I started writing about education through fiction stories because I believed that was the best way to help parents and students understand that the best laid plans of educators and politicians could go right or wrong.
I consult many resources to write my stories and Diane Ravitch's writings are among them. Her latest, Death and Life of the Great American School System, is a worthwhile non-fiction read for anyone interested who is interested in education but is not a political insider.
In Death and Life, Ravitch goes into the history of several current practices in public education: school choice, vouchers, charter schools, high-stakes testing, state and federal math and reading standards, and accountability as advocated through No Child Left Behind. She also gets into 'turn-around' efforts that have happened in large cities such as New York and San Diego.
Ravitch is an educator, but her specialty is the history of education. She uses history and the failures of past policies to offer prescriptions for improving the public schools. While she has been an effective policy-maker and program developer--she helped design a history curriculum for California schools that has survived criticism for more than two decades and she has been a valued resource by Democratic and Republican presidents--I felt that readers would be better served if she used the past to help guide them to make their own conclusions.
As for me, this book stays on my shelf. It is a tremendous historical reference and it told me much I did not know. For example, the concept of vouchers dates back more than half a century. After the Supreme Court ruling on Brown vs. Board of Education, the state of Virginia used public money to send white children to segregated private schools. The link between vouchers and segregation led Ronald Reagan to limit support for vouchers to children in low income families nearly 30 years later.
Ravitch also makes several interesting observations about turn-around management within urban public school systems. While she does not deny that turn-around efforts are necessary to root out corruption, nepotism and sloth, she adds that turn-around managers who have come from the ranks of other professions often go overboard.
For example, she points out examples where superintendents in New York and San Diego attempted to coerce and legislate reading methods and tools instead of allowing teachers to choose those they believed to be most effective. She also adds that, once hired, these new leaders did not believe that there was a need to consult the teachers and principals who had worked in good standing. They believed as corporate executives do, that a bureaucracy must adjust to changes brought down from above.
Ravitch calls the schools a "public good," not a business and she appears to believe in the ideal of the neighborhood public school. She's done an effective job of proving that has been what parents have wanted all along. Unlike conservative and even some moderate politicians she does not place total blame on the teacher's unions; she even explains how unions protect the academic quality of education from overzealous challenges.
But part of the problem with the idea of being a public good is that schools have not always adjusted well to the changes in their surroundings. It is exceptionally difficult for any school, public, private or parochial, to succeed when the neighborhood is falling apart around it. I wished Ravitch had offered more examples of public schools that have defied neighborhood decline. She has made it quite clear that reforms in favor with Democrats and Republicans alike have not.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Parents Try to Keep New Jersey Catholic School from Closing
Today I am reading a story on NJ.com about a Catholic school, the Incarnation-St. James School, not far from where I live. Parents and friends have raised $102,000 over the past month to help keep the school open. The Diocese of Trenton has given them another month to raise enrollment by 40 or more students and approximately $200,000 to cover a projected budget deficit and provide for an emergency fund.
The story mentions that 95 parents and students attended the school's most recent fund-raising and planning meeting. That's high considering the small size of the student body. However, this school, also according to the story, enrolled as many as 400 students.
If the parents successfully raise the money and come up with a viable business plan to grow the school, this will become a good example of the importance of parental involvement in education. If they fail, I believe it is more of a black mark against the Diocese. To allow only a month to raise the remaining two-thirds of the necessary funds is a sign of giving up.
Personally, I'm rooting for the parents to prove them wrong.
A great school is not only a school with strong leadership, effective teachers and receptive students. Whether public, private or parochial, a great school becomes great when parents care enough to become involved.
The story mentions that 95 parents and students attended the school's most recent fund-raising and planning meeting. That's high considering the small size of the student body. However, this school, also according to the story, enrolled as many as 400 students.
If the parents successfully raise the money and come up with a viable business plan to grow the school, this will become a good example of the importance of parental involvement in education. If they fail, I believe it is more of a black mark against the Diocese. To allow only a month to raise the remaining two-thirds of the necessary funds is a sign of giving up.
Personally, I'm rooting for the parents to prove them wrong.
A great school is not only a school with strong leadership, effective teachers and receptive students. Whether public, private or parochial, a great school becomes great when parents care enough to become involved.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Proposed Pay Freeze is Not the Biggest Worry for New Jersey Teachers
To say that New Jersey teachers have not given Governor Chris Christie a positive response to his request for a voluntary pay freeze and employee contributions to health benefits would be an understatement. However, teachers have more to worry about financially. Christie's call for a freeze comes on the heels of his request for a property tax cap.
Governor Christie has asked for an amendment to the state constitution to cap local property tax increases at two and one-half percent. This comes at a time when last year's state and local budget cuts, which were less severe than this year's, forced a third of New Jersey municipalities to raise their property taxes by more than four percent.The four percent limit was imposed three years ago by former governor Jon Corzine.
The idea is that property tax rebates, now sent through the mails, will become property tax credits instead. So, there are no rebates because property tax increases go down. Sounds good on paper, so far.
The problem is that Christie has not provided for exemptions such as prior union contracts and rising utility and health care costs. He has also excluded a process by which local governments could elect to exceed the cap. He will not commit to future state aid to help communities in need to deliver needed services while remaining in compliance with the cap.
In fact, he has cut state aid to all municipalities in his 2011 budget cycle. I would doubt that Christie will restore these cuts or delayed wage increases over the next two years. His promise was to cut spending, and he has delivered. If he has stood firm in bad times, expect him to stand firmer in better times. A better economy only gives him more leverage.
Given the future impacts of a property tax cap, it is no wonder that the state's public school teachers would be opposed to a pay freeze. A two and a half percent cap with no considerations for health benefits promises that there will be more cuts and contractual challenges to come.
Caps have a good side; they make it easier for local governments to plan and manage spending. The backing through the state constitution is also of tremendous help in negotiations with unions, non-union contract workers and vendors. Tax increases, assuming no new housing or business activity, can be easily projected.
However, the down side is that revenues cannot be accurately projected. Neither can costs of health insurance, fuel and utilities. Nor can emergencies. Teaching and government service become less attractive occupations to future generations if salary increases were tied to such a low cap, or if job cuts became an annual routine.
New Jersey is a home rule state;most politics is local. In this setting local governments should be free to set strategic direction, because each and every municipality is not the same.
A growing suburb with acres of undeveloped land free of environmental constraints is very different from an urban center with high concentrations of poverty and a considerable number of non-taxable properties. A "one cap fits all" policy will not work across every town because every town has different needs.
Governor Christie has asked for an amendment to the state constitution to cap local property tax increases at two and one-half percent. This comes at a time when last year's state and local budget cuts, which were less severe than this year's, forced a third of New Jersey municipalities to raise their property taxes by more than four percent.The four percent limit was imposed three years ago by former governor Jon Corzine.
The idea is that property tax rebates, now sent through the mails, will become property tax credits instead. So, there are no rebates because property tax increases go down. Sounds good on paper, so far.
The problem is that Christie has not provided for exemptions such as prior union contracts and rising utility and health care costs. He has also excluded a process by which local governments could elect to exceed the cap. He will not commit to future state aid to help communities in need to deliver needed services while remaining in compliance with the cap.
In fact, he has cut state aid to all municipalities in his 2011 budget cycle. I would doubt that Christie will restore these cuts or delayed wage increases over the next two years. His promise was to cut spending, and he has delivered. If he has stood firm in bad times, expect him to stand firmer in better times. A better economy only gives him more leverage.
