Tag Archives: partnerships

Business Resources for a College- and Career-Ready America

Posted on by

Achieve has released new resources directed toward the business community, to inform and rally more advocates for education reform. The Business Resources for a College- and Career-Ready America include modular resources for business leaders to use as they engage their internal and external networks of colleagues, peers, employees, and employers around the college- and career-ready agenda.

The business community has a long history of supporting efforts to improve public education in America. Whether through public-private partnerships, direct engagement, or financial support, companies and organizations historically have made strategic investments in education because they know that the success of our nation’s economy in the global marketplace depends on a quality workforce.

The resources specifically include:

  • Case-making facts and data that outline the urgency for business engagement around education reform
  • Critical and relevant background on college- and career-ready reforms, including the Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards, and the U.S. education system
  • Actionable strategies for engaging with employees, peers, CEOs and corporate executives, business associations, elected officials and the media in support of education reform

Over time, Achieve will add to these resources, with additional cards, PPT slides, templates and data for developing organization-specific fact sheets and messages, and examples from the field of how business leaders are currently supporting the college- and career-ready agenda.

To access these resources, please visit http://achieve.org/business

Share

Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas

Posted on by

The Annenberg Institute for School Reform and the Schott Foundation for Public Education recently released a new report, Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to Do About Them.  The report, which is more of a guide for improving teaching effectiveness, is based on the plethora of evidence that links teaching quality and student achievement.  Though clearly emphasizing that teaching quality is the single largest in-school influence on student learning, the guide also stresses that there are internal and external factors that have tremendous influence on teaching quality.

At the beginning of the report, two important caveats are put into place:  First, as discussed above, is that teaching quality is the most important variable in student performance.  Second, though there is not a common definition of what effective teaching looks like and how to measure it, “there is enough common ground and common knowledge right now to make better policies and implement more effective practices.”

Each of the six strategies is given their own chapter, and dealt with in a problem-solution manner, a short case study of a success story, and accompanied by “What Can I Do?” boxes that help educators know what questions to ask, both of themselves and policymakers, and what to advocate for.  The strategies are:

1. “Follow Your Bliss: Career Pathways for Teachers”

2. “Evaluation Nation: Multiple Ways of Measuring Performance”

3. “Supports for Teachers, Not Just Rewards and Sanctions: Why Firing Teachers Won’t Lead to Large-Scale Improvement”

4. “Environmentally Friendly: Why School Culture and Working Conditions Matter”

5. “No Teacher is an Island: The Importance of In-School Partnerships and Teacher Collaboration”

6. “No School is an Island: Partnerships with Parents and Community”

In the end, the authors stress their definition of the effective teacher: “one who helps students learn more and spreads her or his own expertise to colleagues.”  They also urge all stakeholders in public education to keep the conversation about teaching quality “on the right track” by using the strategies in the guide as a template for what needs to be addressed.

To read the guide, please visit http://annenberginstitute.org/VUE/wp-content/pdf/StraightTalk.pdf

Share

Shut Up and Teach?

Posted on by

In a recent article for The Hechinger Report, classroom teacher Eric Shieh reflects on his experiences working with his union to fight budget cuts in his district.  As a music teacher in St. Louis, he was appalled by the district’s decision in 2007 to cut student time in the arts by 64% at the middle school level, in the hopes that more “academic” time would improve test scores.He immediately emailed fellow arts teachers across the district, but was answered with apathy—“there is nothing you can do; this has been happening for the past 20 years.”  Dissatisfied, Shieh began circulating petitions, which dead-ended even after collecting hundreds of signatures.  Frustrated, he called his union.

The union acted quickly, promising to mobilize teachers and parents against the cuts.  In the end, though the union’s role in the conflict was “minimal,” Even so, its action did empower Shieh by “rejecting the powerlessness that my colleagues had articulated, and affirmed my professional convictions about the centrality of the arts in public education.”  It also helped motivate previously downtrodden teachers to join with Shieh to fight the cuts, and, supported by a large group of vocal parents, convinced the administration in the district to reverse their decision.

Shieh is now teaching in New York City, but he still feels frustration with his colleagues across the profession and their perceptions of their own powerlessness.  “Teachers across the nation have given up advocating for their students not because they don’t wish to, but because it seems an impossibility…Consider this past year.  By all accounts, it should have been one of teacher outrage…cuts targeted students in poverty and students with special needs…they targeted arts and physical education programs, and they severely disrupted school processes as one seismic change after another was proposed…What interests me, too, is how the cuts to schools came and went so quietly while other education issues raged in the public eye.”

