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 education reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education reform. 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.
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Why Isn't Montessori Part of the Education Reform Conversation?
Maybe the reason I am asking this question is naivete. My kids spent five years in a private Montessori school in Seattle, and so far, it was the best learning community we've been a part of and the one where they were able to achieve the most success. It seems like all of the things we are discussing in terms of education reform have already been in practice in Montessori schools for almost a century with great success. Things like:
- Individualized learning plans
- Low teacher/student ratios
- Integrated subject matters
- Project-based learning
- Experiential/hands-on learning
- Whole child learning
- A student-centric environment
- Assessment and demonstrated proficiency (vs. testing)
- Multi-age classrooms
I could go on and on. I frequently substituted as a teacher's assistant at the school, mostly with the 3-5 year olds, but also with the 6-9 year olds, and was constantly amazed at how much fun the kids had, how proud they were of their "work," how engaged they were in their learning, how advanced they were, how they cared about other students and the school, and so on. So if so many Montessori schools are already doing the things we want for education reform, why does it seem that Montessori isn't part of the conversation and getting the recognition it deserves? Do we really need to reinvent the wheel?
- Individualized learning plans
- Low teacher/student ratios
- Integrated subject matters
- Project-based learning
- Experiential/hands-on learning
- Whole child learning
- A student-centric environment
- Assessment and demonstrated proficiency (vs. testing)
- Multi-age classrooms
I could go on and on. I frequently substituted as a teacher's assistant at the school, mostly with the 3-5 year olds, but also with the 6-9 year olds, and was constantly amazed at how much fun the kids had, how proud they were of their "work," how engaged they were in their learning, how advanced they were, how they cared about other students and the school, and so on. So if so many Montessori schools are already doing the things we want for education reform, why does it seem that Montessori isn't part of the conversation and getting the recognition it deserves? Do we really need to reinvent the wheel?
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?"
Monday, June 27, 2011
I Follow Rabbit Trails So You Don't Have To!
If you've read my article, When Doing Nothing Isn't Doing Nothing, then perhaps you'll understand how my hours following Internet links on education reform isn't doing nothing! This morning, for about four hours or so now, I've been mostly doing just that--following rabbit trails. Through a Facebook link from New Schools Venture Fund (nsvf), whose primary goal is funding "education entrepreneurs," I found this video from their New Schools Summit 2011.
Now you likely won't have an hour to sit and watch this awesome discussion between Kaya Henderson, Chancellor of Washington D.C. schools, and Netflix founder Reed Hastings...BUT if you do, I'd highly recommend it. In short, they agreed on about 80% of what needs to change in education. Mr. Hastings, however, is committed to making those changes primarily through growing charters across the country and world. I was impressed with the somewhat controversial Ms. Henderson (who is Michelle Rhee's successor in D.C. after Ms. Rhee resigned due to allegations of cheating). She basically stated that she is interested in providing a high-quality, equitable education by any means possible: district, charter, virtual, or ???
The highlight of the video is a final question from an anonymous audience member (this is the part where my 14-year-old son got a 10 minute impassioned lecture from me on curriculum design). The question can be summarized as:
There are three important questions around education: What do students need to know? How are we going to teach that? Where are we going to teach it? We spend an awful lot of time on 2 and 3. What about question 1?
Bravo, anonymous audience member! We can't even begin to look at testing, teachers, or anything else until we figure out "what do adults of 2025 and beyond need to be able to know and do?" Then we can figure out how, who, where and how much. Basic curriculum design, folks.
Now you likely won't have an hour to sit and watch this awesome discussion between Kaya Henderson, Chancellor of Washington D.C. schools, and Netflix founder Reed Hastings...BUT if you do, I'd highly recommend it. In short, they agreed on about 80% of what needs to change in education. Mr. Hastings, however, is committed to making those changes primarily through growing charters across the country and world. I was impressed with the somewhat controversial Ms. Henderson (who is Michelle Rhee's successor in D.C. after Ms. Rhee resigned due to allegations of cheating). She basically stated that she is interested in providing a high-quality, equitable education by any means possible: district, charter, virtual, or ???
The highlight of the video is a final question from an anonymous audience member (this is the part where my 14-year-old son got a 10 minute impassioned lecture from me on curriculum design). The question can be summarized as:
There are three important questions around education: What do students need to know? How are we going to teach that? Where are we going to teach it? We spend an awful lot of time on 2 and 3. What about question 1?