Given the future impacts of a property tax cap, it is no wonder that the state's public school teachers would be opposed to a pay freeze. A two and a half percent cap with no considerations for health benefits promises that there will be more cuts and contractual challenges to come.
Caps have a good side; they make it easier for local governments to plan and manage spending. The backing through the state constitution is also of tremendous help in negotiations with unions, non-union contract workers and vendors. Tax increases, assuming no new housing or business activity, can be easily projected.
However, the down side is that revenues cannot be accurately projected. Neither can costs of health insurance, fuel and utilities. Nor can emergencies. Teaching and government service become less attractive occupations to future generations if salary increases were tied to such a low cap, or if job cuts became an annual routine.
New Jersey is a home rule state;most politics is local. In this setting local governments should be free to set strategic direction, because each and every municipality is not the same.
A growing suburb with acres of undeveloped land free of environmental constraints is very different from an urban center with high concentrations of poverty and a considerable number of non-taxable properties. A "one cap fits all" policy will not work across every town because every town has different needs.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Special to Educated Quest: Environmental Consultant to Bring Story of Global Warming to Young Adults. Interview with Beverly Milestone Maisey
Owner of Building Services Consultants, based in Wyncote, Pennsylvania, Beverly Milestone Maisey has worked in environmental control engineering for 25 years.
Beverly has recently started a young adult novel, Where People Go, Trouble Follows, to make middle students more aware of the issue of global warming. Educated Quest would like to thank Beverly for the opportunity to conduct this interview.
Tell me more about your background
I have been a writer/storyteller my whole life. I became aware of the environment when I was in Junior high and they held the first Earth Day. I’ve been concerned about it ever since.
In my day job, I help clients learn how to turn their buildings from energy users into energy generators.My company preaches and practices true sustainability in energy and energy systems.
In my off hours, I am part of my local Transition Town where I try to educate as many people as possible about how to adjust to climate change in a calm, sensible, well planned manner.
Given Al Gore's The Inconvenient Truth and other media discussions on global warming, do you believe the issue receives adequate and fair coverage--or do you believe something is missing in the debate?
In my opinion, global warming is the most important GLOBAL issue facing us all. It doesn’t matter about the economy or jobs or health insurance if we don’t come to terms with the crisis we are facing. Every other problem will only be exacerbated by the changes in our climate.
Frankly, I am totally bewildered by the lack of action on this issue as well as the others I mentioned. We should all be taking to the streets, demanding an immediate response.
Unfortunately, we have all become so complacent and brainwashed to believe that we are powerless. But that’s simply untrue; we can all be forces for positive change but we have to remember or relearn how to stand up for ourselves and for what we know is right.
Throughout history, individuals and social movements have forced the world to change; this is what we need today. Al Gore and others are discussing the problem. We need to not only discuss the problem but more importantly we need to discuss the solutions.
What made you decide that you wanted to write a YA book about this subject?
I love YA literature! I think it offers the widest range of interesting stories available in today’s market. On top of that, it’s the middle school generation that will be hit the hardest and they need to become educated on the subject so they can prepare for the times ahead.
Plus, they can make a difference, they can influence policy and they can help us all by changing the way we see ourselves. If we can influence them now, at this age, hopefully they will stay engaged throughout their lives and be forces of positive change.
You are uniquely qualified to write this story. How would you like to see teachers use the book? Would you like to develop additional materials around it?
I think Where People Go, Trouble Follows is a good beginning and basis for a cross curricular term on the subject. It’s a great starting point because it talks about how climate has affected the planet’s inhabitants in the distant past and the not so distant past. It also offers positive reinforcement regarding how individuals and social movements can be forces of good for the world.
Where People Go, Trouble Follows can be used in science classes, current events, history, even as a jumping off point for other readings in English classes and as a basis for many mathematical calculations.
Eventually, I would like to see Where People Go, Trouble Follows translated not only into different languages, but also rewritten for different cultures and different social contexts across the United States and the world. In this way, it will be relevant to everyone and not just the socio-economic and geographical audience I wrote to.
Do you have any concerns about comments on political bias? Global warming is very much a scientific issue, but it has also been a political football at the national level.
It’s almost too late for politicians to embrace the issue. Yet, climate change has been made a political issue because it involves big business and change at the very highest levels of government and industry. Business as usual, where short term profits are all that matter, has to change.
Every politician and indeed, every corporation, needs to step up and own this issue. Global warming is happening as we live and breathe and if we all don’t do something immediately to halt and reverse the trend of warming temperatures, well, I don’t like to think about it.
As it stands, even today, we have already gone way too far down the path to climate change and are already beginning to feel the effects of the trouble we have wrought.
I don’t like to sound all doom and gloom and that’s why I wrote Where People Go, Trouble Follows. We need to wake up and take charge and that’s what this book is all about. Hopefully, it will empower individuals to make a difference.
Beverly has recently started a young adult novel, Where People Go, Trouble Follows, to make middle students more aware of the issue of global warming. Educated Quest would like to thank Beverly for the opportunity to conduct this interview.
Tell me more about your background
I have been a writer/storyteller my whole life. I became aware of the environment when I was in Junior high and they held the first Earth Day. I’ve been concerned about it ever since.
In my day job, I help clients learn how to turn their buildings from energy users into energy generators.My company preaches and practices true sustainability in energy and energy systems.
In my off hours, I am part of my local Transition Town where I try to educate as many people as possible about how to adjust to climate change in a calm, sensible, well planned manner.
Given Al Gore's The Inconvenient Truth and other media discussions on global warming, do you believe the issue receives adequate and fair coverage--or do you believe something is missing in the debate?
In my opinion, global warming is the most important GLOBAL issue facing us all. It doesn’t matter about the economy or jobs or health insurance if we don’t come to terms with the crisis we are facing. Every other problem will only be exacerbated by the changes in our climate.
Frankly, I am totally bewildered by the lack of action on this issue as well as the others I mentioned. We should all be taking to the streets, demanding an immediate response.
Unfortunately, we have all become so complacent and brainwashed to believe that we are powerless. But that’s simply untrue; we can all be forces for positive change but we have to remember or relearn how to stand up for ourselves and for what we know is right.
Throughout history, individuals and social movements have forced the world to change; this is what we need today. Al Gore and others are discussing the problem. We need to not only discuss the problem but more importantly we need to discuss the solutions.
What made you decide that you wanted to write a YA book about this subject?
I love YA literature! I think it offers the widest range of interesting stories available in today’s market. On top of that, it’s the middle school generation that will be hit the hardest and they need to become educated on the subject so they can prepare for the times ahead.
Plus, they can make a difference, they can influence policy and they can help us all by changing the way we see ourselves. If we can influence them now, at this age, hopefully they will stay engaged throughout their lives and be forces of positive change.
You are uniquely qualified to write this story. How would you like to see teachers use the book? Would you like to develop additional materials around it?
I think Where People Go, Trouble Follows is a good beginning and basis for a cross curricular term on the subject. It’s a great starting point because it talks about how climate has affected the planet’s inhabitants in the distant past and the not so distant past. It also offers positive reinforcement regarding how individuals and social movements can be forces of good for the world.
Where People Go, Trouble Follows can be used in science classes, current events, history, even as a jumping off point for other readings in English classes and as a basis for many mathematical calculations.
Eventually, I would like to see Where People Go, Trouble Follows translated not only into different languages, but also rewritten for different cultures and different social contexts across the United States and the world. In this way, it will be relevant to everyone and not just the socio-economic and geographical audience I wrote to.
