The frenzied media attention concerning how poor American Schools are performing may have reached new heights with Oprah Winfrey’s recent announcement that billionaire Mark Zuckerberg will donate $100 million to fix the public schools of Newark, New Jersey. Somehow, Newark Mayor Cory Booker becomes the Knight in Shining Armor sent by Governor Chris Christie to fix an ailing system of urban public education. I tend to agree with Bob Braun’s take on this one reported in the New Jersey Star-Ledger (Friday, September 24, 2010) as it’s worth reading.
Not that public education in Newark or in any other urban environment is in need of a tune up, it certainly is. In fact, schools in rural areas face similar challenges. The main problem is twofold here in my humble opinion. First, schools in America are chronically underfunded given the challenges we face and required mandates we must meet. Second, schools were designed to be a one-size-fits-all institution and society contains far too much variation for a public institution designed over a century ago to effectively respond to.
Consider that America still is singularly the most significant social experiment in the world: a magnificent melting pot of cultures that places her people in the most non-homogeneous environment ever to populate a geographic area. In other words we are replete with diversity: not one other world country can claim this fame nor rise to this educational challenge.
Its not that American education is failing students on a wholesale scale like the critics, think-tanks, pundits, and (certain) politicians would have us believe. In fact its not that we are failing our students rather we are failing to change to adjust to our students. In fact by design, we are not able to adjust to the rapidly changing global and technological society that evolves around us.
Author Jim Collins of Good to Great, demonstrated this concept with his descriptions of corporate America at the end of the past century. In simplistic terms he suggested that corporations who were lean and adaptable were the most likely to survive the forward march of time and everyone else destined to fail.
Schools as an institution are no exception. Think about the typical school calendar public schools in America follow: A ten-month agrarian design that suited the lifestyle of this country well over a hundred years ago when the family farm dictated the pulse of most communities. How predominant are family farms in 2010? The same can be said about many of the rules and mandates schools must follow in this new century: all designed for a society that no longer exists.
The “failing” label that the federal government now attaches to schools that do not meet 100% of their annual targets reaches an even higher level of improbability as all schools and children in our nation under No Child Left Behind must be 100% proficient in a few short years. A goal worth reaching for but a reality not attainable unless the natural variation in the human population ceases to exist in the near future. Our children live in conditions far too overwhelming for schools to mitigate in the little time students attend school during their youthful lives.
American schools are far too understaffed and under-resourced in order to attain this objective, especially if we consider the overwhelming number of children with learning disabilities, developmental conditions, and physiological unmet needs entering schools each day. Factor in millions of immigrant children (legal and illegal) who are part of America’s peripatetic population attending schools far less than others in their age cohort. Think about the language barriers. How can schools overcome these challenges alone?
Richard Rothstein made a strong case for the problems that manifest themselves in American public schools as societal ones. His book, Class and Schools, identifies the problems America faces and encourages us to take a more complete approach to closing the academic achievement gap. He acknowledges that schools alone cannot fix the problems endemic in American society. Government needs to stop blaming schools for America’s problems and begin the massive effort of creating a lean and more flexible institution capable of responding to the challenges existing in the heterogeneous population living in our society present to educators nationwide.
This is a challenge that money alone will not fix. That is why I remain cynical about Zuckerberg’s latest move for Newark. The Abbott districts already receive the lion’s share of state funding (Newark receives $940 million presently) and after three decades of adequacy and equity funding we still do not see a measurable difference in student performance.
I agree with Governor Christie in this area that New Jersey’s system of public education needs reform in order to survive the future (given protracted poor economic conditions). The unionism that dominates the patterns of New Jersey government may be the biggest impediment to effective overall reform. If only the educational community would embrace the necessary changes and begin the process of needed reform instead of waiting for politicians to do it for them. We must not fail to recognize that we are on the verge of a paradigm shift in public education and our success as a public institution hangs in the balance.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Friday, September 17, 2010
Reflections on Pay to Play and other Educational Issues
I recently read with interest an article in the New Jersey publication the Daily Record on School Pay to Play policies:
http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20100917/COMMUNITIES/100916097/NJ-Assembly-probes-pay-to-participate-student-fees-at-schools
In Hopatcong Borough Public Schools where I am superintendent, we studied the concept this year and choose to call it “Pay to Participate” so there would be no guarantee of actually "playing" at the varsity level, just participating. Having read the article, I am relieved my school board did not adopt a Pay to Play policy this year. Instead, we are studying the impact of such policies on other districts and looking at the wide variety of approaches to this problem. There appears to be several advocacy groups across the country (in California for example) where lawsuits are being initiated over the charging of activity fees. Where this ends up is beyond my imagination.
