Thoughts on “Race to the Top”

I’ve been reading lately about the Obama Administration’s “Race to the Top” fund and have read a couple of blog posts about it. I thought I would post my response to a post on Seeking Shared Learning, as it sums up my thoughts on this new funding/mandate from the Secretary of Education. Feel free to comment.

- – -

“It will certainly be interesting to hear your perspective as more details of these guidelines become clearer. I have yet to read all 80+ pages of the guidelines, so I can’t say I know everything about what is being proposed.

Even so, my wonder at all of this – dating back to ESEA – is the constitutionality of this sort of move. In my eyes, the whole thing seems shady at best.

As the government has no constitutional standing to make educational mandates (that being left to the states in the 10th Amendment), it seems that the federal government has found its loophole, along with a way to wholly influence the education system through federal funding. While initially it was a series of grants, once schools were accustomed to the money (and it had been factored into state budgets), conditions were attached. States and schools had two choices – accept the conditions and continue receiving the funding they had come to depend on, or refuse the conditions and turn down a massive amount of money that would benefit your school/district/state. The funding issue became a lose/lose situation for many districts.

As we’re seeing, this process only continues to intensify, through NCLB and now RTTT. Again states are left with a choice – accept the conditions/mandates attached to the billions of dollars in funding, or turn down billions of dollars in federal funding because they believe in the kind of education they are giving students. It seems to me that this is a hazy issue, and if this had different players and wasn’t about funding, I think we would consider it a despicable move (give someone a product for free, then once they’re hooked on it, slowly raise the price on the product), but that’s just opinion.

The more practical question is what effect this will have on our district’s curriculum efforts. If we believe that thinking skills and habits of mind and our outcomes and indicators are what education should really be about, does the RTTT “fund” really help us reach that goal? Does putting more emphasis on test scores – particularly as a way of rewarding/punishing teachers and principals – really help us teach students these skills?

My gut answer is no. I expect teachers and administrators would act like most creatures do. We would either pursue the reward of higher compensation by focusing students almost exclusively on test results, or we would act in self-preservation and try to keep our jobs by focusing entirely on test scores. In either case, it is the things Tahoma espouses – thinking skills, habits of mind, etc. – that would be sacrificed in the exchange.

Of course, I’m just a small fry in a vast ocean of educational politics, and could be completely dramatizing the situation. Even so, I wonder if, from an administrative perspective, you see this (RTTT) in the same way, or if you are envisioning greater benefits from this set of guidelines than I currently foresee.”

Obama’s Inauguration Speech: Reflections and Implications for Education

I had the privilege of watching the inauguration this morning with my students. Our school was kind enough to extend our first period so we could finish listening to President Obama’s inauguration speech. First, a couple of thoughts on the process:

• Since we don’t receive any sort of cable signal, our building tried an interesting idea: stream the video to one computer and send that out over the school video connection. It was somewhat successful, except that the feed was jumpy due to the high volumes of traffic. We eventually resorted to some less tech-savvy methods: internet radio and actual radio. One staff member even quipped, “Anyone have a pair of rabbit ears for my TV?”
• It was interesting to see how the opportunity to watch this event was received by the students. A good number of them (maybe 75%) were simply entranced – they listened and hung on every word. Others could have cared less and felt it more important to discuss more pressing issues like what so-and-so was wearing.

As soon as the speech was finished, I searched for the full text of the speech. I wanted to look it over and see if it was usable as an example of good writing. Not surprisingly, I found a copy of the speech within seconds of it ending (isn’t the web an amazing thing?). I highlighted a couple of impressive lines and thought I’d reflect on the implication for education in the Obama administration.