Do you have any concerns about comments on political bias? Global warming is very much a scientific issue, but it has also been a political football at the national level.
It’s almost too late for politicians to embrace the issue. Yet, climate change has been made a political issue because it involves big business and change at the very highest levels of government and industry. Business as usual, where short term profits are all that matter, has to change.
Every politician and indeed, every corporation, needs to step up and own this issue. Global warming is happening as we live and breathe and if we all don’t do something immediately to halt and reverse the trend of warming temperatures, well, I don’t like to think about it.
As it stands, even today, we have already gone way too far down the path to climate change and are already beginning to feel the effects of the trouble we have wrought.
I don’t like to sound all doom and gloom and that’s why I wrote Where People Go, Trouble Follows. We need to wake up and take charge and that’s what this book is all about. Hopefully, it will empower individuals to make a difference.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Rutgers and Thomas Edison College May Not Form a Perfect Marriage
Yesterday I read that New Jersey governor Chris Christie has proposed to zero-out the budget of Thomas Edison State College and merge the school into Rutgers, our state university. Thomas Edison's president opposes the merger. Rutger's president called it an "unsolicited proposal."
Needless to say, college mergers do not happen three and half months away from the start of a fiscal year. They take time and planning, and both sides may learn that they are not suited for each other.
Based in Trenton, the state capital, for more than three decades, Thomas Edison has the second largest enrollment of any New Jersey public college, after Rutgers main campus in New Brunswick. However, while the vast majority of Rutgers students attend college full-time, practically all of Thomas Edison's 18,000 students are part-time.
From a distance, Thomas Edison appears to be the perfect "no-frills" option for working people who want a college degree. There's no campus, only an administrative center in Trenton. Undergraduate tuition for in-state students is approximately half Rutgers tuition.
Credits are awarded for prior learning, including work and military experience, because the focus is on adult students. With advancements in Web-based tools, much of the Thomas Edison experience takes place online. If Thomas Edison did not exist, its students are more likely to be attracted to an online for-profit college at five or six times the price. Managed right, Thomas Edison is a statewide economic development asset.
For Rutgers to take over such an institution it would need to run it separately from the rest of the university. It would be expensive, possibly impossible, to integrate faculty, registrar, student services and student information systems. Rutgers has also been asked to make cuts, so it's fair to question whether they could absorb an entire institution. Not to mention that the Thomas Edison students would prefer not to pay twice the tuition.
I'd like to offer an alternative--create an education compact and merge online institutions in New Jersey and neighboring states. The State University of New York operates Empire State College, a school with a similar mission. Why not have a single institution to serve New Jersey and several other Northeast or Mid-Atlantic states? It would be easier to spread administrative and technology costs over a population of similar students--online and working adults--than a mix of traditional and non-traditional students.
This has already been done in the U.S. Fifteen years ago, the governors of nineteen states agreed to form Western Governor's University--an accredited online institution very much like Thomas Edison, with some advancements in technology. Though tuition and fees are higher than those charged by Thomas Edison, they are still considerably lower than Rutgers and for-profit alternatives.
I realize that New Jersey's economic problems are great, but so are those of neighboring states. A blend of talents and technology might advance online education for millions and possibly save money for several state governments. Like Western Governor's, it would require bi-partisanship. But, as I watched Democratic and Republican governors discuss health care on C-Span, I am quite convinced that thoughtful, intelligent people can work things out.
Partnering to create a regional online university would be challenging and difficult, but it makes more sense than bringing dissimilar interests to a shot gun wedding.
Needless to say, college mergers do not happen three and half months away from the start of a fiscal year. They take time and planning, and both sides may learn that they are not suited for each other.
Based in Trenton, the state capital, for more than three decades, Thomas Edison has the second largest enrollment of any New Jersey public college, after Rutgers main campus in New Brunswick. However, while the vast majority of Rutgers students attend college full-time, practically all of Thomas Edison's 18,000 students are part-time.
From a distance, Thomas Edison appears to be the perfect "no-frills" option for working people who want a college degree. There's no campus, only an administrative center in Trenton. Undergraduate tuition for in-state students is approximately half Rutgers tuition.
Credits are awarded for prior learning, including work and military experience, because the focus is on adult students. With advancements in Web-based tools, much of the Thomas Edison experience takes place online. If Thomas Edison did not exist, its students are more likely to be attracted to an online for-profit college at five or six times the price. Managed right, Thomas Edison is a statewide economic development asset.
For Rutgers to take over such an institution it would need to run it separately from the rest of the university. It would be expensive, possibly impossible, to integrate faculty, registrar, student services and student information systems. Rutgers has also been asked to make cuts, so it's fair to question whether they could absorb an entire institution. Not to mention that the Thomas Edison students would prefer not to pay twice the tuition.
I'd like to offer an alternative--create an education compact and merge online institutions in New Jersey and neighboring states. The State University of New York operates Empire State College, a school with a similar mission. Why not have a single institution to serve New Jersey and several other Northeast or Mid-Atlantic states? It would be easier to spread administrative and technology costs over a population of similar students--online and working adults--than a mix of traditional and non-traditional students.
This has already been done in the U.S. Fifteen years ago, the governors of nineteen states agreed to form Western Governor's University--an accredited online institution very much like Thomas Edison, with some advancements in technology. Though tuition and fees are higher than those charged by Thomas Edison, they are still considerably lower than Rutgers and for-profit alternatives.
I realize that New Jersey's economic problems are great, but so are those of neighboring states. A blend of talents and technology might advance online education for millions and possibly save money for several state governments. Like Western Governor's, it would require bi-partisanship. But, as I watched Democratic and Republican governors discuss health care on C-Span, I am quite convinced that thoughtful, intelligent people can work things out.
Partnering to create a regional online university would be challenging and difficult, but it makes more sense than bringing dissimilar interests to a shot gun wedding.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Put Teeth in Letters of Intent and Graduation Rates Will Rise
This week Education Secretary Arne Duncan proposed that college basketball teams with less than a forty percent graduation rate be banned from competing in the NCAA Tournament.
His point is this--there is no reason that a college should not be able to graduate two-fifths of the players they recruit. If 53 of the 65 teams in the NCAA Men's tournament and 62 of the 65 woman's teams graduate more than forty percent of their players, then why can't all of them do it? It's a very fair question.
We're at the start of March Madness--the post-season NIT has begun play and the NCAA tourneys start today--but I'll also presume that Secretary Duncan has the same intentions for all schools in all sports conferences. This would include Division II, Division III and non-NCAA schools, too. Regulatory policy should not be limited to the Big Dance.
I've written prior posts stating that college athletes should be students. They go to college with the thought of earning a degree. If they can extend their athletic careers beyond college, Mazel Tov.
But there's no need for government intervention. The schools are not the only problem. The professional sports leagues are the other side of the coin. They can resolve the problems on their own.
Men's college basketball and football work on the same model. Players sign Letters of Intent and they must play a minimal number of seasons in college before they can enter a professional draft. If an athlete's talents are so great that it does not pay to remain in college--the risk of injury and loss of income is too great--they enter the draft.
A basketball player can leave college after one season, a football player after their junior year. However, there are "third-year sophomores" in pro football, players who were red-shirted during their freshman year while earning between two and three years of college credits. Larry Fitzgerald and Randy Moss, Pro-Bowl wide receivers, came immediately to my mind.
There have also been two high school basketball players--one, Brandon Jennings, later became a NBA first-round pick--who bucked the model and played professional basketball in Europe.
