leopold again:

The $1 billion each those 25 hedge fund managers netted (for themselves) was impressive -- but doing it in the year 2009 was also slap in the face of struggling Americans. That's because hedge funds would have earned little or no money at all in 2009 had the government not bailed out the financial sector with trillions in loans, asset guarantees and other forms of financial assistance. It was, in effect, a generous gift from we the taxpayers. Much of that money was "earned" by betting that the government would not let the financial sector collapse. Smart bet.

I know of one manager who put tons of money into bank stocks when they were at their bottom, gambling that the government would not let them fail. The money he invested did not contribute to hiring more people at the banks. In fact, the money he invested did not go to the banks at all. It was our money, through the government, which recapitalized the banks (at the same time they still were restricting loans, and slashing lines of credit for companies and individual's credit cards).

Each hedge fund manager was, according to Leopold, worth 26,320 beginning teachers.

I make more than a beginning teacher. As a public employee, what I am paid by Prince George's County Public Schools is a matter of public record. My base pay is 83,000 and I get 7,000 for being National Board Certified. If I take that 90K and divide it into the 1 billion averaged by each of the 25 hedge fund managers, I am worth 1/11,111 of a hedge fund manager. Restated as a decimal, as a highly regarded teacher who each year is responsible for the learning of around 180 young people, I am worth 0.00009 of a hedge fund manager.

Now, I am not asking to be paid billions, or even millions. But quite frankly, I think I am actually contributing more to the future of this country than is the average hedge fund manager, unless the only value that matters is wealth, in which case, why bother to have skilled, experienced teachers like me at all, since most of students will never enter the rarified air of the very wealthy?

I can look back a few years at the fascination of Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. I see our glorification of wealth and of power.

Yes, we will occasionally recognize those who do good works. We smile and say how nice it is that there are people like that, then as a society we move on - will Tiger win this year's Masters? How much is Bill Gates actually worth?

Bill Gates. It is honorable that he is trying to use his wealth to make the world a better place. But why should his billions give him a more influential voice on education than the skilled professionals who have been trying to make a difference for years? Yet it does. Gates and Eli Broad have been driving the educational agenda using their wealth. Similarly, the US Department of Education is now using funds through Race to the Top to drive educational policy without those policies being any more vetted and discussed than have been the initiatives funded by Gates and Broad.

I began this diary with a question: Why are 25 Hedge Fund Managers Worth 658,000 Teachers? My answer is simple - they are not. But so long as we measure primarily by money, our values will continue to be distorted, we will devote resources that could be used to improve the lives of millions for the further enrichment of the already wealthy.

Don't worry. I'm not so motivated by money that I will quit teaching and enter the world of hedge fund management. I would rather see the light go on behind the eyes of a struggling adolescent than be able to add a string of zeroes behind my currently very limited net worth.

The average teacher does more good than does the average hedge fund manager. Too bad our society does not see things that way.

Peace.

Why a School of Education?

I have recently become the founding dean of the school of education at Merrimack College. The school itself brings together already existing undergraduate and graduate programs, as well as a graduate institute that focuses on non-degree programs and professional development for K-12 teachers and administrators. It is, as such, not a true “new” school of education. Nevertheless, I had to reflect on whether it was even legitimate to take on the position of dean of a school of education in today’s educational policy climate. I am giving a short speech at the beginning of a forthcoming conference on the future of education that formally launches the school of education, and I thus want to lay out some of my thinking around why a school of education is not only relevant, but vital for preparing future educators.



(I should be clear at this point that I am speaking for myself as an individual and not on the behalf of the institution. Nevertheless, as dean, I occupy a public role and thus cannot simply take off my “dean” hat to put on my “blogger” hat. Thus whereas before I wrote in and through my expert and professional role as a social foundations scholar, this line, at least to me, is no longer clear. Let the reader, as such, beware.)



Twenty-five years ago just about every licensed teacher came through a traditional, bricks-and-mortar school of education. The alternative pathways in place were few and far between; in 1985 less than 300 individuals across the country had gone through an alternative route to gain teacher certification. Then along came Teach For America, the standards and accountability movement, the emphasis on “teacher quality” and alternative pathways, and, poof, a generation later schools of education are on the defensive, feeling outdated, maligned, and marginalized. 60,000 individuals a year go through alternative pathways towards teacher certification, states routinely create regulations and partnerships (e.g., ABCTE) that privilege “off-site” licensure programs (oftentimes seen in district-based residency programs), and the entire notion of a teaching degree within a “traditional” institution through course-driven seat-time seems antiquated. (This is not a dissertation, so check out NCEI’s data, David Angus’s brief history, or any of David Labaree’s writings on the subject.)