No one wants to deny any child of an educational opportunity...and in my opinion the “Four A's” of education all are an intricate part of the human development continuum for healthy growth and individual attainment (The “Four A's:” Academics, Arts, Activities, and Athletics). When we limit a student's access to any segment of a comprehensive education we in fact deny them an opportunity. So the very nature of Pay to Play may violate the expectations that a student has a right to an education inside and outside of the classroom. But school districts and divisions nationwide are forced to take such measures as a response to the drastic cuts we are experiencing due to the economic downturn and underfunding of public education.
The sad part of this discussion is the programs that are being lost as a result of the economic crisis and the outright attack on public education by federal and state "politicians gone wild". We are not immune here in Hopatcong as several programs were cut that were a long standing part of our educational system. Notably, the German language program, Field Hockey, Golf, Marching Band, and all freshman sports. The parents have brought back the Golf and Marching Band program with private funding and volunteer supervision, but these are temporary fixes to a long standing problem that will plague New Jersey and schools nationwide for years to come.
Public schools are not optional. They are created by the constitutional authority vested in each state (note: pubic education is absent in the U.S. Constitution). Every state over the past three decades has advocated for a "world class" education and accountability for reaching out to achieve a 100% success rate across the entire strata of student population in this country (well over 50 million), an ambition that thus far has eluded educators in every state. Reaching for the remarkable goal of pushing every child toward a high school diploma regardless of circumstances will require far more resources than available to public schools in America. For example, the effort to ensure and guarantee a high school diploma to every child enrolled in America’s public schools may require education to expand to 220 to perhaps even 260 days per year as opposed to the standard 180 days we currently operate under. So what are needed for public schools to succeed are more resources, not less.
In the meantime, when politicians attack public education and pull back significant portions of state support for education, we are left to ask the question: Who are we not supposed to teach this year? If schools followed an industrial model then a downturn in cash flow would be met with a reduction in output: For example, an automotive industry facing a 15% cut in revenue would respond with a similar reduction in production in order to survive. But public schools in America are being asked to do much more with far less funding...a formula for disaster in the long run. When you factor in the countless federal and state mandates that are underfunded or not even funded this problem becomes even larger.
The quality of a public school system depends upon motivating the student to succeed and creating a synergistic partnership with parents and community alike. The four "A's" are the bedrock of public education and must be fully supported in order for us to sustain a quality system for producing a citizenry that will support our democratic ideals long into the future. Having observed the fabric of society change significantly over the past five decades let me add that the public schools and perhaps the religious institutions in this country are the glue that keeps the fabric of our culture alive. Where else are the lessons of virtue, character, and honesty demonstrated and practiced on a daily basis?
Chip away at the foundation of public education and soon the very core of a civil society will erode. Isn't it time to rethink our priorities? Charging students to participate or selling ads on the sides of school busses will not resolve the financial issues in the long run. Let's do some serious thinking about what we want the future of America to look like...then adequately and generously invest in her public schools for the good of all people.
http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20100917/COMMUNITIES/100916097/NJ-Assembly-probes-pay-to-participate-student-fees-at-schools
In Hopatcong Borough Public Schools where I am superintendent, we studied the concept this year and choose to call it “Pay to Participate” so there would be no guarantee of actually "playing" at the varsity level, just participating. Having read the article, I am relieved my school board did not adopt a Pay to Play policy this year. Instead, we are studying the impact of such policies on other districts and looking at the wide variety of approaches to this problem. There appears to be several advocacy groups across the country (in California for example) where lawsuits are being initiated over the charging of activity fees. Where this ends up is beyond my imagination.
No one wants to deny any child of an educational opportunity...and in my opinion the “Four A's” of education all are an intricate part of the human development continuum for healthy growth and individual attainment (The “Four A's:” Academics, Arts, Activities, and Athletics). When we limit a student's access to any segment of a comprehensive education we in fact deny them an opportunity. So the very nature of Pay to Play may violate the expectations that a student has a right to an education inside and outside of the classroom. But school districts and divisions nationwide are forced to take such measures as a response to the drastic cuts we are experiencing due to the economic downturn and underfunding of public education.
The sad part of this discussion is the programs that are being lost as a result of the economic crisis and the outright attack on public education by federal and state "politicians gone wild". We are not immune here in Hopatcong as several programs were cut that were a long standing part of our educational system. Notably, the German language program, Field Hockey, Golf, Marching Band, and all freshman sports. The parents have brought back the Golf and Marching Band program with private funding and volunteer supervision, but these are temporary fixes to a long standing problem that will plague New Jersey and schools nationwide for years to come.