Baseball and hockey follow a different model. Players are drafted right out of high school. They may sign with a major league team, provided the bonus is right, and they are usually assigned to a minor league team for further development. The minor league wage sale, separate from the bonus, is the same for all players, regardless of their ability.
A player does not need to declare for the draft, in fact he can be drafted every year from high school through college without his knowledge or consent. He signs when the bonus is right--and it could happen before he finishes his degree. Barry Bonds,Roger Clemens and Mark McGwire, three of baseball's poster boys for steroids, came to mind. I'm only aware of four baseball Hall of Famers--Christy Mathewson, Bob Gibson, Reggie Jackson, and Dave Winfield--who earned college degrees.
With either model it comes down to incentives. If it pays to turn pro, go. If graduation rates become a stronger concern for educators and politicians then perhaps college sports should move towards a new model.
Any high school athlete deemed ready to turn pro should go. Let him take his bonus and play in a developmental league financed by the pros. If he is not pro-ready and cannot get into a four-year school, he can go to a two-year college or do a post-graduate year at a private school. Or let him play abroad. This is common practice now.
If he commits to a four-year college he stays until his class graduates. If he needs an extra year because of the demands of his sport, then give it to him. But once he signs a Letter of Intent with a four-year school he has two directions--transfer or drop out and find a job outside of his sport. He cannot turn pro until his class graduates. And, for as long as the player makes adequate academic progress, no coach revoke his scholarship.
Under the current models in professional sports and NCAA policies, the Letter of Intent has no teeth. It is a commitment that can be easily broken whenever someone thrusts a pile of money in an athlete's face. Tighten the commitment and graduation rates will rise.
His point is this--there is no reason that a college should not be able to graduate two-fifths of the players they recruit. If 53 of the 65 teams in the NCAA Men's tournament and 62 of the 65 woman's teams graduate more than forty percent of their players, then why can't all of them do it? It's a very fair question.
We're at the start of March Madness--the post-season NIT has begun play and the NCAA tourneys start today--but I'll also presume that Secretary Duncan has the same intentions for all schools in all sports conferences. This would include Division II, Division III and non-NCAA schools, too. Regulatory policy should not be limited to the Big Dance.
I've written prior posts stating that college athletes should be students. They go to college with the thought of earning a degree. If they can extend their athletic careers beyond college, Mazel Tov.
But there's no need for government intervention. The schools are not the only problem. The professional sports leagues are the other side of the coin. They can resolve the problems on their own.
Men's college basketball and football work on the same model. Players sign Letters of Intent and they must play a minimal number of seasons in college before they can enter a professional draft. If an athlete's talents are so great that it does not pay to remain in college--the risk of injury and loss of income is too great--they enter the draft.
A basketball player can leave college after one season, a football player after their junior year. However, there are "third-year sophomores" in pro football, players who were red-shirted during their freshman year while earning between two and three years of college credits. Larry Fitzgerald and Randy Moss, Pro-Bowl wide receivers, came immediately to my mind.
There have also been two high school basketball players--one, Brandon Jennings, later became a NBA first-round pick--who bucked the model and played professional basketball in Europe.
Baseball and hockey follow a different model. Players are drafted right out of high school. They may sign with a major league team, provided the bonus is right, and they are usually assigned to a minor league team for further development. The minor league wage sale, separate from the bonus, is the same for all players, regardless of their ability.
A player does not need to declare for the draft, in fact he can be drafted every year from high school through college without his knowledge or consent. He signs when the bonus is right--and it could happen before he finishes his degree. Barry Bonds,Roger Clemens and Mark McGwire, three of baseball's poster boys for steroids, came to mind. I'm only aware of four baseball Hall of Famers--Christy Mathewson, Bob Gibson, Reggie Jackson, and Dave Winfield--who earned college degrees.
With either model it comes down to incentives. If it pays to turn pro, go. If graduation rates become a stronger concern for educators and politicians then perhaps college sports should move towards a new model.
Any high school athlete deemed ready to turn pro should go. Let him take his bonus and play in a developmental league financed by the pros. If he is not pro-ready and cannot get into a four-year school, he can go to a two-year college or do a post-graduate year at a private school. Or let him play abroad. This is common practice now.
If he commits to a four-year college he stays until his class graduates. If he needs an extra year because of the demands of his sport, then give it to him. But once he signs a Letter of Intent with a four-year school he has two directions--transfer or drop out and find a job outside of his sport. He cannot turn pro until his class graduates. And, for as long as the player makes adequate academic progress, no coach revoke his scholarship.
Under the current models in professional sports and NCAA policies, the Letter of Intent has no teeth. It is a commitment that can be easily broken whenever someone thrusts a pile of money in an athlete's face. Tighten the commitment and graduation rates will rise.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Here is One Solution to the Texas History Textbook Controversy
I am amused, but also sickened by the recent controversies over history textbooks in Texas and I wonder why these arguments are being made at the state level at all. A board of education has better things to do than micromanage modules in a middle school or high school class and attempt to rewrite history the way they like it. Last time I checked teachers teach. They should plan the instruction.
This controversy is as much a fault of the publishing process as Texas school board politics. According to a Washington Monthly story, Texas political attitudes were usually counterbalanced with California political attitudes. However, according to the story, California is so fiscally pinched that the state has put off buying new books until 2014. So, for the next few years, if the textbook publishing model remains the same, as Texas goes, so goes the nation.
Regardless of the persons who sit on state boards of education or offer citizens comments on the content of textbooks, the publishing model must change. The unbalanced influence of two states on textbook sales, one that can buy and one that cannot tells me that decision on what to teach should be brought down to the school level, regardless of where the school is. We need free-market solutions to a monopolistic problem.
Ideally, I would like to see teachers work with content providers, in this case historians, to develop customized books available on a Kindle or other electronic reader, but that might be a long way off. So, I'd like to offer one short term solution that would be affordable to high schools.
If there is so much concern about balance, one thought is to teach both sides, liberal and conservative, to historical events. If high school teachers would like to produce more ambitious readers, they could consider using Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States and A Patriot's History of the United Statesby Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen in concert.
I'm sure there are other books available that could help teach both sides, but these titles are well circulated and they should be available at deep discounts. If the school district wants to cut costs, they could consider putting both books on the summer reading list at Barnes and Noble and Borders. I'm sure that the stores would slap an extra discount on both titles to keep students shopping in the young adult stacks.
I am not suggesting that nearly 1,700 pages can be covered in a single school year. But, if American history is taught as a series of events, is is quite possible to use both books over three, with supplemental materials collected by the teachers. This way, both sides can be taught, the costs of history books can go down, and students could reconcile the differences and develop their own historical and political views. And teachers would not force one viewpoint upon every student.
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
This controversy is as much a fault of the publishing process as Texas school board politics. According to a Washington Monthly story, Texas political attitudes were usually counterbalanced with California political attitudes. However, according to the story, California is so fiscally pinched that the state has put off buying new books until 2014. So, for the next few years, if the textbook publishing model remains the same, as Texas goes, so goes the nation.
Regardless of the persons who sit on state boards of education or offer citizens comments on the content of textbooks, the publishing model must change. The unbalanced influence of two states on textbook sales, one that can buy and one that cannot tells me that decision on what to teach should be brought down to the school level, regardless of where the school is. We need free-market solutions to a monopolistic problem.
Ideally, I would like to see teachers work with content providers, in this case historians, to develop customized books available on a Kindle or other electronic reader, but that might be a long way off. So, I'd like to offer one short term solution that would be affordable to high schools.
