Teacher World

The Department of Education released the names of the ten winning applicants in the Phase 2: Race to the Top competition in their August 24th release. They include the following: the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Rhode Island.

Even though these applicants had the highest scores, apparently other states were not far behind. The number of winning applicants was determined by the quality of their applications and the available funds. According to the release, “The 10 winning applicants have adopted rigorous common college- and career-ready standards in reading and math, created pipelines and incentives to put the most effective teachers in high-need schools, and all have alternative pathways to teacher and principal certification.” Hmm…sounds a little scary to me. I’m not sure what pipelines are, but I have a feel for what incentives might be used. Does merit pay ring a bell? Also, if you check out the release from the Department of Education, you will get a feel for the intended budget for each state, as well as the District of Columbia. We’re talking a lot of money here, gang!

 If you are from any of the above winning areas, it would probably behoove you (as it would me since I am a teacher in Ohio) to read your state’s application. Let’s face it; even if your school is not a participating LEA, the writing is on the wall that your whole state will eventually be adopting the same reforms. So, take the time to read through a summary of your state’s application at the very least, and get a preview of what lies ahead. Pre-warned is prepared!

Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog Department of Education, Educational Reform, Race to the Top Phase 2

On June 30th, and again on July 7th, press releases from the Department of Education itemized states which would be receiving funds through grants, the 2009 budget, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. I confess to being awestruck at the amount of money being earmarked to states to protect teachers’ jobs, to turnaround low-performing schools, and to comply with the guidelines of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The further I got into the two press releases, the more questions I had. My hope is that someone from the Department of Education might read this blog and be able to answer these questions which I am respectfully putting out there:

* When our economy is so crippled and money is so tight, where is all of this money coming from, or are we all just going to be paying it back in taxes for years to come?
* Is this money earmarked for specific purposes, and are those purposes public knowledge?
* How can citizens attain this information as it pertains to their state?
* In what ways are states being made accountable for how the money they receive is being utilized?
* Is money being allocated equally to all school districts within each state or are funds mainly being funneled to low-achieving schools?
* Many of the states listed already received money from ARRA. Why are they receiving more money, and how can interested citizens be informed as to what was achieved from the first round of funds their states received?

Again, I am asking these questions as a concerned citizen as well as an involved educator. When we are talking about this much money, I think we would all agree that a high level of accountability and transparency are critical to ensure a successful result.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, Department of Education, teachers' jobs, turnaround schools

Have you heard that Pennsylvania is receiving $141 million to turn around its persistently lowest achieving schools? The announcement was made on June 9, by Arnie Duncan. According to the Department of Education, this money is part of the $3.5 billion made available to schools this spring as part of the 2009 budget and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. According to Duncan, “When a school continues to perform in the bottom five percent of the state and isn’t showing signs of growth or has graduation rates below 60 percent, something dramatic needs to be done. Turning around our worst performing schools is difficult for everyone but it is critical that we show the courage to do the right thing by kids.”

So, what does this mean for states like Pennsylvania who qualify for this money? Well, they have to follow one of these models in order to radically improve the educational systems in their states:

* TURNAROUND MODEL: Replace the principal, screen existing school staff, and rehire no more than half the teachers; adopt a new governance structure; and improve the school through curriculum reform, professional development, extending learning time, and other strategies.
* RESTART MODEL: Convert a school or close it and re-open it as a charter school or under an education management organization.
* SCHOOL CLOSURE: Close the school and send the students to higher-achieving schools in the district.
* TRANSFORMATION MODEL: Replace the principal and improve the school through comprehensive curriculum reform, professional development, extending learning time, and other strategies.