I of course hear AACTE’s cogent argument that 85% of all teachers still go through schools of education (they include the number of individuals going through alternative pathways run by higher education institutions), and I think Arne Duncan’s speeches about teacher preparation programs have been way too stereotyped, as they are in fact not antagonistic to the idea of schools of education (whereas the Bush administration completely was). Nevertheless, schools of education are clearly on the defensive, and I see that every day through the very positioning of how AACTE is responding and what the federal government is privileging in its funding, and, closer to home, in how Massachusetts and other states are revamping regulations and priorities within the context of the RTTT competition.



So why a school of education? Why buy in to a physical school of education within a residential liberal arts and pre-professional college?



The answer – rhetorically, pragmatically, and, yes, data-driven – is that it is the only formal place where future educators will have the opportunity to reflect, rethink, revise, and re-vision their ideas of what it means to be an educator in a complex and bureaucratic organization called a school enmeshed within a pluralistic, stratified and “global” society while beholden to deeply linear, outdated, and all too often punitive notions of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. To put it simply and quickly, schools of education offer the opportunity to change your mind about oneself as a teacher, to break out of the pattern of teaching simply as one was taught.



Teacher preparation consists of three things; two of them are standard and what is usually talked about: the opportunity to learn and the opportunity to practice. The opportunity to learn includes content knowledge (e.g., math), pedagogical content knowledge (e.g., how to teach math at the elementary level), and pedagogical knowledge (e.g., good classroom management skills such that one can actually deliver the math lesson one meant to). The opportunity to practice, in turn, is to actually try all of this out in an actual classroom. This traditionally includes pre-practicum and actual practicum opportunities (i.e., student-teaching) that can range anywhere from six weeks to an entire year. The third (which is never really talked about but what I argue is at the crux of powerful teacher preparation) is the opportunity to change.



This three-fold formulation – at least for me – greatly clarifies why traditional teacher preparation oftentimes appears so outdated. This is because the opportunity to learn and the opportunity to practice can legitimately and powerfully be done in a wide range of locations and modalities. (Which of course doesn’t mean it is done legitimately and powerfully in other locations and modalities outside of higher education institutions; but that is another argument and a completely different issue that I bracket for now.) I can become immersed in math and even in how to teach math through in-seat, hybrid, or online courses. I can teach myself calculus and I can sit with a master teacher in a professional development workshop to gain her perspective on “tricks of the trade” of ways to get student interest and enthusiasm. Similarly, the opportunity to practice can legitimately be done in a wide variety of formats. The key is that one sees multiple models of practice, attempts multiple modes of teaching, and gains substantive, ongoing, and critical formative feedback in one’s attempts as a new teacher. Institutions of higher education, in my perspective, have no monopoly on these opportunities to learn and practice.



Where higher education does have a monopoly, and one that is paramount to future teacher success, is in providing the opportunity to change. College – be it at the undergraduate or graduate level – is the only formal place I know where future teachers have the opportunity to carefully, thoughtfully, and critically examine the underlying assumptions and in-practice narratives of what teaching and learning means, what it should look like, and how do they fit into this picture. College – to put it both in truly banal yet also truly profound terms – changes us. Or at least it should, if we as academics and teacher educators do our job.



And this opportunity – the opportunity to change – is crucial. School is not a simple or obvious place. It is embedded in complex economic, sociological, political, psychological, and historical networks. This can refer to how school is organized, the demographics of who goes to school, the psychometrics of who succeeds in school and why, or the political realities of school funding (to name but a few off-the-cuff issues). None of us has thought all of these things through. And they matter. Perhaps not to the immediate classroom lesson. But to why I am teaching that lesson in the first place, in the way I am teaching it, with what kind of scaffolding, and with what kind of assessment I give afterwards.



I would claim that none us can be a good teacher without – at some conscious or subconscious level – having delved deeply into these dynamics, even if it is at the level (memorialized by Ted Sizer’s Horace’s Compromise) of realizing that the classroom is a negotiated inter-dynamic process. One has to consciously realize this before one can change it (if one so wants). (Which is why Sizer used this example as his set-up for the profound argument of what came to be known as the Coalition of Essential Schools model.)



And, and here’s the kicker, one can’t do that on one’s own. I can’t on my own push my mind beyond the boundaries of what I already know. To use Wittgenstein’s metaphor, the limits of our language become the limits of our world. I need a space – most likely a physical space with a real professor who has delved deeply into these issues for most of his/her academic career focus – in which to be pushed and prodded to think beyond what I have traditionally thought. To be shown connections I would have never imagined. To be dragged down the logical path I would have never wanted to explore. To be reminded that I don’t know how an argument plays out. To come to grips with the complexity that I will all too often gloss over. To think.