If there is so much concern about balance, one thought is to teach both sides, liberal and conservative, to historical events. If high school teachers would like to produce more ambitious readers, they could consider using Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States and A Patriot's History of the United Statesby Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen in concert.
I'm sure there are other books available that could help teach both sides, but these titles are well circulated and they should be available at deep discounts. If the school district wants to cut costs, they could consider putting both books on the summer reading list at Barnes and Noble and Borders. I'm sure that the stores would slap an extra discount on both titles to keep students shopping in the young adult stacks.
I am not suggesting that nearly 1,700 pages can be covered in a single school year. But, if American history is taught as a series of events, is is quite possible to use both books over three, with supplemental materials collected by the teachers. This way, both sides can be taught, the costs of history books can go down, and students could reconcile the differences and develop their own historical and political views. And teachers would not force one viewpoint upon every student.
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
School Vouchers for New Jersey--Questions that Must Be Answered
During his successful campaign for governor Republican Chris Christie called for vouchers as one solution to stem the rising tide of property taxes and costs for urban schools. Since his inauguration, urban Democrats have also expressed support for vouchers. However, there are many questions that must be answered before a voucher plan can be developed for the Garden State.
A voucher for a K-12 school is essentially like a Pell Grant for college. It is a government grant that may be used to defray all or part of the tuition to attend a public school outside a student's district or a private or parochial school. State government may also set a limit on the voucher; it does not necessarily need to cover full tuition.
Governor Christie's intentions appear to be targeted to students from low-income families enrolled in the poorest-performing public schools. There are thirty one "poorer urban districts" or "special needs districts" according to the New Jersey Law Center.
It would be overly ambitious for any politician to attempt to apply a single voucher policy across thirty one school systems. Not all have access to the same educational options.
Newark, for example, has four highly regarded public high schools as well as several charter schools. The parochial school community is very large, too. Trenton has one public high school, few charters, private or parochial schools and the public high schools in neighboring communities are also considered to be In Need of Improvement under No Child Left Behind.
I have to wonder if one solution would be to allow communities to compete to become voucher districts. Parents and state politicians need to know the options on the table. With this in mind, New Jersey could learn from Louisiana's experience.
According to a story in Education Next, four conditions were in place for the Louisiana legislature to pass a voucher bill 1)a weakened teacher's union presense; 2)parent-based lobbying support;3)new faces in the legislature; and 4) strong gubernatorial support.
With Christie's election, New Jersey has three of the four. The union has a large membership, but will have far less influence if urban Democrats support vouchers, too. Only one Democratic seat in the legislature changed hands--state senators were not up for election--but there is Democratic support for vouchers.
The big question mark is parents. Will there be grassroots support? I have to wonder if a tax credit for all families--with an income limit, of course--to send their children to a private or parochial school might have a stronger following in the Garden State. Christie won, in part, due to suburban anger about property tax bills. A tax credit might do him more political good than vouchers, though it would be of less help to low and moderate income families.
The issue of public funding for religious schools is a constitutional question. Also important, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal called the voucher plan a scholarship program, and legislators were allowed to vote separately on the question of vouchers for New Orleans versus their own district.
But Louisiana lawmakers also had good questions. New Jersey politicians should pay attention to them, too. They were:
+Which private or parochial schools would be eligible? There would be as much concern about voucher start-ups as there is about charter schools. In both cases, state government might be funding an unproven institution--unless they agree not to.
+What state standards would the voucher schools need to meet? For example, would students who attend voucher schools be subject to the same tests in grades 3 through 8 as students in public schools? It's foolish to push for higher standards in the public schools without knowing if the private or parochial schools will meet them, too. Otherwise, a politician is caught in the middle--cut funds for public schools while trying to lead students into schools that might not necessarily be better schools.
+Which agency would audit voucher schools? Vouchers are a government program, so state government must be accountable for the expenses.
Then, I would like add more questions:
+ Vouchers supposedly take the best students out of public schools. However, the best-endowed private and parochial schools offer scholarships to students from low income families, while others, like Newark and Jersey City, have at least one high-performing high school. Does every excellent student who lives within the service area for a poor-performing school already have a choice without vouchers?
+ Will parochial schools make more room for students who are not of the same faith? Last year, the Most Reverend John Myers, Archbishop of Newark, said that the cost of a Catholic school education was $10,000 per year versus $15,000 for a public school education. He advocated a $5,000 voucher that would send, in his estimation, 100,000 students into the Catholic schools. However, Myers did not say that the Catholic schools would admit more non-Catholics. He did support extending the voucher to schools of other faiths.
+ Could vouchers be used for special needs schools? At present, New Jersey school boards pay tuition for special needs students who must be educated outside the district. A state voucher might relieve cash-strapped local governments of this expense. It may be an interesting item to trade off against future increases in municipal aid.
+ Must vouchers be limited to schools within commuting distance? My hunch is yes; if for no other reason parents would prefer schools close to home. But it has not been unusual to hear of parents who send their child to boarding school or to live with another relative who would be their guardian. However, while the Newark metro area has several local options, how can you accommodate a district that might not?
+ Could community college be an option for high school juniors under a voucher program? The top five to ten percent of an urban high school senior class might be less expensively accommodated this way. As one example, the cost for a year's tuition at Essex County College in Newark is approximately $4,000. That is probably less than the cost of a private/parochial school voucher would be.
+ Will neighboring suburban districts accept more students from poor performing schools as a result of vouchers? My hunch is no. The voucher is unlikely to cover full tuition and it would be impossible for a low income household to make up the difference. In addition, public school districts are not obligated to take tuition-paying students, especially if they have no room for them.
And the last question--what do you do with the students who cannot be accepted into any school outside of the poor performer? True, you might see a smaller school with fewer students under vouchers. But would you see a higher level of attention for the students who need it the most?
A voucher for a K-12 school is essentially like a Pell Grant for college. It is a government grant that may be used to defray all or part of the tuition to attend a public school outside a student's district or a private or parochial school. State government may also set a limit on the voucher; it does not necessarily need to cover full tuition.
Governor Christie's intentions appear to be targeted to students from low-income families enrolled in the poorest-performing public schools. There are thirty one "poorer urban districts" or "special needs districts" according to the New Jersey Law Center.
It would be overly ambitious for any politician to attempt to apply a single voucher policy across thirty one school systems. Not all have access to the same educational options.
Newark, for example, has four highly regarded public high schools as well as several charter schools. The parochial school community is very large, too. Trenton has one public high school, few charters, private or parochial schools and the public high schools in neighboring communities are also considered to be In Need of Improvement under No Child Left Behind.
I have to wonder if one solution would be to allow communities to compete to become voucher districts. Parents and state politicians need to know the options on the table. With this in mind, New Jersey could learn from Louisiana's experience.
According to a story in Education Next, four conditions were in place for the Louisiana legislature to pass a voucher bill 1)a weakened teacher's union presense; 2)parent-based lobbying support;3)new faces in the legislature; and 4) strong gubernatorial support.
With Christie's election, New Jersey has three of the four. The union has a large membership, but will have far less influence if urban Democrats support vouchers, too. Only one Democratic seat in the legislature changed hands--state senators were not up for election--but there is Democratic support for vouchers.
The big question mark is parents. Will there be grassroots support? I have to wonder if a tax credit for all families--with an income limit, of course--to send their children to a private or parochial school might have a stronger following in the Garden State. Christie won, in part, due to suburban anger about property tax bills. A tax credit might do him more political good than vouchers, though it would be of less help to low and moderate income families.