Bravo, anonymous audience member! We can't even begin to look at testing, teachers, or anything else until we figure out "what do adults of 2025 and beyond need to be able to know and do?" Then we can figure out how, who, where and how much. Basic curriculum design, folks.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Learning About Education Reform
I have always been passionate about education reform, but I was living another life until recently. After 20 years in corporate training and communications, I gave up a successful consulting career to determine "what's next" for me. In that time, I have been participating in Toastmasters and getting a few articles published online. I attend a wonderful women's writing group, called Wise Women Write (tm) led by the amazing and talented Diane Owens, and get inspiration from her and the lovely women writers she's assembled.
I also have two teenage sons, ages 14 and 17, who have not had an easy time working their way through school. They are both incredibly smart and talented, and other than the oldest struggling with a moderate case of ADHD, it hasn't been due to learning disabilities. Of course, as their mother, I blame myself. Part of it was the wonderful foundation they got in Montessori, and part of it is the parenting style my husband and I have chosen, which is a less structured and control-oriented than the norm. Their academic challenges were exacerbated when we moved to Phoenix, Arizona from Seattle, Washington five years ago.
In the five years we have lived in Arizona, the boys have attended five different schools, including charter, public, private, and online schools. All in an effort to find a learning environment that would capitalize on their strengths (and not diminish them for their weaknesses--in fact, an environment that would actually support and improve their weaknesses would be ideal!). We're not there yet.
I know I am not alone in my struggles. It is no longer just kids who have learning differences or poor and minority students that are not getting their needs met in the education system. I know plenty of middle and upper class white kids that can't seem to get their needs met, either. While I am thrilled that as a nation we are FINALLY focusing on our antiquated education system, I am far from thrilled about the role that corporate America is playing in education reform, the emphasis on high-stakes testing and more seat time, and blaming teachers. All of this has prompted me to learn more about where we are with education reform and figure out what I can do about it.
My dear friend and mentor, Paul Evanson, suggested I begin blogging about my experience learning about education reform, because what I am finding is that things are moving along in many exciting directions! People are fighting for school choice. People are speaking out against high-stakes testing. People are promoting democratic learning environments. It's been exhilarating to learn about all the good education stuff that's going on in our nation. It's also a little sticky.
It's hard to figure out the "good guys" from the "bad guys." There are a lot of agendas going on out there and sometimes it's difficult to figure out where the money is coming from and what an organization's goal really is. As a political Independent, having lived in both blue and red states, I am striving to find and support organizations who are legitimately working to meet the needs of our kids, regardless of their political leaning. If the political agenda is more important than their work for kids, then you'll hear about it from me.
The purpose of this blog is simply for me to share what I am learning. I'll post book reviews, links to websites, blogs, and articles, and, I'm sure, share my own opinions and insights along the way. It might be interesting for you to learn along with me. I hope so.
I also have two teenage sons, ages 14 and 17, who have not had an easy time working their way through school. They are both incredibly smart and talented, and other than the oldest struggling with a moderate case of ADHD, it hasn't been due to learning disabilities. Of course, as their mother, I blame myself. Part of it was the wonderful foundation they got in Montessori, and part of it is the parenting style my husband and I have chosen, which is a less structured and control-oriented than the norm. Their academic challenges were exacerbated when we moved to Phoenix, Arizona from Seattle, Washington five years ago.
In the five years we have lived in Arizona, the boys have attended five different schools, including charter, public, private, and online schools. All in an effort to find a learning environment that would capitalize on their strengths (and not diminish them for their weaknesses--in fact, an environment that would actually support and improve their weaknesses would be ideal!). We're not there yet.
I know I am not alone in my struggles. It is no longer just kids who have learning differences or poor and minority students that are not getting their needs met in the education system. I know plenty of middle and upper class white kids that can't seem to get their needs met, either. While I am thrilled that as a nation we are FINALLY focusing on our antiquated education system, I am far from thrilled about the role that corporate America is playing in education reform, the emphasis on high-stakes testing and more seat time, and blaming teachers. All of this has prompted me to learn more about where we are with education reform and figure out what I can do about it.
My dear friend and mentor, Paul Evanson, suggested I begin blogging about my experience learning about education reform, because what I am finding is that things are moving along in many exciting directions! People are fighting for school choice. People are speaking out against high-stakes testing. People are promoting democratic learning environments. It's been exhilarating to learn about all the good education stuff that's going on in our nation. It's also a little sticky.
It's hard to figure out the "good guys" from the "bad guys." There are a lot of agendas going on out there and sometimes it's difficult to figure out where the money is coming from and what an organization's goal really is. As a political Independent, having lived in both blue and red states, I am striving to find and support organizations who are legitimately working to meet the needs of our kids, regardless of their political leaning. If the political agenda is more important than their work for kids, then you'll hear about it from me.
The purpose of this blog is simply for me to share what I am learning. I'll post book reviews, links to websites, blogs, and articles, and, I'm sure, share my own opinions and insights along the way. It might be interesting for you to learn along with me. I hope so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)