In the end, I may walk out of that college classroom with the same beliefs and propensity for actions I had when I first walked in the door. Which is in fact just fine. Because at least now I can better articulate and understand why I do what I do. And that – the self-reflective individual able to contextualize one’s beliefs and actions within a conceptual framework as impinged upon by the realities around us – is at the heart of powerful teaching. It gives me the chance to think about what it means to teach in the type of school I am hired by and with the type of kids sitting in front of me; and it gives me the chance to wonder, deeply and profoundly, whether in fact I want to teach as I was taught. And if I don’t, then how the heck do I want to teach? And why?



Thus what a school of education ultimately offers – beyond the opportunity to learn and the opportunity to practice – is the opportunity to come to grips with what it means to be a teacher today. This experience will never change for new teachers and why we need a school of education.

Privacy Policy

I respect your privacy and I am committed to safeguarding your privacy while online at my site educationzon.blogspot.com. At .blogspot.com, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us. This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by educationzon.blogspot.com and how it is used.

Log Files
Like many other Web sites, educationzon.blogspot.com makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol ( IP ) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider ( ISP ), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user’s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

E-mail Subscription
If a user wishes to subscribe to my posts via e-mail (powered by Feedburner), I ask for contact information such as name and email address. Out of respect for my users’ privacy, a way to opt-out of these communications is provided.

Cookies and Web Beacons
A cookie is a piece of data stored on the user’s computer tied to information about the user. My site use cookies for tracking visitors’ activity. Some of our advertising partners may use cookies and web beacons on our site. Our advertising partners include Google Adsense. Please check their websites for respective privacy policies.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on educationzon.blogspot.com send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

I use outside ad companies to display ads on my site. These ads may contain cookies and are collected by the ad companies, and I do not have no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. educationzon.blogspot.com's privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browsers' respective websites.

Links
This Web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that I am not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. I encourage my users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of each and every Web site that collects personally identifiable information. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Contact Information
If you require any more information or have any questions about our privacy policy, please feel free to contact us by email at vikriponakan@gmail.com.

Last Update
This Privacy Policy was last updated on September 7, 2009.

Ravitch: A new agenda for school reform

this was written for and originally posted at Daily Kos. The links to my previous posts are to the Daily Kos versions of those pieces

I used to be a strong supporter of school accountability and choice.

So begin Diane Ravitch in an op ed in today's Washington Post titled A new agenda for school reform. And yes, she hotlinks in that sentence to an earlier Post piece about her new book, a book about which I wrote in this diary.

In today's piece Ravitch criticizes both accountability, telling us NCLB did not produce large gains in reading and math and that choice has been disappointing and provides data to support that assertion.

But Ravitch does more than criticize. After explaining both of the assertions, she tells us

It is time to change course

and that is the heart of her piece.

In case anyone reading this does not know, let me reiterate the following before getting to the heart of the Ravitch piece

1. I am, and have been since 1995, a public school teacher

2. I am on record as having expressed strong opinion of NCLB

3. I have been highly critical of much of what we do in public education

4. I have also been highly critical of the Obama administration's proposals for education, for example in this piece critical of the newly announced Blueprint

5. I have known Ravitch professionally for about a decade, consider her a friend, even though she and I disagree on some key points

Now let's get to the heart of what Ravitch suggests.


She begins by acknowledging that everyone - or should I say everyone sensible - agrees that education must be far broader than the skills tested under NCLB (which are still used in the Blueprint to ascertain the 5% or 5,000 schools still under the gun for reconstitution or worse. She supports " learning history, geography, civics, the arts, science, literature and foreign language. Schools should be expected to teach these subjects even if students are not tested on them." As one who teaches in the latter group of subjects and who majored in another, I agree. I also note, as Ravitch and others (including me) have done elsewhere, that it is often the "softer" subjects such as music, art, photography, phys ed, and the like that are the reasons that some students persist in school, thus giving us the opportunity to work on their basic numeracy and literacy and to expand their horizons.

And she focuses on good teachers. Sh would accept either a major in the subject they teach, or strong background in two subjects, and would require all teachers to pass a test on subject area content, as well as on basic literacy and numeracy. I might quibble some - I would be perhaps a bit more willing to have someone who has demonstrated expertise in one subject to teach that subject. Thus I would not care if a professional artist or photographer had majored in that subject provided s/he can demonstrate the expertise in that subject. Also, I do think that before stepping in the classroom those who teach need some background in things like basic pegagogy, classroom management and organization, human development, and the legal requirements of things like special education. I would accept an intensive 6-10 week training period provided there were ongoing support and supervision during the first 1-2 years of teaching.