Public schools are not optional. They are created by the constitutional authority vested in each state (note: pubic education is absent in the U.S. Constitution). Every state over the past three decades has advocated for a "world class" education and accountability for reaching out to achieve a 100% success rate across the entire strata of student population in this country (well over 50 million), an ambition that thus far has eluded educators in every state. Reaching for the remarkable goal of pushing every child toward a high school diploma regardless of circumstances will require far more resources than available to public schools in America. For example, the effort to ensure and guarantee a high school diploma to every child enrolled in America’s public schools may require education to expand to 220 to perhaps even 260 days per year as opposed to the standard 180 days we currently operate under. So what are needed for public schools to succeed are more resources, not less.
In the meantime, when politicians attack public education and pull back significant portions of state support for education, we are left to ask the question: Who are we not supposed to teach this year? If schools followed an industrial model then a downturn in cash flow would be met with a reduction in output: For example, an automotive industry facing a 15% cut in revenue would respond with a similar reduction in production in order to survive. But public schools in America are being asked to do much more with far less funding...a formula for disaster in the long run. When you factor in the countless federal and state mandates that are underfunded or not even funded this problem becomes even larger.
The quality of a public school system depends upon motivating the student to succeed and creating a synergistic partnership with parents and community alike. The four "A's" are the bedrock of public education and must be fully supported in order for us to sustain a quality system for producing a citizenry that will support our democratic ideals long into the future. Having observed the fabric of society change significantly over the past five decades let me add that the public schools and perhaps the religious institutions in this country are the glue that keeps the fabric of our culture alive. Where else are the lessons of virtue, character, and honesty demonstrated and practiced on a daily basis?
Chip away at the foundation of public education and soon the very core of a civil society will erode. Isn't it time to rethink our priorities? Charging students to participate or selling ads on the sides of school busses will not resolve the financial issues in the long run. Let's do some serious thinking about what we want the future of America to look like...then adequately and generously invest in her public schools for the good of all people.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Period of Uncertainty, Change, and Innovation for Public Education
Anyone connected to public education is feeling a bit uncomfortable right now due to the dire state of the economy and the political pressure to reduce budgets at all levels. In most communities public schools represent the largest expenditure for state and local government and are experiencing unprecedented cuts to operational and personnel costs. The reduced revenue stream to schools has been met with a response by educators to cut programs and instructors all across the nation in order to produce a balanced budget for 2010-2011.
Think about this: No one is presently talking about reduced expectations for public education in spite of these recent record cuts to personnel and programs. In fact, the opposite is true-during a time of drastic cuts in educational resources the expectations for teaching our youth are actually elevated. Another key point: There are very few correlations to the dramatic budget cuts we are experiencing in terms of outputs. In other words, any other industry experiencing such reductions in cash flow would naturally adjust its production rates. For example, a fifteen percent reduction in the revenue stream of a manufacturer who produces light bulbs might be met by a fifteen percent cut in output or product. Not public schools. We are expected to produce the exact same results with many fewer dollars to accomplish this mission.
If you know of Joel Barker’s work with “paradigms” over the past twenty years set your sites on public schools. According to Joel, when the old rules don’t apply that represent the stable or accepted order of things you can count on one thing for certain: new rules take over. Public education is poised for such a paradigm shift that may dramatically alter the way we deliver educational services to youth. In fact, government officials may be counting on this as the frenzy to “privatize” educational delivery models as Charter Schools, Virtual Schools, School Choice programs, and even Home Schools gain increased credibility.
Leave no doubt about it. Public schools will have to embrace accelerated changes in the way we deliver educational services to youth or someone else will step in and do it for us. Oh, and we will have to do this with far less funding. The challenge is daunting given the multitude of unfunded (if not underfunded) federal and state mandates that account for huge parts of school budgets. Union contracts will have to be revisited in states that allow for collective bargaining practices. The existing regulations in place for the thorough and efficient operations of public schools will not make it easy to meet these challenges ahead.
Here’s where innovation fits into the big picture. Schools are embracing changes that were unimaginable just a few years ago but are now up for serious consideration given the pressures of the budget reductions. Recent news accounts in New Jersey point to new programs or initiatives here in the metropolitan area as the school year begins. For example, Toms River schools are incorporating cell phones into the curriculum for students to conduct research, write reports, or download books. In lieu of foreign language teachers some are schools are counting on DVD’s to deliver basic instruction in Spanish at the elementary school level.
Virtual learning classes are becoming a more widely acceptable way for students to earn advanced credits at schools that have eliminated or reduced advanced placement programs. In Mount Olive Township, parents of school-aged children are suddenly being asked to pay for transportation if they live within a two-mile zone of their schools known as subscription bussing. In Sparta, parents of student athletes are being charged a pay-to-play participation fee.