Shieh believes that the reason these cuts went largely unnoticed by the population at large is because they were “strategically, perversely” made to the populations “least likely to detect and fight against them.”  Most teachers, Shieh believes, have simply learned to “shut up and teach.”  Why is this?  Shieh can only guess—perhaps it is the cycle of helplessness, perhaps teachers took what happened in Wisconsin to heart, or perhaps they feel the just can’t match “billionaire philanthropists who’ve been plowing policy changes that suit their business models through Congress for nearly a decade.”

How does Shieh suggest teachers begin to advocate for themselves and their students?  First, he believes unions need to widen their discourse beyond HR issues and take on issues like teacher evaluation, curriculum development, and school equality.  Second, leaders of teacher associations, particularly small, local associations, have to be able to better organize the teacher voice.  They need to “build spaces for member action, and focus member discourse on innovative practices and policy.

Finally, teachers have to find a way to engage with education policy.  This includes finding and creating spaces within professional associations to discuss issues that matter to teachers.

To read Shieh’s full commentary, please visit http://tinyurl.com/8xuh4hx

Share

Seizing the Opportunity

Posted on by

A new report from Education First and Policy Innovators in Education (PIE) details how state advocacy groups are working with state policymakers to advance education reforms.  To compile the report, PIE and Education First worked closely with Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Texas to get greater insight into how advocacy groups and policymakers are trying to collaborate.

These states are at all levels of reform, and the study found that even in states “primed for reform,” there have been stumbling blocks and missed opportunities.  However, several practices were identified for advocacy groups to adopt in order to be successful at navigating the confusing, chaotic, and complex policy environment:

1. Begin by building public will to solve some problem or concern.

2. Next, efforts must shift towards forging agreement among different stakeholders about potential solutions.

3. Then, proposed solutions must then be introduced as law, policy or regulation.

4. The legislation should create broad directives as well as delegate implementation details to the purview of state boards and education agencies.  Strong reforms can easily be watered down in the implementation phase, which reduces the reform efforts to naught.

5. Once policies and implementation goes into effect, great advocates must continue their work by sustaining and defending the policies they’ve championed.  They can manage expectations, highlight successes, and troubleshoot glitches to keep reforms on track, as well as continue to support policymakers and agency leaders against resistance to change.

Furthermore, great advocates are also adept at creating urgency for action, building and maintaining strong relationships with policy champions and leaders, negotiating, recruiting broad coalitions, agitating to keep the pressure on, and setting the stage for future successes.  Each of these methods is discussed in detail in the report.  Overall, the researchers found that education advocacy organizations are adept at both contributing to and capitalizing on favorable political conditions “by sticking to common, winning strategies.”

To read the full report, please visit http://www.pie-network.org/seizing-the-opportunity

Share

Lightening the Load: How Community Schools Can Support Effective Teaching

Posted on by

 

A new paper from the Center for American Progress takes a look at the increasingly talked about “wraparound services” for children in low-income communities, and the connections to teacher efficiency.  Wraparound services generally refer to non-classroom services such as health care, family involvement programs, and food assistance.  There is research on the potential benefits such services provide for students, but how teacher efficacy relates to these services has yet to be determined.

The authors of the paper interviewed faculty and staff from 14 schools around the country that integrate wraparound services, called “community schools” by education professionals.  From these conversations, the authors identified four main trends:

1. Providing wraparound services at school helped reduce the health-related issues that would otherwise cost students instructional time.

2. These services help students and families stay in the community by meeting basic needs, and the resulting decrease in mobility benefits teachers by creating classroom stability.

3. Family programs, such as ESL classes, encourages parents to communicate more with teachers and empowers them to help their children with homework and generally support the work the teacher does in the classroom.

4. Enlisting the help of community partners and services providers, such as onsite health professionals, can free teachers to concentrate on instruction with fewer worries about nonacademic student needs—thus reducing their stress and burnout tendencies.

Taking these trends together, the researchers make several recommendations to schools, districts and states to help them maximize the benefits of wraparound services for teachers:

A. Creatively combine multiple funding streams and align school services with any existing commitments to provide wraparound services.

B. Incorporate teacher input when aligning instructional strategies with wraparound student services.

C. Include strategies for data collection and analysis whenever possible.

D. Explore the impact of wraparound services on teacher effectiveness to see whether there is an optimal mix of service to provide at high-poverty schools, and whether the presence of such services makes these schools more attractive to teacher candidates.

