Everyday, I spend a lot of time reading different perspectives on education, what needs to be fixed and why. I follow people and organizations with whom I disagree as well, because in all things I believe we need to listen to each other and search for common ground. I don't know of any other way we can move forward--and move forward we must. One cause for debate is school choice, and frankly I have difficulty understanding why.
School choice to me includes using public education fund for programs like vouchers and charters. As far as I can tell, the argument against is that if people want choice, they should fund it themselves. The argument is that public funds should only be spent on public schools which are underfunded already. What I don't understand is why must we only reform public schools in one manner? (The other argument is about non-union teachers, but I'll have to save that for its own post).
Even if, in an ideal world, we could update our buildings, pay our teachers better, purchase and integrate technology, have an individualized curriculum, what's wrong with offering parents more than one way to educate their kids? Even if we did our best to create the "best" system, it still wouldn't be the right place for all kids. By only providing one way, I would guess there are kids on either end of the spectrum that would still not be served, as well as the kids who are "different" in any way. What is wrong with using the tax money these parents already pay to buy their kids the education they need?
Of course, I speak from experience. My sons have both attended charter schools. One was just okay, and operated basically like a small public school, so if class size/overall enrollment was your only issue with the local public school, this charter might fit the bill for your kid. The other charter was great in theory, but was operationally deficient in putting that theory into practice. The local public middle school both my kids attended after the charters didn't meet their needs was even less impressive, despite it's "excelling" status. It felt more like a prison than a school, so my son spent the last four months of last year at a virtual (charter) school that was equally unimpressive, but at least got him out of an unfixable situation in the public school (between him and a teacher/admin, not other students).
I don't claim that charters or vouchers are "the" solution, but as a parent who is now paying private school tuition for one kid, and has the other one at another charter, I'm open to whatever solution works for MY kid. And I don't think that just because your kid can't march in lock step with the public school, that you shouldn't have other options for using your tax money for their education.
Showing posts with label arizona education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label arizona education. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
The Cart Before the Horse: What is the Why and the What of Education?
I am new to the education reform debate. I am not a teacher, but I have volunteered in my kids' Montessori, public, and charter schools over the years. I am a parent and a voter. I also have 20+ years as an instructional designer for corporate training. For many years now, I have been consulting with large organizations on how to best train their employees and how to align their practices with their missions. As a newbie to education reform, I just don't get how we can move forward until we know what our "mission" is.
The very first thing I learned as an instructional designer is to determine, "what do we want people to know or be able to do" by the end of this course. And in turn, those objectives are in line with the company's mission--the "why are we doing this?" I still haven't heard one really clear response to "what do we want our kids to know and be able to do by the time they graduate from high school and why?" What are our mission and objectives for America's children?
Without a good answer to that question, it seems to me that there is no possible way to move forward. There is no way to measure teacher performance and determine teacher pay, if we don't know what they're supposed to achieve. There is no way to measure student learning, if we don't agree on what they're supposed to be able to do. There is no way to determine teaching methods, school design, school hours, classroom needs, and, perhaps most importantly, BUDGETS, if we don't agree on what kids should be able to DO by the time they graduate high school.
Everyone seems so focused on the "how" when no one seems to be able to agree on a common goal of "what." I agree that teachers, parents, and students must have more power than corporate reformers, but I disagree with dismissing them outright. There are some things we can learn from business--and their money and involvement can be a good thing. I've seen too many companies--like Borders Books, for example--who ignored the "what" and the "why" and spent a lot of time and effort trying all kinds of "hows." It's a surefire path to demise and our kids deserve better than that.
The very first thing I learned as an instructional designer is to determine, "what do we want people to know or be able to do" by the end of this course. And in turn, those objectives are in line with the company's mission--the "why are we doing this?" I still haven't heard one really clear response to "what do we want our kids to know and be able to do by the time they graduate from high school and why?" What are our mission and objectives for America's children?
Without a good answer to that question, it seems to me that there is no possible way to move forward. There is no way to measure teacher performance and determine teacher pay, if we don't know what they're supposed to achieve. There is no way to measure student learning, if we don't agree on what they're supposed to be able to do. There is no way to determine teaching methods, school design, school hours, classroom needs, and, perhaps most importantly, BUDGETS, if we don't agree on what kids should be able to DO by the time they graduate high school.