Professional development for teachers appears to be rapidly changing as more and richer content is made available to them via online internet sites. One example is Hopatcong Borough which uses the School Improvement Network’s professional development software to deliver quality enrichment experiences via the internet. Over twenty percent of all advanced degrees for educators nationwide are now earned through virtual colleges such as The University of Phoenix, AspenUniversity, or Walden University (to name just a few).
In a period of accelerated change either public schools will join with others to create innovative opportunities for educational services or step aside as other institutions take over. These are the challenges we must contemplate as the shrinking economy will not allow for additional funding for our public schools. What was once valued as an ideal: low pupil to teacher ratios, is being replaced with much larger than sought after class sizes preK-12. The teacher of the future may be valued for his/her ability to teach students in much larger numbers than the teacher of today. Is this a change that represents an educational improvement? Possibly not, but a function of the new economic realities we must confront.
The future for pubic education may look entirely different than we imagine today. These are the times and challenges we face and like it or not we must be accepting of them. The educational leader of tomorrow will have to first usher in a period of transition and uncertainty as public schools that were once the bedrock of American society for the past hundred years reshape themselves for the profoundly different future ahead.
Think about this: No one is presently talking about reduced expectations for public education in spite of these recent record cuts to personnel and programs. In fact, the opposite is true-during a time of drastic cuts in educational resources the expectations for teaching our youth are actually elevated. Another key point: There are very few correlations to the dramatic budget cuts we are experiencing in terms of outputs. In other words, any other industry experiencing such reductions in cash flow would naturally adjust its production rates. For example, a fifteen percent reduction in the revenue stream of a manufacturer who produces light bulbs might be met by a fifteen percent cut in output or product. Not public schools. We are expected to produce the exact same results with many fewer dollars to accomplish this mission.
If you know of Joel Barker’s work with “paradigms” over the past twenty years set your sites on public schools. According to Joel, when the old rules don’t apply that represent the stable or accepted order of things you can count on one thing for certain: new rules take over. Public education is poised for such a paradigm shift that may dramatically alter the way we deliver educational services to youth. In fact, government officials may be counting on this as the frenzy to “privatize” educational delivery models as Charter Schools, Virtual Schools, School Choice programs, and even Home Schools gain increased credibility.
Leave no doubt about it. Public schools will have to embrace accelerated changes in the way we deliver educational services to youth or someone else will step in and do it for us. Oh, and we will have to do this with far less funding. The challenge is daunting given the multitude of unfunded (if not underfunded) federal and state mandates that account for huge parts of school budgets. Union contracts will have to be revisited in states that allow for collective bargaining practices. The existing regulations in place for the thorough and efficient operations of public schools will not make it easy to meet these challenges ahead.
Here’s where innovation fits into the big picture. Schools are embracing changes that were unimaginable just a few years ago but are now up for serious consideration given the pressures of the budget reductions. Recent news accounts in New Jersey point to new programs or initiatives here in the metropolitan area as the school year begins. For example, Toms River schools are incorporating cell phones into the curriculum for students to conduct research, write reports, or download books. In lieu of foreign language teachers some are schools are counting on DVD’s to deliver basic instruction in Spanish at the elementary school level.
Virtual learning classes are becoming a more widely acceptable way for students to earn advanced credits at schools that have eliminated or reduced advanced placement programs. In Mount Olive Township, parents of school-aged children are suddenly being asked to pay for transportation if they live within a two-mile zone of their schools known as subscription bussing. In Sparta, parents of student athletes are being charged a pay-to-play participation fee.
Professional development for teachers appears to be rapidly changing as more and richer content is made available to them via online internet sites. One example is Hopatcong Borough which uses the School Improvement Network’s professional development software to deliver quality enrichment experiences via the internet. Over twenty percent of all advanced degrees for educators nationwide are now earned through virtual colleges such as The University of Phoenix, AspenUniversity, or Walden University (to name just a few).
In a period of accelerated change either public schools will join with others to create innovative opportunities for educational services or step aside as other institutions take over. These are the challenges we must contemplate as the shrinking economy will not allow for additional funding for our public schools. What was once valued as an ideal: low pupil to teacher ratios, is being replaced with much larger than sought after class sizes preK-12. The teacher of the future may be valued for his/her ability to teach students in much larger numbers than the teacher of today. Is this a change that represents an educational improvement? Possibly not, but a function of the new economic realities we must confront.
The future for pubic education may look entirely different than we imagine today. These are the times and challenges we face and like it or not we must be accepting of them. The educational leader of tomorrow will have to first usher in a period of transition and uncertainty as public schools that were once the bedrock of American society for the past hundred years reshape themselves for the profoundly different future ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)