• “The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
  In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. “
  • One of the lines from this speech that may be engraved on a statue some day. Again, a rephrasing of another writer (“life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”). I think this line reflects what we want to provide our students: a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
    One of the interesting debates we have with students at the secondary level is whether or not they should go to college. Of course, some students will not attend college. Unfortunately, many that don’t simply stop caring about school. I see my goal as a teacher to encourage those students to work hard to be successful in school, not so they can go to college, but so they can at least have the opportunity to do so if they choose. I believe that choice to do as one pleases captures the ideas President Obama (or his excellent speech-writer) had in mind – that is true liberty and true happiness.
• “For the world has changed, and we must change with it.“
  • How many times have we heard this in education, particularly as it relates to technology? In spite of the almost cliched status of this line, it still rings true. As Microsoft begins to roll out the Surface coffee table, our students will begin learning how to use a new technology. The skills they develop now – risk-taking, flexible thinking, problem-solving, and creativity – will determine how successful they are as the world around them changes. And we continue to test students’ ability to solve quadratic equations or identify possessive pronouns…
• “Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends – hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism – these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths.”
  • I think this idea has huge implications in education – the tools are ever-changing, but the ways in which we use those tools and the goals we strive for continue to be the same. Plato and Socrates advocated wisdom as the primary goal of education – something we have termed “critical thinking” and “habits of mind.” Helping students develop this kind of mentality has always been the primary goal of education. Now we have different tools and strategies to help students reach those goals.

It will be interesting to see how these thoughts evolve over the next four years. My only hope is that education will not take a back seat to the economic problems as I fear it will.

How to Win Over a Dumbed-Down America

A recent article on one of my favorite websites, Factcheck.org  describes a post-election poll that is sure to incite headaches in some (and infuriate others). It points out that, after the 2008 Presidential election was completed, a large portion of the country had completely bought into the “spin” (read: lies) told by both sides of the campaign; many Republicans still believe that Obama is Muslim, and many Democrats still believe that McCain was going to hack apart Medicare (neither of which was true).

What is most disturbing to me in the article is this statistic:

Political ads run thousands of times and reach far more people than articles on FactCheck.org. On our best day, we were read by 462,678 visitors. By contrast, the Obama campaign aired two ads claiming that McCain planned to cut Medicare benefits a total of 17,614 times at a cost estimated to be more than $7 million – which is several times more than FactCheck.org’s entire annual budget.

Considering that a large portion of the public believed the claims espoused in those ads, it would seem that two things convinced many Americans of its truth: repetition and money. By investing serious cash into commercials that aired repeatedly, the Obama campaign was able to convince many voters that McCain would be cutting Medicare (obviously the same goes for McCain’s ads on Obama).

I see two possible ramifications of this as it relates to education. First, maybe repetition is still an effective strategy for convincing people of something. Sometimes, repetition can be effective. Second, it seems like throwing money at an idea can be effective, as well. Is it just me, or are those some pretty cynical conclusions to draw from all of this?

“The Latest Nation at Risk Report”

I got this via email (It’s actually from The Forum for Education and Democracy blog) and thought it was very funny. Thus, I share it with you (emphasis added).

The Latest Nation at Risk ReportPosted by Carl Glickman
Tags: Education Policy The Forum for Education and Democracy

Epilogue

 

The Latest Nation At Risk Report: The Education Roundtable to Tell Corporate America How to Stop Ruining America. 

We feel compelled to report to the American people that the business and financial foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. What was unimaginable a generation ago has begun to occur— companies that extolled themselves as models of excellent practices have deceived the American people with sloppy, undisciplined, and greedy practices that are driving Americans out of their homes, threatening their retirements, and dashing their hopes of a financially  secure future. Indeed, if an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre corporate financial performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, our businesses have allowed this to happen, with greedy CEOs and upper management taking enormous benefits for themselves while preaching and dictating to our schools the need to adopt their “sound” business practices of unbridled free markets, privatization strategies, and the notion of competition as the force for change. Taxpayers are now providing an initial $700 billon bailout of some of these  companies, whose CEO’s have been actively involved in dictating to policy-makers that America’s schools should model the management style of the private sector.God forbid that our schools become more like these kinds of businesses!  Our business and financial communities have, in effect, been committing rash, thoughtless acts of unilateral financial disarmament, dragging our citizens and their children into economic insecurity while having many of these same citizens pay the bill. By making their terminology, practices and transactions incomprehensible to the lay audience, these business leaders enjoyed a decade-long end run around the public and our alleged watchdog agencies. The hubris of high rollers on the top floors of America’s giant companies permitting unfettered profit-taking at the expense of others has no limit. To be blunt, the business community has become an industry at risk of implosion.To help our colleagues in the business community, we educators hereby recommend a new guiding and monitoring organization for business and financial institutions. The Education Roundtable will gather a team of the country’s top educators, whose charge will be to set business standards, goals, and accountability structures for all corporations and financial institutions. To promote a greater culture of accountability, the Roundtable will also require each entity to publish a report card every year, based on a series of standardized assessments. Our final word, perhaps better characterized as a plea, is that all segments of our population will give close attention to the implementation of our recommendations. Our present plight did not appear overnight, and the responsibility for our current situation is widespread. Reform of our corporate and financial system will take time and unwavering commitment. For no one can doubt that the United States is under challenge from many quarters.