Ravitch also focuses on principals. Here, before I quote the entire paragraph on this subject, I need to disclose that I explored an alternative program for becoming a principal, New Leaders for New Schools. I had one final round of interviews in the selection process for DC schools, but withdrew for several reasons, of greatest importance that I realized that I was not sure I wanted to leave the classroom. Thus I am not opposed per se to the idea of alternative routes to educational leadership.

Ravitch offers what I consider valid concerns:

We need principals who are master teachers, not inexperienced teachers who took a course called "How to Be a Leader." The principal is expected to evaluate teachers, to decide who deserves tenure and to help those who are struggling and trying to improve. If the principal is not a master teacher, he or she will not be able to perform the most crucial functions of the job.

As to district level leadership, Ravitch offers a similar set of concerns about Superintendents. She wants them to be experienced educators " because their decisions about personnel, curriculum and instruction affect the entire school system." And of course, they are responsible for picking principals and advising school boards on curricular matters.

The selection of district level leaders is perhaps the most problematic area of American schools. There have been a few examples of those not themselves professional educators who have been successful. There are very much the exception, and certainly should not be used as models. Thus just because a former General, John Stanford, was fairly successful in Seattle did not justify DC hiring former General Julius Becton, who turned out to be a disaster. We are seeing non-educators as the result of two sets of pressures. One is that of mayoral control of schools. Thus we have had Alan Bersin in San Diego (and Ravitch thoroughly explores his tenure in her book) and Joel Klein in New York (similarly covered in the book, and even more in her ongoing writing for newspapers and other print publications). OF course, the critical example is Arne Duncan first in his role in Chicago, and now as US Secretary of Education.

The other is one result of the effort by Eli Broad to use his wealth to reshape American education in his vision. Ravitch explores some of this in a chapter in her book on the Billionaire Boys Club. When it comes to superintendents, Broad has established an Academy which says right on the home page: WANTED: THE NATION'S MOST TALENTED EXECUTIVES TO RUN THE BUSINESS OF URBAN EDUCATION. Except education, especially urban education, is very different than a business. There are aspects of a large school district in which business expertise is appropriate, and having an assistant superintendent with appropriate experience and expertise to address those domains is not something to which I would object. Like Ravitch, I am concerned with district leaders who do not fully understand the nature of education.

Ravitch cannot fully explore the topics she attempts to address in her op ed. She wants better assessments, more than picking one multiple choice answer out of four, the most common form of state assessments. She is in general opposed to labeling schools as failing, noting that many of such schools have a large proportion of the kinds of students who start as low-performing: they are English language learners, they are students

who live in poverty, who miss school frequently because they must baby-sit while their parents look for work, or who have disabilities that interfere with their learning. These are not excuses for their low scores but facts about their lives.

She offers suggestions for how to address their needs, including bringing in inspection teams to exam WHY such schools are not meeting the needs of the students and then suggesting target methods of addressing those needs. Here I note that simply closing the school down and/or firing all the staff neither identifies the causes nor fixes the problems. Ravitch has a standing challenge she often makes when she speaks - please point at a single school or district that has improved performance by an approach of firing all the staff and/or closing a school down. And lest you be inclined to point at examples in Arne Duncan's Chicago, I should warn you that the schools about which Duncan and his supporters were prone to brag did not contain the same student body as had been in the school before it was reconstituted, and thus you do not have an honest comparison or any way of controlling the educational background, readiness and preparation of the new student body.

For Ravitch, there is another reason we should rarely close down schools:

In many poor communities, schools are the most stable institution. Closing them destroys the fabric of the community.

. To this I would add that closing and consolidating often puts children in urban areas at risk, as they have to cross territory of hostile gangs to get to the schools to which they have newly been assigned. That in itself should remind us all that many of the factors that impact school performance are outside the control of school officials. Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children's Zone recognizes this. Let me quote from the ABOUT page:

In the early 1990s, HCZ ran a pilot project that brought a range of support services to a single block. The idea was to address all the problems that poor families were facing: from crumbling apartments to failing schools, from violent crime to chronic health problems.

This approach has been expanded:

In 1997, the agency began a network of programs for a 24-block area: the Harlem Children's Zone Project. In 2007, the Zone Project grew to almost 100 blocks. Today the Children's Zone® serves more than 8,000 children and 6,000 adults. Overall, the organization serves more than 10,000 children and more than 7,400 adults. The FY 2010 budget for the agency overall is over $75 million.

Note especially the inclusion of adults in addressing the overall needs of the schoolchildren.