To read the full report, please visit http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/01/chang_wraparound.html

Share

Group Aims to Reverse Rural Teacher Turnover Rate

Posted on by

The annual turnover rate in rural Alaskan schools can be as high as 35%, compared with urban rates as low as 5%.  A new program in rural Alaska seeks to halt this trend through a new program that pairs rural schools with big-city counterparts.  Funded by a federal grant of nearly $2 million to launch cultural immersion camps for incoming teachers, the three-year program is an offshoot of the Rose Urban Rural Exchange program (RUREP).

The camps are intended to introduce urban educators to rural and Native Alaskan life and to prepare teachers to enter communities that may have a historical distrust of outsiders.  Many Native Alaskan villages have collective memories of boarding schools that sought to dismantle indigenous cultures.  Teachers will also be paired with a master-teacher to apply what they have learned into classroom activities and lesson plans.

Besides geographic isolation, other factors contributing to the high turnover rate is the soaring cost of living and the lower standardized test scores often found in rural areas.  This makes the pressure on teachers to improve student performance even more pronounced, and with students’ economic and cultural factors affecting attendance, the stress can simply be too much.

The cultural immersion program may have a positive impact on teacher attrition.  “It’ll introduce new teachers to cultures and values, getting folks to understand that different values aren’t wrong,” says Mike Dunleavy, director of Alaska Teacher Placement.  “Once they understand, they can relate to the folks they’re trying to teach.”

The first camps will be held next summer for 30 teachers.  As of now, organizers are unsure of where the camps will be held, but say that there will be at least one camp in each of the two pilot districts.  Though funding is only guaranteed for the next three years, it is hoped that the camps could become a permanent fixture in Alaska’s teacher preparation/professional development offerings.

To read the full story, please visit http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/12/01/474612klaskaretainingteachers_ap.html?tkn=MYUFnAQ9aKvo85P81H2kMX%2FG5HDkOztIjWbr&cmp=ENL-TU-NEWS2

Share

Is Teaching a Team Sport?

Posted on by

John Merrow recently blogged about a comment made by the Center for Teaching Quality’s Barnett Berry:  “Teaching is a team sport,” he told Merrow.  Merrow was left wondering—is this true?  Baseball is a team sport, with everyone needing to work together for success, while at the same time allowing for individual statistics and honors.  But does teaching fit that definition?  He finds six elements that prevent a “yes” to that question.

First, “the ‘egg crate’ architecture” of schools keeps each classroom separated from others.  Also, school schedules do not support team play—most teachers spend their entire day inside their own classroom and have little opportunity to work together.  Third, the very language used in schools, such as “team teaching,” imply that only teachers who share a classroom are a team—everyone else is autonomous.  Teacher evaluations are also done on an individual basis, with few points given for if/how the teacher contributes to overall school culture or success.

School governance is another area where there is no sense of team.  “Often it’s ‘labor versus management,’ with teachers punching a time clock twice a day.”  Teachers are not asked their opinions on school or colleague performance, they are not given discretion to make decisions that might affect others outside of their classroom—in short, they are not treated as trustworthy partners in the school mission.  Finally, Merrow argues that the “emerging pay structure flies in the face of the idea that teaching is a team sport.”

Merrow believes that most teachers want teaching to be a team sport, but that the current system doesn’t allow for it.  He proposes that teaching should be recognized as a team sport, “and education as a team activity.  The ‘team’ is the school, and everyone in the school is on the team, including secretarial staff and custodians.”  Furthermore, education can’t have a simple win/loss record due to its complexity: it should include academic measures, attendance and turnover rates of students and teachers, community involvement, and more.  Merit pay could then be divided up when the team achieves the agreed-upon goals.

To read the original post, please visit http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=5402

Share

Professional Learning Networks Take on a Grassroots Approach

Posted on by

In the new era where teachers have little time for face-to-face interaction with colleagues and district budget cuts limit professional development opportunities, educators are increasingly turning to online communities (or professional learning networks, PLNs) that allow them to share lesson plans, teaching strategies, and student work, as well as collaborate across grade levels and departments.  Many teachers and administrators feel that PLNs “reduce isolation, promote autonomy, and provide inspiration” through access to teachers across the world.

The past four years have seen the launch of thousands of personalized education sites that allow real-time interaction and extended professional development through videos, blogs, podcasts, webinars, etc.  Edmodo is the fastest growing of these networks, projected to have 4 million users worldwide by the end of October.  This past August, more than 2,000 educators attended EdmodoCon, its first one-day global virtual conference; the average stay for each educator was 4 hours and 10 minutes.  This is an astounding accomplishment, as the organizers of the event had only expected about 200 attendees, and underlines the desire many teachers have for improving their practice through continual learning and engagement with the profession.