All of these, to varying degrees, are extremely radical steps which will ultimately be considered as threatening to the individuals involved in the affected schools. There are drawbacks to each, but let’s try to break it down. My first concern with the broad assumption that a school has to be turned around is precisely this: Is the school the problem, or is it the environment or the social decay in which the school is located that is the real culprit here? I continue to state, without equivocation, that until the environment these children live in changes, and it is not only acceptable but safe to go to school and get an education, no amount of intervention within the schools will be completely successful in turning these schools around. Having stated this obvious fact, for the rest of this blog, my purpose is to look a little deeper into these four methods to discern the pros and cons of each.

Clearly, the assumption of all of these approaches is that the principal has contributed through negligence or mismanagement to help create an environment which is not conducive to learning. In my opinion, principals should only be removed if careful examination of their record were to reveal inadequacies and failures. Otherwise, keep the administrator and work from there. And I have a real problem with the implied assumption with the Turnaround Method that the problem is the majority of the teaching staff. Why else is there a restriction that, at the most, only 50% of the teachers should stay on staff?

The School Closure method seems very unfair for so many reasons that it is hard to zero in on just one. First, it implies that everyone in that school was ineffective in the performance of their job. I find that impossible to fathom, let alone believe. And I can’t even imagine the navigational nightmare involved in redistributing all of these poor school-less children to other schools, not to mention what such an increase in student numbers would do to the schools which would have to accommodate the new arrivals. It just sounds like a total nightmare to me.

I refuse to address the Restart Model, so that leaves the Transformation Model. Of all of the above, I feel that this is the method that seems to be the fairest, although I wouldn’t feel that way if I was the principal. Let’s face it, is there any school anywhere that wouldn’t benefit from some transformation? What school would not turnaround with “comprehensive curriculum reform, professional development, and other strategies”?  (Notice that I took out the “extended learning time” because I have said in past blogs, and continue to maintain, that I think a longer school day is counterproductive. If any additional time is going to be tacked onto learning time, let it be adding on days to the school calendar not hours to each day.)

True turnaround of a school, in my humble opinion, can and should be accomplished with the original staff working together to bring about necessary change. Give teachers who have not been effective the opportunity to improve and grow. Then if they continue to be ineffective, let them go. Imagine the pride and solidarity that a successful transformation would create! These schools would serve as models to other schools that change is possible when there is money to support it and people working together to make it happen.

So, let the transformations begin! And good luck to all of you in Pennsylvania.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, Arnie Duncan, Department of Education, Educational Reform, turnaround schools

Let’s talk about other reasons why so many school systems in Ohio chose not to be a part of Race to the Top. I already stated in my last blog that it was poorly publicized. But I will discuss three other reasons why I believe so many school districts in Ohio turned down this opportunity.

First, something I touched on a little in my previous blog, there were rumors circulating that this new plan would probably change the way teachers are currently compensated, based on years served and graduate classes and degrees achieved, and replace this with merit pay. This is a troublesome issue for teachers for a variety of reasons, which I have addressed in previous blogs. But let me lay out a few concerns that I have with merit pay. First, I do not feel that it is appropriate or fair to link merit pay to test scores as there are so many factors, over which teachers have no control, that influence student achievement on state tests. Home issues and the degree of parental involvement are two major factors in student performance. Second, I feel that merit pay creates competition between teachers when what we should be striving for is collaboration. If Joe Teacher has a system that is highly effective, and he knows he will be paid more bucks for his effectiveness, is he likely to share his techniques if that might mean sharing the bucks as well? Some certainly would, but I am afraid many would not. I can see using merit pay to reward schools which have consistently been effective in showing AYP in all areas of their student population.  That makes sense because it inherently builds a network of staff working in unison to be as productive as possible across the board. That is what is best for students. But I do not believe merit pay for individual teachers will create better schools.

Another item which I believe made it virtually impossible for many school systems to participate in RttT, including my own, was the requirement that all LEAs who joined in had to agree to match the funds that they would receive from the government. In our current economy, how likely is that? At a time when so many schools are operating in the red, this seems like an impossible stipulation, and I am sure it kept many school districts like ours from participating.