I know my friend Diane will not mind that I have explored some of her points in greater depth than the space the Post granted her would allow, but remember, the exploration is mine, and while Ravitch would agree with much of what I offer, she might will disagree on some points.

Where we absolutely agree is the need to abandon the punitive mindset that underlies NCLB, and which, unfortunately, is perpetuated in the Blueprint and in the demands imposed if one is to qualify for funds under Race to the Top. We both would agree that this is requires a long term effort, that there are no magic bullets nor ready-made solutions that can be taken off the shelf and imposed wholesale on schools and districts.

Her last brief paragraph says it all:

We wasted eight years with the "measure and punish" strategy of NCLB. Let's not waste the next eight years.

Indeed, let's not waste another day in the failed approaches of the last eight years. It is unfair to too many of our children.

Peace.

Obama's Blueprint for Education - Richard Rothstein criticizes

cross posted from Daily Kos

I have already weighed in on the Blueprint, in Obama's "Blueprint" for education - why this teacher cannot support it. Today I want to call to your attention a very important critic by Richard Rothstein, whose current position is as a research associate at the Education Policy Institute, but who spent 1999-2002 as the national education columnist for The New York Times

On March 23 he posted A blueprint that needs more work at the EPI website. His is a balanced examination, but one that is nevertheless more critical than complimentary. I am going to urge that anyone interested in public education carefully read his entire critique. I am going to focus on several issues that caught my attention. I invite your continued reading.

A major focus of Rothstein's critique is the administration's emphasis on students being college ready upon graduation from high school. He actually begins by discussing the funding of college, something addressed in the recent reconciliation bill on health insurance reform. He compliments the administration for recognizing the need to make college more affordable/accessible, writing

It would be foolish to try to re-organize elementary and secondary education to make students “college-ready” if college itself becomes less affordable.

But let's take a look at the goal of having students college ready. The Blueprint calls for all graduates to be college or career ready by 2020. This replaces the requirement of NCLB that all students be 100% proficient in reading and math in 2014. Let me quote how Rothstein embarks on exploring this topic:

The Blueprint’s overall theme is that by 2020 all students should graduate from high school “College and Career Ready.” Administration officials have explained that this entails the ability to gain admission to an academic college program without having to take remedial courses. (The addition of “Career” to “College Ready” is meaningless, because what the Administration intends to convey is that some students may choose to pursue a non-college career, but would still have gained the qualifications to enter an academic college program if they wished.) This is, perhaps, the most disturbing aspect of the Blueprint. It indicates that the Administration may have learned little from the NCLB experience.

He goes on to quote Duncan as describing the 100% proficiency requirement of NCLB as "utopian" and it is worth noting that those in the Congress knew it was not achievable, but did not believe you could move forward with a more achievable goal of say 75 or 80% proficient, certainly not in legislation labeled "No Child Left Behind." Then after noting that a level of proficiency cannot be simultaneously "challenging" for students at the top and bottom of normal distribution, Rothstein offers three powerful paragraphs, which I think need to be offered in their entirety:

But aside from ridicule, NCLB’s adoption of this goal did great harm to public education. It created incentives for educators to lie to the public and claim that they could achieve something that they knew was unachievable. It created well-known incentives to “define down” proficiency, to make it possible for more students to pass themselves off as proficient. It engendered a culture of cynicism in public education, and it discredited public education in the broader community, as it became apparent that school leaders could not deliver what they were promising.

Any institution that sets an impossible goal runs the risk of such cynicism and loss of legitimacy.

The goal of all students college-ready by 2020 is just as fanciful as the goal of all students proficient by 2014. Today, perhaps 20 percent of all youth graduate high school fully prepared for academic college. It should certainly be higher. Aspiring to make it higher is a worthy ambition. But basing policy on a promise, or even an expectation, that we will quintuple this rate in a mere decade is laughable.

Thus, the key selling point for the Blueprint, the idea that all students will be career or college ready, is as unachievable - or if you will, false - as was NCLB's goal of 100% proficiency. We are now at 20% ready for college. But basing policy on a promise, or even an expectation, that we will quintuple this rate in a mere decade is laughable. Which in my mind makes the entire proposal laughable.

There is so much more in this superb analysis of the Blueprint. Just on this point, while the administration tries to divert criticism by calling the goal aspirational, Rothstein cuts quickly to the chase. He notes that schools serving disadvantaged children will be most likely to fail this aspirational goal and continue to suffer sanctions just as under NCLB.

For these schools, the same cynicism, the same false promises, the same gaming, will be stimulated as occurred with NCLB.