Some schools are starting their own PLNs to help pool resources, particularly as states prepare to implement the Common Core.  At the school level, administrators can use “back-end” information to see where teachers are clicking to help determine where the needs are and to provide appropriate resources.  In Denver, the public school system is creating a separate PLN group for new teachers and instructional superintendents with the idea that these networks will help newcomers plug in and contribute at the district level.

Despite their growth, however, PLNs still do not have recognition in many districts as legitimate professional development tools.  Districts would do well, however, to explore these resources that teachers are using and build on them to create networks of support and information that align with district priorities.

To read more, please visit http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/10/26/09edtech-network.h31.html

Core Education is pleased to offer services including the design and alignment of professional learning networks. For more information about our professional development services, see www.CoreEducationLLC.com/services.php

Share

Principals Hone Their “People Skills” with New Simulations

Posted on by

Syracuse University has launched a new simulation training program for school administrators.  The project uses live-action simulations that present more contemporary situations faced by administrators: non-traditional family structures, abusive home situations, substance-abuse issues, morally-charged issues such as sex education, depression, and confrontations with teachers who have more experience than the administrator.

The program is supported by a three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences, and has developed 15 principal and 13 teacher simulations.  The program will be rolling out a school leadership training curriculum based on them this fall.

Much of the existing research on professional-development simulations has focused on computer-based programs for teachers, but little emphasis has been given principals.  This live simulation program aims to bridge this gap and assist school leaders develop diplomatic skills and hone their judgment.  “Social interaction is something we aren’t trained on,” says Jody Manning, a veteran superintendent in New York state, “[Preservice programs] take care of the pedagogy, take care of classroom management, but they never teach how to deal with parents.”

Benjamin H. Dotger, lead researcher on the project, and his team interviewed 52 principals about regular issues in their daily practice, including their most difficult conversations with students, parents, and teachers.  The researchers then analyzed the interviews for common problems and themes, and developed the simulations around them.  The actors in the live simulation are trained over 20 hours, not just to play their role but to provide feedback on each principal’s performance.

The simulation scenarios range from a traditional screening interview with a teacher candidate; a conversation with the parents of a student who is seeking re-entry after a drug-related suspension, including one version in which the student’s father reeks of alcohol himself; a meeting in which the principal must act as referee between a first-year teacher and parents angry over her grading policy; and a meeting in which the principal learns that school staff may have inappropriately restrained a student with autism during a verbal misunderstanding.

A leadership student goes into each simulation with a minimum of information: sometimes the student’s file, but more often than not just a note from a secretary.  The participants face four simulations back-to-back to mirror a real meeting schedule an administrator may have.

It remains to be seen if the idea of live simulations will catch on in the administrator-preparation world.  The Syracuse program costs about $10,000 per year for more than 100 students; to put one person through four simulations it costs $150 to $200.

To read the full story and view a video of a simulation, please visit http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/08/15/01roleplay_ep.h31.html?tkn=UWVF%2F%2BIk3T0DMY8f0eaj2%2FLdOqotMwx05j2%2F&cmp=clp-edweek

Share

Reform through Sustained Union-Management Collaboration

Posted on by

Last week, the Center for American Progress published a paper discussing an alternate path to school system reform: collaboration of stakeholders through labor-management partnerships among teachers’ unions, school administrators, and school boards.

The authors base their recommendations on six examples of how teachers’ unions have been critical to improving public education systems in collaboration with administrators.  The six districts studied have been recognized by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) as having a “lengthy track record of innovation,” and were chosen for this study because they “appear to have institutionalized a long-term collaborative partnership between administration and the local teachers’ union…”

The researchers spent extensive time talking to teachers, administrators, union officials, board members, and superintendents; reviewed archival data such as contracts, memoranda of understanding, student performance data, and internal reports.  Based on their study, the researchers developed several conclusions and recommendations for local unions and districts who wish to engage in collaboration for school reform and improvement:

1. Education reform and improvement must been seen as a systems problem.

2. Shared decision-making must take place at both the district- and school-levels.

3. Successful union-management collaboration must focus on substantive areas affecting the quality of teaching or student achievement.

4. Peer-to-peer networks must be developed to facilitate ongoing professional development and support.

5. Districts must develop strong cultures of collaboration that inform approaches to planning, decision-making and hiring decisions.

6. Shared learning opportunities are critical to building and sustaining long-term collaboration.

7. Stability in leadership (union leaders, superintendents, or both) benefits school reform and improvement.

8. Collaborative systems require the full support of school boards.

9. Local unions should take advantage of the resources, assistance, support and training available at the national or state-level unions.

10. Community support is critical to institutionalizing collaboration.

To read the full report, visit http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/07/collaboration.html

Share