 

 

 

 

There will be some angry readers out there who will bristle as I have lifted some of the exact wording of the Nation at Risk Report of 1983 and changed the word “schools” and “public education” to “business and financial institutions.”  And yes, I have taken plenty of liberties to extend and add sentences to define all business and financial leaders and stock market manipulators as untrustworthy, immoral, dangerous people who have let our country down; crushing the day to day lives and long term hopes of the large majority of Americans who can not afford to lose their jobs, their homes, and their savings. And my business friends — if there still are a few left — will bristle at the idea that educators and lay people, with no experiences in business or finance, should be taking charge of what they need to do. If so, the point has been made and hopefully, sincerely taken before further policy making.

Democracy 2.0

There’s been a lot going on the last couple of weeks, and I heard that there was some sort of big voting thing last week (but I thought American Idol started in January…).

I came across this CNN article today that was impressive. It’s about Barack Obama’s new up-and-running website, change.gov. While that in and of itself is pretty cool, some of the other things outlined in the CNN article are nothing short of revolutionary. A quick recap:

• The article summarizes the enormous impact the web, specifically Web 2.0, had on Obama’s campaign and, in all likelihood, his election. From Facebook and MySpace to Twitter and text messages, Obama’s use of technology and the social web were revolutionary.
• This quote is unreal: “People who follow Obama online have become a community that the president-elect can tap into, said Andrew Raseij, founder of TechPresident.com, a Web site that tracked the online operations of the 2008 presidential campaigns. ‘He now has his own special interest. He has a group of people he can go to and ask them to participate in helping him pass his legislative agenda,’ Raseij said.”
  In other words, he has an online professional learning community (PLC). Sweet…
• The same guy predicts that this presidency will revolutionize how the president communicates with the public: “I wouldn’t be surprised if Barack Obama starts doing a weekly YouTube video and also fireside chats for the 21st century by allowing people to filter up questions to him that he might answer.”
  How cool would that be? To get updates on YouTube? To ask the president a question? Whoa nelly…
• But perhaps the most significant point of the article (in my humble opinion) is this: “The president-elect already has said he’ll have a five-day online comment period before signing any nonemergency legislation, so Americans can be part of the process.”

So the new president not only revolutionized how campaigns will be run, but is also aiming to revolutionize the way democracy itself is run. Is it safe to say that Web 2.0 – the interactive, read-write, social networking, at-your-fingertips web – is more than just a silly fad?

Regardless of what you think about the man himself (or his party), I think we cannot help but applaud this sort of forward-thinking that Obama and his crew have been doing. It strikes me as both unbelievable and awe-inspiring that you and I actually have input in the decisions that will be made during this presidency (apart from electing representatives to make those decisions, that is). Even if this ends up being nothing more than hot air, the concept seems valid – political offices could use Web 2.0 (and the millions of people using it) to inform key political decisions.

I just wonder if he’ll be taking those comments on Facebook…

ADDENDUM: I love the quote at the top of change.gov - it sounds a lot like what my high school football coach always told us: He would ask: “How do we leave this place?” We replied: “Better than we found it.”