Finally, I believe some school systems bowed out when they learned that Ohio is proposing to allocate more than $35 million to hire 50 new Ohio Department of Education staffers, including some with annual salaries in excess of $100,000 per year. Again, at a time when districts throughout Ohio are being forced to make drastic cuts just to stay solvent, this is almost a slap in the face. Let’s put that money where it belongs and where it can do the most good. It just seems mismanaged to me, but what do I know?

Educational Reform, Funding Education, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests Add new tag, Department of Education, LEAs, merit pay, Race to the Top, school reform

Over the next few weeks, I will be blogging about Race to the Top, the national contest to find creative ways to improve education in the United States. First, let me give you a brief summary of the goals of Race to the Top, or RttT, as it is called.

It all started last February with the signing of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 by President Obama. The purpose of this legislation is to “stimulate the economy, support job creation, and invest in critical sectors, including education. The ARRA lays the foundation for education reform by supporting investments in innovative strategies that are most likely to lead to improved results for students, long-term gains in school and school system capacity, and increased productivity and effectiveness”. This act is providing $4.35 billion in grant money to the RttT fund, to “encourage and reward states that are creating the conditions for education innovation and reform; achieving significant improvement in student outcomes, including making substantial gains in student achievement, closing achievement gaps, improving high school graduation rates, and ensuring student preparation for success in college and careers; and implementing ambitious plans in four core education reform areas:
 
Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;

Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;

Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and

Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.”

The states chosen as finalists in this national competition are Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee. Winners will be chosen in April, and the school systems that were part of their state’s application process will be the models for implementing their detailed plan of recovery for their state.

Wow! Quite a venture with some awesome potential! If you haven’t read anything else about it, follow my link above, and do some other reading about it because, in my next blogs, I will be discussing my state’s plan and what I think of the process and the proposals. Interesting reading! Talk to you again after you’ve done your homework! Enjoy!

Educational Reform, Funding Education, High Caliber Schools, Teacher-World's Blog American Recovery and Reinvestmenat Act, education reform, President Obama, Race to the Top, state competition

Our school system, like so many others in this troubled economy, is facing massive cuts if we are unable to pass our next levy, and if our levy passes by some miracle, we are so far in the red, that cuts will need to be made regardless. If your schools are facing similar financial concerns, you know the fear that such uncertainty brings.

In our school system, rumors are running rampant, and teachers with little seniority and no tenure are sweating bullets. This makes for an uneasy feeling as we all wait impatiently to discover the fate of our schools, teachers, paraprofessionals, and other staff members.

We have faced these issues in the past. Earlier in my teaching career I spent three summers on the RIF list myself, so I know the fear and worry that such times create. These fearful times will either bring out the best or the worst in us. When we work together to try to save as many jobs as possible, we show our compassion and concern for each other. Unfortunately, the opposite is usually seen, as self-preservation takes over, and everyone begins to look out for themselves. And some people just love to spread the rumors that are so very destructive and so often completely fabricated. The turmoil that results creates negativity and suspicion, two emotions that are counterproductive and harmful for a school system and the education of our children.

So, I appeal to my school system and so many schools like ours to be cautious. Know your rights and your contract, and wait patiently for the facts to be determined. Don’t get roped into the rumors, and don’t help spread them. Be kind and fair, especially to those who face uncertainty. When the dust settles, we need to be able to work together in a co-operative and cohesive fashion for the sake of our students. So let’s practice now until we get it right!

Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog cutbacks, RIF lists, school budgets, school levies, troubled economy

While visiting other blogging sites, I spent some time on http://assortedstuff.com. The author of this blog talked about a gathering of educators to discuss “why schools have remained isolated islands of status quo over the past twenty years, while the rest of the world has been fundamentally altered by computers, networks, and communications tools”. He will be a speaker at this conference where he will talk about his “growing frustration with American education and the two-faced embrace of techie tools while at the same time rejecting the transformative possibilities they offer.” He continues to contend the following:

“Schools in the US have spent billions of dollars in just the past decade to buy laptops and software, install networks, connect classrooms to internet, and train teachers. However, walk down the halls of your average American school, especially high schools, and you’re likely to see a teacher-directed, lecture-demo formatted lesson, with little or no technology use by either teacher or students. Over the past few years, the most visible example of technology use in the classrooms of our overly-large school district has been interactive whiteboards, devices which chain teaching to standards of the previous century. Talk all you want about ‘student engagement’ and ‘interactivity’, these boards are little more than expensive electronic extensions of blackboards and chalk, controlled by the teacher, and locking the learning focus on them, not the students.”

First, I use a smart board daily in my classroom, and I do allow it to direct my instruction by either introducing or reinforcing subject matter which is to be covered in an interactive way. And with more professional development, I am sure I could utilize it even more effectively. But therein lays the problem with incorporating technology into the classroom to its full extent. How many schools in this crippled economy have the financial resources to purchase the technology needed and provide the professional training required to truly bring classrooms into the 21st century? Our school still doesn’t even have smart boards in each classroom, and those we do have are hooked up to antiquated computers which are living on borrowed time. Our district has been unable to pass a levy, which is true of many districts in this troubled economy, so we are looking at significant cuts in order to survive. We have already been told that the budget for replacing computers is non-existent, as is money for professional development. Now that is about as bare-bones as it gets.

How can we provide 21st century classrooms without the significant amount of money it requires to do so? It is expensive to purchase the technology, and even more expensive to train teachers to use it adequately. So often, software is purchased, but teachers are not thoroughly trained in how to use it. And if they aren’t comfortable with it, they will not use it. It is that simple. And the cost to purchase software licenses is often a deterrent for school systems that are pinching pennies.

So here is the bottom line. You cannot expect significant changes in the use of technology, which I totally agree is necessary to better prepare our students for the future, without the resources that it takes to implement them successfully. Where is that money coming from? Because, sure as shooting, it isn’t coming from our overwhelmed school systems or already-taxed tax payers.

.

Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog economy, school levies, technology

I hope everyone had a wonderful and restful Christmas. And I hope you got everything you wished for and more. But, we all know that there are some things that Santa can’t bring us under the Christmas tree or in a beautiful stocking. These are the things we have on our teaching wish list. Oh, you know you have one, too. I thought I would share my other wish list with you, and hopefully, you will feel compelled to share some of yours with us. So, with a little drum roll in the background, here is my…

Teacher Christmas Wish List

* A classroom of children who live to learn and learn to better live
* 100% attendance from now until we have completed our state achievement tests
* Parents who place their children’s education and success in school a top priority in their homes
* Parents who make their children accountable rather than making excuses for them
* A school made up of teachers whose desire to excel is so strong that collaboration is the rule not the exception
* 100% proficiency from all students on every state achievement test
* A SPED version of state achievement tests which adequately measures their yearly progress as opposed to making them feel, yet again, that they can never be successful in a “regular ed” world
* A better way to support schools financially than levies which are doomed to fail in our strained economy
* A school system that is monetarily sound and able not only to maintain its current level of instruction, but has the additional revenue to support the constant educational reforms thrust upon it
* Report cards that measure performance not the potential to pass state achievement tests
* A school filled with teachers who can get back to loving teaching instead of trying to learn to love testing
* A school that takes a firm stand against bullying and teasing and provides students with the knowledge, desire, and tools to combat this destructive habit
* Students who leave our classroom better prepared academically, socially, and emotionally than they were when they came to us in the fall

Hey, there’s nothing wrong with wishing! What are you wishing for in this New Year? We would love to hear your wish list, too! In the meantime, I wish you all a great vacation. Enjoy the time with your family and friends, and get energized for the “joys” that lie ahead. Merry Christmas!