Everyone seems so focused on the "how" when no one seems to be able to agree on a common goal of "what." I agree that teachers, parents, and students must have more power than corporate reformers, but I disagree with dismissing them outright. There are some things we can learn from business--and their money and involvement can be a good thing. I've seen too many companies--like Borders Books, for example--who ignored the "what" and the "why" and spent a lot of time and effort trying all kinds of "hows." It's a surefire path to demise and our kids deserve better than that.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
What Should Kids Know?
In my rabbit-trail hopping adventures today, I linked to the Aspen Institute's Aspen Ideas Festival 2011 (AIF), which is going on as I write this. AIF is not just about Education--it's goal is to "engage its participants in a variety of programs, tutorials, seminars and discussion events that together are guaranteed to charge the atmosphere with vibrant intellectual exchange." The website has live streaming of sessions, along with videos you can watch of sessions that have already occurred. When I saw the video title, "What Should Kids Know?" it caught my attention. I thought, "Finally, someone is asking the foundational question we should be answering to truly reform education." Well, someone might have asked it, but unfortunately the prestigious panel didn't even get close to answering it, in my humble opinion.
Perhaps it was this "distinguished panel," that was the issue. The panel was made up of people who have something invested in the way learning has been done, rather than a stake in what it could be. A Duke University professor, a supreme court judge, an educator/administrator from the International Baccalaureate program, etc. I have to admit, I didn't listen to the whole thing. I did listen to most of it, but when I heard comments that suggested that many schools no longer have the traditional set up of desks with teachers lecturing (really?), and that our model should be a public charter in New York where the kids go to school from 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, then return for more on Saturday (and they were happy doing it, too!)--well, let's just say I threw up a little in my mouth.
It's true, however, that we need discussion, even from people with whom I disagree. Part of what's important--after we answer "what should kids know?"--is remembering that there will be MANY different correct responses on "how should they learn what they need to know?"
Perhaps it was this "distinguished panel," that was the issue. The panel was made up of people who have something invested in the way learning has been done, rather than a stake in what it could be. A Duke University professor, a supreme court judge, an educator/administrator from the International Baccalaureate program, etc. I have to admit, I didn't listen to the whole thing. I did listen to most of it, but when I heard comments that suggested that many schools no longer have the traditional set up of desks with teachers lecturing (really?), and that our model should be a public charter in New York where the kids go to school from 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, then return for more on Saturday (and they were happy doing it, too!)--well, let's just say I threw up a little in my mouth.
It's true, however, that we need discussion, even from people with whom I disagree. Part of what's important--after we answer "what should kids know?"--is remembering that there will be MANY different correct responses on "how should they learn what they need to know?"
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Taking a Stand for Children
Today I met with Carl Zaragoza from Stand for Children - Arizona. I contacted Carl after he invited me to contact him during a Facebook discussion on running for school board. As I learn about education reform and explore my options on how to get involved, running for school board has crossed my mind, so I was anxious to learn more from Carl.
Immediately upon meeting Carl, you can tell he's a good guy. As I heard his story about teaching through Teach for America, and then running for and serving on the Creighton Elementary school board here in Phoenix, I could see the passion he has for serving his community--especially children. We settled in as I munched on my bagel and he began telling me about Stand for Children.
Right now, Stand for Children in Arizona is working on four major initiatives:
Immediately upon meeting Carl, you can tell he's a good guy. As I heard his story about teaching through Teach for America, and then running for and serving on the Creighton Elementary school board here in Phoenix, I could see the passion he has for serving his community--especially children. We settled in as I munched on my bagel and he began telling me about Stand for Children.
Right now, Stand for Children in Arizona is working on four major initiatives:
- An independent audit of the charter authorization process in Arizona through NACSA (the National Association of Charter School Authorizers).
- Unification of school districts
- A funding initiative that aims to not just "throw more money" at schools, but also to provide guidelines on how that money is spent and what is to be accomplished
- Revamping teacher evaluations, with 33-50% of the evaluation based on student outcomes (which is much, much more than standardized testing)
I'm still not sure I want to give running for school board a try, but I am interested in finding out more about what my local school board is doing (or not doing), so I plan to attend a meeting in August (when things are gearing up again). I used to give my friend, Irene Stewart in Seattle, a bad time for running for and serving on Seattle's school board--what a thankless job! But serving on a board really CAN make a difference in public education and every voter should attend at least one school board meeting to find out how well your board functions. It's YOUR tax money, so if the board isn't functioning well, your vote can change that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)