Iowa Blueprint for Reform in Education

Link to a description of the reform:  http://www.iowasenaterepublicans.com/index.php?option=com_lyftenbloggie&view=entry&category=blogs&id=36%3Aiowas-education-reform-blueprint&Itemid=18#bookmarks

Link to a replay of this morning's chat (this is in text form):  http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2011/10/03/9-a-m-live-coverage-gov-branstad-unveils-iowa-education-reform-plan/


Here is my synopsis from this morning's press conference unveiling the blueprint for education reform in Iowa:

1.  Increase teacher salaries
2.  Change the structure of how teachers are paid to a four-tiered career ladder system.
3.  High stakes literacy tests at 3rd grade
4.  End-of-course exams and graduation testing for high school.
5.  Create competition through charter schools and competitive innovation grants.
6.  Create a system where teachers can work and learn together.

The goal to put a high quality teacher in every classroom, and a high quality principal in each building. Also, restrict those who go into to teaching to only the best and brightest.

My interpretation is not overly favorable right now.

Paying teacher more will make them better teachers?  I'm not opposed to paying teachers more.  I think in general, they should get a higher starting salary, but paying more without other changes will have little impact on the classroom.  I also know that part of the purpose is to attract quality candidates to become teachers.  Might work, but look at the states that have higher salaries than Iowa. Most of them also have a GREATER TEACHER SHORTAGE!

Pay teachers differently.  I agree that the 4X4 salary schedule, as it exists now, is archaic at best.  Teachers advance because we take a class and/or we advance because we lived to see another year. What Dr. Glass and Gov. Brandstad fail to acknowledge is that under current bargaining laws (i.e. Chapter 20) salary is a MANDATORY topic of bargaining.  The salary schedule has to be bargained locally during negotiations, so really it is within the power of each district to set up any salary schedule they want. Which begs the question that if there is something better out there, why hasn't it surfaced through the negotiation process? If you recall, the current 4X4 schedule actually originated from the Des Moines school district a number of years ago. Doesn't mention how this is supposed to directly impact instructional practices.

High-stakes testing.  If a third grade student doesn't test proficient on the literacy tests, they don't move on automatically.  They have to go through remediation (i.e. summer school).  This makes the assumption that all children acquire literacy skills at the same time, when we know through research that this is not true. That's not to say that we need to improve our practice of teaching reading in the primary grades.  We do, and we should. No mention of instructional practices.

More high-stakes testing.  End-of-course exams is not new reform, it's part of the Iowa Core (now know as the Common Core). Hey, but if they want to take credit.... The graduation exam is actually a re-hashed notion as well. Look to other states that have put this in place.  Cheating is an issue (by students and teachers). There have been lawsuits filed.  There are examples of errors in grading the tests and students being retained unnecessarily.  There is no indication in the blueprint on how special education falls into the plan for exit exams.  This one is going to require a great deal of thought and planning. Still no mention of instructional practices.

Competition for funding.  Charter schools. Charter schools in Iowa are public schools that operate outside of Chapter 12 requirements with permission from the DE.  Believe it or not, you can do this now in Iowa without being a charter school through the waiver laws that are in place. So really, in Iowa, we have the ability to establish alternative educational tracts for students if we so choose. If this is so, why don't we see more of it? Because the current philosophy behind a comprehensive K-12 system is one people buy into, in practice it works when the correct instructional practices are implemented.  The other part of the competition piece is having school compete for innovation funds through a grant process.  So, innovation is going to be in the sole hands of grant readers, rather than experts in educational practices.   I guarantee that this will lead to shallow innovations like interactive whiteboards, one-to-one laptop initiatives, and the like.  Again, never directly addressing instructional practices.

The question came up in the chat on how these reforms will be funded?  The response from the Governor was that more resources will have to go to education in the state budget.  Currently, 58% of the State of Iowa's budget is currently going to education. Again, I doubt throwing money at the problem is the correct course of action.  I would gladly accept more, but I think we need to cut back on some of the categorical funding and allow local control on how the funding is used. As with the salary issue, look at the states simply spending more on education and you will see two things. Most of them perform at a level below Iowa, and most of them have or had severe budget crisis. Requiring research-based instructional practices would cost the state no more money.  There would be some professional development required and that funding stream is already in place.

Both the Governor and Dr. Glass talked about creating a system where teachers can work together and learn together.  In this current day, professional learning communities are more the norm. These are groups of teachers learning and working together, reviewing student achievement data, and working to improve teaching and learning.  This exists already in many, if not most, schools. This leads me to a question, "Have the people working on this reform spent any significant time observing schools prior to addressing the so-called problems?"

It was also mentioned that teachers should have a voice in curriculum development and hiring.  Curriculum development has been, almost soley in the hands of the teachers since we started writing standards and benchmarks back in the late 80's early 90's and this practice hasn't changed much.  Currently, teachers are working hard on curriculum alignment with the Common Core.  I guess I don't know who Dr. Glass or Gov. Brandstad thinks has been doing this work.  As far as hiring goes, Although it was never directly stated, I take this to mean the hiring of teachers and administrators.  It is common practice for teachers to serve on interview teams for hiring administrators. In many schools, teachers sit on interview teams when hiring teachers as well, Again, this is a local decision, but this would be far from major reform.