Rothstein argues that middle class schools will be harmed by this, that the pressue to dumb down standards of readiness will parallel what happened to standards of proficiency, and then warns

Promising to make all students college-ready by 2020 is, in effect, an attack on the quality of America’s institutions of higher education.

Remember, this is on a key selling point of the administration's education proposal. While Rothstein offers some compliments on parts of the Blueprint - funding some states to broaden their curricula and assessment, providing funds for support outside the regular school day - on the whole he is at least skeptical if not downright critical. Those who have read my post will again encounter criticisms of the administration's shift away from formula-based programs, especially in a time of economic distress and pressu4e (and Rothstein properly credits the education funding in ARRA for having perhaps prevented the laying off of a third of a million teachers and other school employees).

There is more, much more in this 3219 word piece, which originally appeared as part of the group "blogging" effort on education at National Journal. As noted, I strongly urge people to read it.

In his penultimate paragraph, Rothstein offers this:

We can hope that the Administration thinks further about its proposals, and revises them as they proceed through Congress. It is, in any event, virtually certain that the Blueprint will not be adopted in its present design by this Congress, and perhaps not even by the next.

He may be correct. While the House (Miller) and Senate (Harkin) chairmen of the relevant authorizing committees might be inclined to give Obama what he wants on an issue he has said is important to him, they cannot control what their members think. When Duncan appeared on the Hill, most of the senior members of the House Committee were more than a little skeptical and challenging in their questions and commentary, and there were similar concerns offered by some of the senior Republicans, including ranking members Kline (House) and Enzi (Senate). Further, even if authorized, the proposal would have to be funded and House Appropriations Chair David Obey of Wisconsin made clear in his questioning of Duncan his unwillingness to go along merely because the President wants it. He is a 41 year member of the House, a close ally of Speaker Pelosi, who was trusted to preside over the House voting on the Senate Health Insurance Reform bill.

So perhaps I should end as does Rothstein. Here is his final paragraph:

This suggests an unintended benefit of the Blueprint. For the foreseeable future, Arne Duncan will continue to be responsible for administering NCLB. Having now gone on record that its provisions are seriously flawed and that compliance with them is doing American education great harm, the Secretary will have no coherent choice but to begin issuing wholesale waivers to states from compliance with the old law. If it accomplishes this much, the Blueprint will have done a great service.

In other words, like me, Rothstein really does not think much of the Blueprint.

So, what do you think?

Peace.

Education: A Race to Equity instead of the Race to the Top

One of the important names in education that too many currently involved in making policy do not seem to know is Herbert Kohl. Those of us on the Progressive end of the educational spectrum know how important the insight he has offered are, and rare is the progressive thinker on education who has not read several of his books, most notably 36 Children and "I Won't Learn from You:" and Other Thoughts on Creative Maladjustment, the latter a reworking of a slightly earlier essay.

Beginning in Harlem in 1962, Kohl has taught every grade from Kindergarten to College, including being a visiting professor at Swarthmore College.

During a previous time of re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Kohl worked with the late Senator Paul Wellstone on building Opportunity to Learn ideas into the law (you can explore OTL at this Google search).

Recently Kohl sent out an email on A Race To Equity, the contents of which are publicly available quoted in another email on the Assessment Reform Network list archive. I want to share with you and explore the ideas Kohl presents.

I want to focus on a series of questions that Kohl suggests should be answered as part of how we evaluate if we are truly and honestly are going to address the real issues of school equity.

Let me begin as Kohl poses the issue:

When considering school failure, consideration must be given to the situation and circumstances under which children learn. Jonathan Kozolâs Savage Inequalities dramatically documents the lack of opportunity presented to many poor children. Taking off from the, we raised the issue of how to negate those inequalities. The question that droves this analysis was: Do all children have the same opportunities to learn? We were careful to avoid the question of poverty, family background, etc., because we wanted to make strictly educational arguments. We wanted to focus specifically on the conditions of schooling and make the opportunity to learn an equity issue.

Kohl suggests we need a series of measures of equity, and ofers a list some. Let me note that absent some equality of opportunity those in so-called failing schools are often disadvantaged even beyond the prior learning with which they arrive in our schools and classroom. As Kohl writes in the conclusion of the piece from which I am quoting,

My feeling is that progressives should advocate a “race to equity” – a
multibillion dollar initiative to bring some of the most impoverished schools up to the material and pedagogical conditions of the most effective public schools in the country.

I am going to list in bold each of the questions Kohl proposes and then offer some commentary of my own.