The issue of public funding for religious schools is a constitutional question. Also important, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal called the voucher plan a scholarship program, and legislators were allowed to vote separately on the question of vouchers for New Orleans versus their own district.
But Louisiana lawmakers also had good questions. New Jersey politicians should pay attention to them, too. They were:
+Which private or parochial schools would be eligible? There would be as much concern about voucher start-ups as there is about charter schools. In both cases, state government might be funding an unproven institution--unless they agree not to.
+What state standards would the voucher schools need to meet? For example, would students who attend voucher schools be subject to the same tests in grades 3 through 8 as students in public schools? It's foolish to push for higher standards in the public schools without knowing if the private or parochial schools will meet them, too. Otherwise, a politician is caught in the middle--cut funds for public schools while trying to lead students into schools that might not necessarily be better schools.
+Which agency would audit voucher schools? Vouchers are a government program, so state government must be accountable for the expenses.
Then, I would like add more questions:
+ Vouchers supposedly take the best students out of public schools. However, the best-endowed private and parochial schools offer scholarships to students from low income families, while others, like Newark and Jersey City, have at least one high-performing high school. Does every excellent student who lives within the service area for a poor-performing school already have a choice without vouchers?
+ Will parochial schools make more room for students who are not of the same faith? Last year, the Most Reverend John Myers, Archbishop of Newark, said that the cost of a Catholic school education was $10,000 per year versus $15,000 for a public school education. He advocated a $5,000 voucher that would send, in his estimation, 100,000 students into the Catholic schools. However, Myers did not say that the Catholic schools would admit more non-Catholics. He did support extending the voucher to schools of other faiths.
+ Could vouchers be used for special needs schools? At present, New Jersey school boards pay tuition for special needs students who must be educated outside the district. A state voucher might relieve cash-strapped local governments of this expense. It may be an interesting item to trade off against future increases in municipal aid.
+ Must vouchers be limited to schools within commuting distance? My hunch is yes; if for no other reason parents would prefer schools close to home. But it has not been unusual to hear of parents who send their child to boarding school or to live with another relative who would be their guardian. However, while the Newark metro area has several local options, how can you accommodate a district that might not?
+ Could community college be an option for high school juniors under a voucher program? The top five to ten percent of an urban high school senior class might be less expensively accommodated this way. As one example, the cost for a year's tuition at Essex County College in Newark is approximately $4,000. That is probably less than the cost of a private/parochial school voucher would be.
+ Will neighboring suburban districts accept more students from poor performing schools as a result of vouchers? My hunch is no. The voucher is unlikely to cover full tuition and it would be impossible for a low income household to make up the difference. In addition, public school districts are not obligated to take tuition-paying students, especially if they have no room for them.
And the last question--what do you do with the students who cannot be accepted into any school outside of the poor performer? True, you might see a smaller school with fewer students under vouchers. But would you see a higher level of attention for the students who need it the most?
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Mass Firings Just the Beginning of Change at Central Falls High
Today I am reading about Central Falls High School in Rhode Island. The superintendent of schools has fired every teacher and administrator because the teachers have asked for additional compensation to support a plan to turnaround the failing school. Seventy four teachers were affected by her decision.
This week, a Newsweek story reported that the Central Falls teachers earned an average salary of $75,000 while working in the poorest school district in the state. According to that same story, only seven percent of the students could pass the state's mathematics proficiency examination.
Frances Gallo, the superintendent of schools, set several conditions on the teachers and claims that the teacher's union has not been cooperative. These conditions included:
+ An additional 25 minutes to the school day
+ Tutoring on a rotating schedule before and after school
+ Lunch with students once a week
+ More rigorous evaluations
+ Weekly after-school planning sessions
+ Two weeks of training in the summer
Essentially, the teachers were asked to do more, so they wanted a raise. Instead, they were fired.
The Obama Administration supports this decision. I believe Republicans would, too. Gallo's decision is consistent with the intentions of No Child Left Behind--if a school fails its students it should be restructured or closed.
I don't understand why the decision was made in February, just past the middle of a school year, but I do know this much--People who work outside of teaching have been asked to do more for the same salary or less. The teachers will get no sympathy from the voting parents who work.
But how will the school change after the superintendent has cleaned house?
Let's say Gallo hires all new people. A new administrative team--principal and assistant principal, athletic director, guidance counselors, custodians and support staff--would be in place. There would need to be a mix of experienced teachers--probably some denied tenure in other districts--and inexperienced ones. If the school has performed poorly there will be special needs teachers as well.
If you're a fan of any college or professional sport, you know that it can take a long time for a bad team to work their way out of the dumps. The same will be true of a school where everyone will be new. The numbers on the standardized tests are unlikely to take a magic leap towards total proficiency.
In addition, while the new teachers may earn lower salaries than their predecessors who were fired, they are human. More likely than not they will be younger teachers less trained to deal with the stress of teaching at a school such as Central Falls. And those teachers will be members of the teacher's union. That leads to another question: will they become activists themselves, and fight for the same benefits their predecessors wanted, or will they come and go?
The superintendent's decision means that there will be fewer tenured teachers on site. It's possible Gallo may end up with the equivalent of a laboratory school for Teach for America or an alternative teacher training program. The recruits will work under the superintendent's conditions for two or three years then move on.
I've never done a quality study of a high school, but I believe that the reputation of any organization is built in part by stability. Is there a core of good, reliable people who are always there?
If I were in Gallo's position, I would invite all of the disposed teachers to re-apply for their jobs; whiners and loose cannons need not apply. I treat each interviewee, especially the more talented teachers, as individuals and see if they will work under my conditions. Then, if I've sufficiently lowered the payroll, I implement a bonus plan on top of the union-mandated increase, or offer to pay for further training. I want to retain the best people who are familiar with the problems in my school as best I can.
Central Falls High will need to start over, but Frances Gallo will, too. No matter how much change is imposed upon the high school, a superintendent who fired 74 teachers in one day must gain the trust of the teachers who return or replace them.
This week, a Newsweek story reported that the Central Falls teachers earned an average salary of $75,000 while working in the poorest school district in the state. According to that same story, only seven percent of the students could pass the state's mathematics proficiency examination.
Frances Gallo, the superintendent of schools, set several conditions on the teachers and claims that the teacher's union has not been cooperative. These conditions included:
+ An additional 25 minutes to the school day
+ Tutoring on a rotating schedule before and after school
+ Lunch with students once a week
+ More rigorous evaluations
+ Weekly after-school planning sessions
+ Two weeks of training in the summer
Essentially, the teachers were asked to do more, so they wanted a raise. Instead, they were fired.
The Obama Administration supports this decision. I believe Republicans would, too. Gallo's decision is consistent with the intentions of No Child Left Behind--if a school fails its students it should be restructured or closed.
I don't understand why the decision was made in February, just past the middle of a school year, but I do know this much--People who work outside of teaching have been asked to do more for the same salary or less. The teachers will get no sympathy from the voting parents who work.
But how will the school change after the superintendent has cleaned house?
Let's say Gallo hires all new people. A new administrative team--principal and assistant principal, athletic director, guidance counselors, custodians and support staff--would be in place. There would need to be a mix of experienced teachers--probably some denied tenure in other districts--and inexperienced ones. If the school has performed poorly there will be special needs teachers as well.
If you're a fan of any college or professional sport, you know that it can take a long time for a bad team to work their way out of the dumps. The same will be true of a school where everyone will be new. The numbers on the standardized tests are unlikely to take a magic leap towards total proficiency.