Bullying, Educational Reform, Funding Education, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests Add new tag, Bullying, Christmas, collaboration, school funding, state achievement tests

After spending quite some time reading a variety of articles both for and against the issue of merit pay for teachers, I feel, as all teachers should, the need to weigh-in on this important issue. Especially as President Barack Obama plugged teacher bonuses based on student achievement in the first education policy speech of his presidency.

We all know that in education, as in any profession, there are employees who produce average work with average to little success, and are unmotivated to do much more. A common fallacy in the teaching profession is that it is predominately the veteran teachers who fit this scenario as they have become burned out and are simply waiting to retire. While I do not deny that I have seen my fair share of this condition, I must also adamantly state that this attitude has no age requirement. I have seen the same attitude in teachers fresh out of college, and some who have a few years under their belt. In teaching, as in any profession, our labor force ranges from the dedicated, hard-working, and tireless to the “I’ll-do-the-bare-minimum”, and various stages in between. The difference between the business and education world is that our teachers’ unions, which protect us in a multitude of important ways making our work places fairer and safer places to work, also do our profession the disservice of fighting to protect teachers, both young and old, who legitimately deserve to be let go. In the business world, job retention is directly related to job performance. If our unions did not work so diligently to protect teachers whose performance necessitated their being weeded out, does it not stand to reason that we would be left with a higher caliber of teachers who, by that very definition, are all deserving of merit pay?

I propose that unions should establish strict and multi-layered guidelines for teacher dismissal and should ensure that these guidelines are followed to the letter. But when thorough documentation proves a teacher’s unwillingness or inability to take the necessary steps to improve their teaching skills after a methodical, multifaceted evaluation process established by the union, it becomes counterproductive and hurts a school system when its union fights for that teacher. Allowing the administration to release these teachers from their contract would ultimately create a higher caliber school system which encourages respect from the community and makes it far more likely for these community members to support levies that pay all teachers in these schools the salary they deserve.

Changes in Teaching, Funding Education, High Caliber Schools, Teacher Education, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog job performance, job retention, merit pay, Obama's education policy, school levies, teacher evaluation, teacher salary, Teacher's Unions, veteran teachers

The costs of a 4 year college degree can be a staggering realization for high school graduates wishing to enter the teaching profession. Earning $40,000 a year sounds like a great number, but not necessarily when you have $60,000 to $80,000 of debt hanging over your head after earning your bachelor’s degree and teaching certification.

However, what many young high school graduates, and individuals who have yet to enter college are learning, is that cheaper options are popping up all over. Community colleges have offered associate degree programs that are significantly less expensive than the typical 4-year program. You can earn your associate’s degree, knock off two years of exhorbitant tuition, and be well on  your way toward your bachelor’s degree.

In addition, there are a few states where community colleges are starting to offer baccalaureate degree programs as well. These programs typically demand similar price per credit tuition as associate degree programs while offering degrees in teaching, nursing, health administration, and more.

“Miami Dade College (a community college) offers bachelor’s degrees in teaching and nursing and public safety management, and will soon add engineering technology, film production and others.”
- New York Times, May 2nd, 2009

Of course four-year colleges are strongly against community colleges adoption of baccalaureate options. There are various reasons for their disagreement with this advancement in community colleges such as that community colleges will not provide quality education. However, most will be able to see through this argument as an attempt to hang on to a monopoly held by over-priced universities.

So, as a person with a high school education looking to enter the field of education, cheaper options for education are on the rise and will most likely start bringing down tuition costs across the board as enrollment numbers start dwindling at the higher priced universities.

The next step for those looking at their teaching degree options is to contact as many schools as possible, make a spreadsheet of costs, pluses and minuses for each university (online or campus), and set yourself up to make the best choice both economically and for your lifestyle. Even as the economic picture looks bleak across the country, rest assured that in tough times like these you will begin seeing some of the greatest deals of your lifetime, even in education!

Funding Education, Teacher Education