What are the facilities necessary to promote equitable learning? We should realize that the physical setting of school can make a difference in the effectiveness of instruction and learning. If nothing else, students can quickly ascertain that their learning is not important if the facilities in which they attend school are decrepit, falling apart, with leaking roofs, heating/ac that does not work, etc. Is there some minimal standard upon which we should be insisting as a precondition to our expectations for learning? We know that wealthy communities often have superb facilities, modern buildings, and the like, while poorer communities, in both urban and rural settings, often conduct classes in buildings as much as a century old, lacking adequate electrical systems for modern equipment as just one indication of how they lag.

What is an equitable ratio of students to teachers?Please note: teacher/student ration is not identical to class size, although it is closely related. It is possible to have a ratio that is too high yet keep class sizes manageable by having teachers responsible for more classes, perhaps removing a planning period and forcing all planning and collaboration and grading to take place outside of paid school hours. Of course, such an approach burns out and discourages teachers, which inevitably leads to other problems. Whether you want to think of the ratio, or of class sizes, recognize this: in our elite private schools those ratios are much smaller than is often the case in schools in economically distressed or isolated communities. In some of our wealthier communities, ratios and class sizes tilt more in the direction of what we see in elite private schools. There are some communities which have made a major commitment on these issues - I live in Arlington Virginia, where I taught in a middle school for one year in which my four sets of students ranged from 19 to 24. By contrast, I have taught most of my career in Prince George's County MD, where in my current high school I have six sets of students with one class having 15 (it is a special program) and my other five ranging from 27 to 37. We know that there is research that supports the idea of smaller classes leading to more effective instruction, especially in elementary. Or if the elementary class has 30 students that there is a teacher aide to assist, or there are co-taught classes: in secondary one can co-teach language arts and social studies, having two teachers for perhaps 40-50 students.

What is the range and scope of a learning program that promotes equitable learning â this would include the arts, opportunity for athletics and cultural learning, advanced placement courses, science labs? Note that this is far beyond the sometimes exclusionary emphasis on reading and mathematics that was the result often seen in schools of lower socioeconomics because of the emphasis on test scores in those two domains under No Child Left Behind. I will acknowledge that Obama has spoken about broadening our understanding of what an education should include, and that the administration's Blueprint allows schools/systems/states to measure performance in other subjects, but for the supposed bottom 5% / 5,000 schools the determination is still being made solely on reading and mathematics. If we narrow what a child experiences in school we do little than perpetuate or even aggravate the unequal status with which that child arrives in our schools. Somehow we need to remember that while literacy and numeracy are important, sometimes they are best learned in a broader context in which the student can experience a broader sense of learning and education. Similarly, we must be able to provide in every school the opportunity to challenge the gifted students that exist in every school, even those in our poorest or most isolated communities.

What are the credentials teachers are expected to have to produce excellence in learning? This question is going beyond the formal licensing today, that is, do you have a complete teaching credential? NCLB said that every teacher was supposed to be "highly qualified" but it was too easy to limit that to paperwork and coursework. We certainly need to have some standards of what we expect those to who we entrust the future of our children to bring to the classroom. What are those characteristics that we can see make a real difference? Can we establish some means of measuring them, so that we do not assume that grades and test scores of teacher candidates are the only measure? Here I note of my five student teachers the one with the highest grades and test scores was totally unable to connect with the students, whereas several with what some might consider mediocre evidence in testing and grades had already demonstrated a real interest and ability in finding ways of motivating and challenging a diverse group of students, both succeeded as student teachers and then later as teachers in our building.


What kind of wages and conditions of work contribute to educational opportunity for children? These are both important issues. Let's address separately. First, if we want to attract and retain teachers we have to be willing to pay them a livable wage. Otherwise we will lose them to other careers, or else force them to work 2nd jobs in order to make ends meet. That is a minimum requirement. Conditions of work are equally important. That includes for many of us the ability to be flexible in meeting the needs of the students, having the support necessary to meet those needs, having the materials and equipment, being in an environment which is not overly punitive either to students or the adults serving those students, being in a setting where it is possible to work with the parents and the larger community for the success of the students. I will acknowledge that money is insufficient by itself to address the issues confronting our schools, but there is no doubt lack of money can undercut our best efforts. And please, do not simply compare the total amount spent per student as a means of undercutting that: yes, DC spends a lot per student, but much of that goes to mandated special education costs, to security, to a top-heavy administrative structure (including record keeping in excruciating detail of things easy to measure but which have not been shown to translate into better instruction), and not to improving instruction in the classroom.

What kinds of supplies and equipment must all school have access to (text books, computers, etc.)? IS it equitable that some school systems have a ratio of computers to students up to 10 times those in other schools? How does one teach laboratory science without labs, equipment, and supplies? What if a school lacks a gymnasium or safe athletic fields? Do some schools still lack chairs and desks for all students? What about a library, with books that students can take out? Remember, for some of our students there is little if any access to public libraries: in rural areas they are too far away, in some urban areas going to a public library - if the community still has one - might require crossing the territory of a hostile gang.