In addition, while the new teachers may earn lower salaries than their predecessors who were fired, they are human. More likely than not they will be younger teachers less trained to deal with the stress of teaching at a school such as Central Falls. And those teachers will be members of the teacher's union. That leads to another question: will they become activists themselves, and fight for the same benefits their predecessors wanted, or will they come and go?
The superintendent's decision means that there will be fewer tenured teachers on site. It's possible Gallo may end up with the equivalent of a laboratory school for Teach for America or an alternative teacher training program. The recruits will work under the superintendent's conditions for two or three years then move on.
I've never done a quality study of a high school, but I believe that the reputation of any organization is built in part by stability. Is there a core of good, reliable people who are always there?
If I were in Gallo's position, I would invite all of the disposed teachers to re-apply for their jobs; whiners and loose cannons need not apply. I treat each interviewee, especially the more talented teachers, as individuals and see if they will work under my conditions. Then, if I've sufficiently lowered the payroll, I implement a bonus plan on top of the union-mandated increase, or offer to pay for further training. I want to retain the best people who are familiar with the problems in my school as best I can.
Central Falls High will need to start over, but Frances Gallo will, too. No matter how much change is imposed upon the high school, a superintendent who fired 74 teachers in one day must gain the trust of the teachers who return or replace them.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Should Colleges Be Forced to Report Career Readiness?
This week I'm reading a column by education policy expert Kevin Carey entitled A 'Race to the Top'.
Carey, who is director of public policy for Education Sector, a non-profit and non-partisan organization based in Washington D.C. believes that colleges and state governments can become more accountable to citizens by issuing reports similar to those that K-12 school systems and state governments will need to issue under President Obama's Race to the Top initiative.
Carey has broken the reporting practices that he would like to see into five sets of "truths." They are:
-Truth in college readiness
-Truth in college transfer
-Truth in college learning
-Truth in graduation rates
-Truth in career readiness
I have no argument with Carey over the first four truths, but I want to speak from experience about the fifth--career readiness. I spent ten years working with career counselors at various types of schools: two-year colleges, for-profit institutions, traditional four-year schools, art and design schools and graduate and professional schools.
Carey writes that states should "publicly report work-force outcomes for individual colleges and universities. The data should include the range of annual and hourly earnings, occupation type, industry of employment, and the net increase in earning power before and after attending college."
He also adds that "the data should be reported one, three, five, 10, and 20 years after students leave college, categorized by student demographics."
The problem is that all schools are not equally staffed and managed to collect this information from alumni. Not that it would have much value to students considering professions that do not have high starting salaries or a defined "career path."
It's ridiculous to ask, for example, an art and design school, to publish longitudinal employment and salary information. The entry level positions are not so much jobs as temporary engagements and the long term prospects depend on more than talent. Not to mention, an art and design school would be embarrassed to report that its alumni had to quit pursuing an artistic career several years out of school.
The same, by the way, is true for an education school. College students do not major in education for the money. Schools and school districts come in all sizes, cultures and budgets. Is the school successful because its graduates are hired by the best paying employers, or because they made the attempt to help match students to the schools best suited to their skill set? And would that school actually want to advertise that its graduates quit teaching five, ten or fifteen years after they entered the field?
I can understand if a state had an economic development objective to keep its best-trained professionals at home and wanted to match graduating students to employer needs.
suppose the state's economists forecast that industry will need new accountants, scientists, programmers or engineers, all good paying jobs. The state's schools should be able to confirm that supply will or will not equal demand. Then business and state government can take short-term actions to steer bright people into those professions.
In this case, the schools already know how many students declared these majors, and possibly those who intend to declare them. There's no major data collection involved. The schools already counsel students, so they have some idea who will stick with a demanding major.
What colleges need to do in these instances is look at the reasons students change their minds. I remember my friends in engineering school were told to look at the person to their left and to their right at their freshman orientation. One of them would be gone.
Weeding out is not something to be proud of. It is something to be fixed. While it is not a written mission of all colleges to supply employers to employees, it is their responsibility to help the students and the employers wherever they can by checking to see that their degree programs meet needs.
But those problems are not solved by spending time on reports.
Carey, who is director of public policy for Education Sector, a non-profit and non-partisan organization based in Washington D.C. believes that colleges and state governments can become more accountable to citizens by issuing reports similar to those that K-12 school systems and state governments will need to issue under President Obama's Race to the Top initiative.
Carey has broken the reporting practices that he would like to see into five sets of "truths." They are:
-Truth in college readiness
-Truth in college transfer
-Truth in college learning
-Truth in graduation rates
-Truth in career readiness
I have no argument with Carey over the first four truths, but I want to speak from experience about the fifth--career readiness. I spent ten years working with career counselors at various types of schools: two-year colleges, for-profit institutions, traditional four-year schools, art and design schools and graduate and professional schools.
Carey writes that states should "publicly report work-force outcomes for individual colleges and universities. The data should include the range of annual and hourly earnings, occupation type, industry of employment, and the net increase in earning power before and after attending college."
He also adds that "the data should be reported one, three, five, 10, and 20 years after students leave college, categorized by student demographics."
The problem is that all schools are not equally staffed and managed to collect this information from alumni. Not that it would have much value to students considering professions that do not have high starting salaries or a defined "career path."
It's ridiculous to ask, for example, an art and design school, to publish longitudinal employment and salary information. The entry level positions are not so much jobs as temporary engagements and the long term prospects depend on more than talent. Not to mention, an art and design school would be embarrassed to report that its alumni had to quit pursuing an artistic career several years out of school.
The same, by the way, is true for an education school. College students do not major in education for the money. Schools and school districts come in all sizes, cultures and budgets. Is the school successful because its graduates are hired by the best paying employers, or because they made the attempt to help match students to the schools best suited to their skill set? And would that school actually want to advertise that its graduates quit teaching five, ten or fifteen years after they entered the field?
I can understand if a state had an economic development objective to keep its best-trained professionals at home and wanted to match graduating students to employer needs.
suppose the state's economists forecast that industry will need new accountants, scientists, programmers or engineers, all good paying jobs. The state's schools should be able to confirm that supply will or will not equal demand. Then business and state government can take short-term actions to steer bright people into those professions.
In this case, the schools already know how many students declared these majors, and possibly those who intend to declare them. There's no major data collection involved. The schools already counsel students, so they have some idea who will stick with a demanding major.
What colleges need to do in these instances is look at the reasons students change their minds. I remember my friends in engineering school were told to look at the person to their left and to their right at their freshman orientation. One of them would be gone.
Weeding out is not something to be proud of. It is something to be fixed. While it is not a written mission of all colleges to supply employers to employees, it is their responsibility to help the students and the employers wherever they can by checking to see that their degree programs meet needs.
But those problems are not solved by spending time on reports.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
The Branding of Sheldon Cooper
This morning I logged into Facebook and spotted an ad for Big Bang Theory T-shirts. I really like the show and I know that the t-shirts worn by the cast have been requested through the social networks. However, these t-shirts featured only one character, the most eccentric, Dr. Sheldon Cooper.
Played by Emmy nominee Jim Parsons, Sheldon is a physics prodigy from the Texas panhandle. Raised by a right-wing religious single mother, along with a glamorous twin sister, Sheldon puts physics, sci-fi and comic books, and his odd selfish quirks, above all else. And, if you watch the show, you'll see that his social development is quite an adventure.
These t-shirts are targeted to people who have already watched the show through three seasons. One has his pet expression--Bazinga!--most of us would say Gotcha! Another is written in the original Klingon.