My interpretation? What they are purposing is "change" not "reform."   To truly reform education, you need to implement research-based instructional practices consistently and with fidelity. Teachers need to be trained in what those effective strategies look like and how to develop lessons using them.  Principals need to be trained to look DOWN at the student tasks, what the students are actually doing in the classroom.  These are the things that will improve instruction, improve student learning, and ultimately, student achievement.  My suggestion to Dr. Glass and Governor Branstad will be to stop just rearranging the deck chairs and start building a better boat. Focus on training teachers and principals in the most effective instructional strategies and expecting some accountability on how they are being used consistently.  The other stuff is all window dressing and won't get us to where we truly need to be.

Why Integrate Technology into the Classrooms?

Technology is ubiquitous, touching almost every part of our lives, our communities, our homes. Yet most schools lag far behind when it comes to integrating technology into classroom learning. Many are just beginning to explore the true potential tech offers for teaching and learning. Properly used, technology will help students acquire the skills they need to survive in a complex, highly technological knowledge-based economy.

Integrating technology into classroom instruction means more than teaching basic computer skills and software programs in a separate computer class. Effective tech integration must happen across the curriculum in ways that research shows deepen and enhance the learning process. In particular, it must support four key components of learning: active engagement, participation in groups, frequent interaction and feedback, and connection to real-world experts. Effective technology integration is achieved when the use of technology is routine and transparent and when technology supports curricular goals.

Many people believe that technology-enabled project learning is the ultimate in classroom instruction. Learning through projects while equipped with technology tools allows students to be intellectually challenged while providing them with a realistic snapshot of what the modern office looks like. Through projects, students acquire and refine their analysis and problem-solving skills as they work individually and in teams to find, process, and synthesize information they've found online.

The myriad resources of the online world also provide each classroom with more interesting, diverse, and current learning materials. The Web connects students to experts in the real world and provides numerous opportunities for expressing understanding through images, sound, and text.

New tech tools for visualizing and modeling, especially in the sciences, offer students ways to experiment and observe phenomenon and to view results in graphic ways that aid in understanding. And, as an added benefit, with technology tools and a project-learning approach, students are more likely to stay engaged and on task, reducing behavioral problems in the classroom.

Technology  changes the way teachers teach, offering educators effective ways to reach different types of learners and assess student understanding through multiple means. It also enhances the relationship between teacher and student. When technology is effectively integrated into subject areas, teachers grow into roles of adviser, content expert, and coach. Technology helps make teaching and learning more meaningful and fun.

Changing the System

"Twenty years of schoolin' and they put you on the day shift" - Bob Dylan

This is not a post that professes to have the solution to changing our current education system. It's actually quite the contrary.  I'm looking for answers and clarity.

Up to now, the current education change speak pushes more academic rigor (which I tend to agree with to a point).  It also speaks to preparing each child for college. Sometimes the change agents come right out and says it, sometimes it's inferred.  This part, I am not in agreement with, at all.

I think that this is the exact type of thinking that is, in part, responsible for our economic problems and I am not speaking of the problems over the past 10 years. I am talking about the imbalance in trade and the gradual gap that has been widening between the haves and the have-nots over the past 5 decades. The disappearing traditional middle class.

A college degree is not the answer, and certainly not preparing each child for a four year college education. We continue to hear that kids can't find decent paying jobs, a living wage, benefits, etc...with a high school diploma.  I don't know that this is always the case. Now, I do believe that training or education beyond high school is a great thing.  I also think that the ability to continue to learn throughout one's life is critical.  I also know that there are more entry level jobs that need some form of post secondary training.  I just feel that for the masses, a liberal arts bachelor degree is counter productive.

So what do we need?  We need to focus our secondary schools more toward technical reading, giving students opportunities to problem-solve, create, synthesize, write creatively, express themselves. Yes, math, science, reading, history, economics, foreign languages are all still important, but we need to be delivering them in context not in isolation.  I also firmly believe that for the majority of students community college, junior college, technical schools are not only adequate, but a much better choice.  We need to be preparing the majority of our student for that type of a post-secondary experience, not a liberal arts education.

What we have been creating is a labor force looking for supervisory, managerial, white collar jobs.  This is being pushed by, primarily well educated, white collars or university system.  The reality is that you can get a bachelor degree in subject areas that have no real world career track. This sets not only our children up for eventual failure and disappointment but it creates an economic structure where the labor force refuses to be true laborers. An imbalance occurs. People refuse to accept certain living wage jobs because the job is below them.  A void is created and in nature there are no voids, the void gets filled. In this case the void gets filled by a foreign labor force, and/or an immigrant labor force.  Eventually, the United States won't be known for "making" or manufacturing anything.....wait....we're there now!

This Is Not Your Father's Education...

The title is a play on the old car commercial "this is not your father's Oldsmobile" but the same can be said for education today.  Even though most schools look pretty much the same on the outside as they have for many years, the teaching and learning are quickly changing....and it should.

The world we need to prepare students for is vastly different than the one I stepped into as a young man.  The need to know "The Three R's" is still important, but today's students need much more than rote learning.  In a 21st century world, we need to know how to access information, analyze and apply information, collaborate with others, communicate through a variety of mediums and create.

I invite you to view a YouTube video produced in June of 2007 by Dr. Scott McLeod on our students changing needs and the world they need to be prepared to enter.  Dr. McLeod is currently a professor at Iowa State University. You can view the video by clicking the link below.  Enjoy
Scott McLeod - Did You Know (Shift Happens) 4.0