What kind of facilities should house an equitable learning environment for all children? The key word is EQUITABLE. That does not have to be identical. I addressed some of this in the beginning. It starts with the building itself. This is not merely the physical condition and age. It is also whether the building itself encourages or discourages learning. We have many models of building layout that can be considered as part of this.


What kind of standards and measures should be used to measure a school's effectiveness as an equitable learning institution? Are the standards which we impose upon students and schools appropriate for where we begin? That is, is it appropriate to measure all against a uniform and often arbitrary level of performance rather than on the growth we are able to to generate in our students? How much are we willing to go beyond easy to score mass-produced tests? What measures beyond test scores are important indicators of whether that school is providing equity of opportunity for our students? Let me offer a couple of things one might consider. School lunch, attendance, opportunity of extra-curricular activities, opportunity for students to explore subjects in depth, multiple measures (which does not mean just multiple tests) of student learning - these are just a few things that come to my mind as I read this question. But also, how do we set standards? Here I think of the current effort for Common Core Standards that were being developed without the input of teachers or professional organizations of the content areas, but had lots of input from think tanks and testing organizations and certain groups arguing for what I would consider a narrow concept of "reform." I might suggest that in order to determine what standards we should apply, we will first have to be willing to address an issue that still remains largely unanswered: what is the purpose of our providing for public schooling? What is the purpose of school? If we are willing to acquiesce in the sorting process and accept the idea that schooling is driven by a limited idea of economic competitiveness, then I suggest we will continue to be frustrated with the results, in large part because our students will be frustrated with what they experience in the classroom. Perhaps we should try talking to students, current and recently graduated, about what their experience has been, what they think they need, and why?


What role should parents and community organizations play to ensure equitable schools in their communities? Schools do not exist in isolation. In too many cases community support seems limited to honoring athletic teams. In some cases, we are fortunate that there is further support and honoring of academic "winners" - the scholarships one, robotics and Latin and Science and History competitions. Community organizations can provide so much more: guest speakers, field trips, supplemntal materials for classrooms, internship opportunities.

And parents: if we want their involvement do we provide an opportunity for them to participate? Is there even an active parent organization? What about providing opportunities for meeting with teachers and administrators on a schedule that works for parents? In many well-off communities, it is not difficult for a parent to adjust a work schedule for a parent conference. What if the parents both work two jobs, for which it represents a loss of income? What if the parents lack language skills, are we prepared to work with community associations to provide translators?

I have in this posting barely scratched the possibilities we could explore in the questions Kohl raises. And I am sure Kohl would tell us that these are only some of the questions we need to consider if we are going to make our schools more equitable.

Perhaps some do not care about school equity. There is a strand of thought among many in America which has no trouble with inequity, which is prepared to justify the increasing economic and social disparities in this nation. After all, we have seen some of that thinking in recent debates over health care reform.

I have experienced up close what the inequity in access to health care means. This weekend I again volunteered in dental triage at a Mission of Mercy seeking to bring basic dental care to people who normally go without. Health and nutrition and education are interrelated. Equity does not have to mean equal. But surely there should be some minimal levels beyond which as a society we understand we cannot allow some of our people to be trapped.

School is supposed to make a difference. Certainly we saw the explosion of the middle class in the decades after WWII in part because we opened up higher education through things like the GI Bill and various other programs, we opened up home ownership, we began to address some of the economic and racial inequity that was endemic in mid-20th century America.

I fear that we may have lost the belief that we can really provide opportunity for all. I worry that we are beginning, under the current economic pressures most of us are experiencing, to pull back from the concept that we have a responsibility for all of us. We may use language like "no child left behind" yet at the same time acquiesce as the educational opportunities for "other people's children" to use the phrase made famous by Lisa Delpit are not really our concern.

Herbert Kohl has been one of the important voices on this, as has Jonathan Kozol, as have many who continue to labor within many schools which do not have the facilities, the larger community support, and thus struggle to provide equity of educational opportunity.

The original Elementary and Secondary Education Act was a product of Lyndon John's Great Society. Johnson had after college and before politics served as a school teacher in a poor economic community. He had seen first hand the lack of educational equity and its impact.

A competition inevitably has winners and losers, and thus inevitably leaves some behind, our telling them that in some way their education is not important enough. That is wrong.

I do not claim to have all the answers. I note that too often we are not asking all the right questions. Herbert Kohl offers some questions I think we need to consider.

What do you think?

Peace.