At first, I didn't like the idea that one character, although an Emmy nominee, had received top billing. I guess the designers believed that Sheldon had the most memorable lines on the show. The cast, especially Sheldon, wear t-shirts with interesting graphic designs from Star Wars and DC Comic book heroes, especially the Green Lantern and the Flash. Last week, Sheldon meets Marvel Comics legend Stan Lee and gets an autographed restraining order!
But, lo and behold, I did a Google and found another company that sells--their words--"Nerdvana"--clothing worn by the four main characters in Big Bang. But their domain name is the "Sheldon Brand," at SheldonShirts.com
If you haven't watched the show, three main characters in Big Bang are physicists: Sheldon, his roommate Leonard, and Raj, an Indian scientist in California on a work visa. A fourth character, Howard, is a MIT-trained research engineer. Howard tries to be the coolest, but fails miserably, Raj is afraid to talk to women unless he's drunk and Leonard is the most mild-mannered. Leonard is also the only one with a steady girlfriend, the blond bombshell Penny across the hall.
I don't know if Big Bang has helped make science "cool," and I don't know who laughs hardest at the punch lines: self-proclaimed nerds, nerds in denial, or fans with absolutely no nerd qualities at all.
But I can see this much from the branding--The nerdiest character, Sheldon, has become the "coolest" of the nerds.
(Full disclosure: My brother-in-law, David Saltzberg, a physicist, is the science consultant to the show.)
Played by Emmy nominee Jim Parsons, Sheldon is a physics prodigy from the Texas panhandle. Raised by a right-wing religious single mother, along with a glamorous twin sister, Sheldon puts physics, sci-fi and comic books, and his odd selfish quirks, above all else. And, if you watch the show, you'll see that his social development is quite an adventure.
These t-shirts are targeted to people who have already watched the show through three seasons. One has his pet expression--Bazinga!--most of us would say Gotcha! Another is written in the original Klingon.
At first, I didn't like the idea that one character, although an Emmy nominee, had received top billing. I guess the designers believed that Sheldon had the most memorable lines on the show. The cast, especially Sheldon, wear t-shirts with interesting graphic designs from Star Wars and DC Comic book heroes, especially the Green Lantern and the Flash. Last week, Sheldon meets Marvel Comics legend Stan Lee and gets an autographed restraining order!
But, lo and behold, I did a Google and found another company that sells--their words--"Nerdvana"--clothing worn by the four main characters in Big Bang. But their domain name is the "Sheldon Brand," at SheldonShirts.com
If you haven't watched the show, three main characters in Big Bang are physicists: Sheldon, his roommate Leonard, and Raj, an Indian scientist in California on a work visa. A fourth character, Howard, is a MIT-trained research engineer. Howard tries to be the coolest, but fails miserably, Raj is afraid to talk to women unless he's drunk and Leonard is the most mild-mannered. Leonard is also the only one with a steady girlfriend, the blond bombshell Penny across the hall.
I don't know if Big Bang has helped make science "cool," and I don't know who laughs hardest at the punch lines: self-proclaimed nerds, nerds in denial, or fans with absolutely no nerd qualities at all.
But I can see this much from the branding--The nerdiest character, Sheldon, has become the "coolest" of the nerds.
(Full disclosure: My brother-in-law, David Saltzberg, a physicist, is the science consultant to the show.)
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Special to Educated Quest: Interview with Judge Tom Jacobs, Author on Juvenile Justice
Thomas A. Jacobs, J.D, spent 30 years as a lawyer and a judge, most in juvenile court. A former Arizona assistant attorney general, Superior Court and Family Court judge, he has published four books about juveniles and the law all available through Free Spirit Publishing.
I have reviewed his latest book: Teen Cyberbullying Investigated in a previous post. Judge Jacob's books are exceptionally well written and effective materials to education students and parents about their rights and the law. I would like to thank Judge Jacobs for the opportunity to interview him about his writing and juvenile justice. I also encourage readers to visit his Web site: AskTheJudge.info.
What led you to write about the juvenile justice system?
Since 1976 I've worked in the juvenile justice system, first as an assistant attorney general representing Child Protective Services for nine years. Then I was appointed to the bench assigned to a juvenile court division for 22 years, with one additional year in family court. During my first years with the court, I kept hearing the same questions from kids, parents, teachers, law enforcement and others about the law as applied to children and teenagers. Juvenile law in the United States was a youngster itself, especially since the landmark Tinker case had just been decided in 1969. This led me to write and self-publish a book for Aizona and California families, and eventually a national edition. After a few years I was fortunate to land an educational publisher [Free Spirit Publishing] and in 1997 "What are My Rights?" was published.
How was the transition from judge to writer about laws?
Not difficult since my life involved laws, interpretation of laws and applying the facts in a case before me to those laws. Since 1985 I've dealt exclusively with juvenile and family law thereby providing me with relevant material to write for teenagers.
Overall, have juvenile offenses increased or decreased in the U.S, and why?
The numbers are up because of the teen population, but the percentage of youth in the juvenile justice system remains stable at 1 to 3% at any one time. The emphasis in the 90's on cracking down on juvenile violence by sending more kids to adult court is declining. See Q #5. The crackdown on gang violence, property and drug crimes continues. There's an increase in alcohol and marijuana use among teens, but many kids are diverted away from the system as first time offenders.
How would you assess the quality of legal representation in the juvenile courts?
Based on 23 years with the court in a major U.S. city, the quality of legal representation on all sides is commendable. Attorneys who choose to work in family and juvenile court have a passion for the field, for people and an equitable resolution of these cases. The bottom line many times is what is in the best interests of the child. No one seems to lose sight of that principle. Oftentimes, counsel wears a variety of hats, from social worker to therapist and at the same time, maintaining the professional status of attorney of record in the case. Not an easy undertaking, but rewarding at the end of the day.
As politics have shifted in a conservative direction, have proposed policies for juvenile crimes become stricter? Is there more political support for trying juveniles as adults?
Since the 1990s the pendulum has swung back toward the center where rehabilitation is front and center as opposed to retribution and punishment. Statistics now show that incarcerating juveniles in the adult system is not the answer to fighting juvenile crime. Virtually no services exist for kids in the adult system, consequently years are wasted that could be spent rehabilitating and preparing them for life in the real world. Some states have passed laws authorizing a "reverse transfer" process whereby the teen automatically waived into the adult system can seek court approval for return to the juvenile court for prosecution. We've come full circle in less than a generation of jurisprudence.
What roles can schools play to help reduce incidents of juvenile crimes? What can they do better? What new roles might they assume in the future?
Schools are overwhelmed with maintaining safe environments for learning while at the same time being mindful of student rights [i.e. First Amendment freedoms of expression, speech, etc]. Education and awareness is the key to respecting the rights of others. Students need to be sensitized to the unintended consequences of their acts. Because many kids act out of frustration, or do things as a joke or prank without thinking about the affect on others, they need to be exposed to such things as victim impact panels or powerful, effective YouTube PSAs and videos. Cyberbullying is epidemic and our youth can learn from the experiences of their peers. Civil and criminal sanctions have been imposed on teens regarding their online and cell phone activities. Schools need to address these issues and not shy away from such subjects as sexting, e-world ethics and personal responsibility. Class material should be supplemented with addresses from local experts and role models. Our youth live in a digital age that requires us to stay up to speed with them for guidance and protection when necessary.
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
I have reviewed his latest book: Teen Cyberbullying Investigated in a previous post. Judge Jacob's books are exceptionally well written and effective materials to education students and parents about their rights and the law. I would like to thank Judge Jacobs for the opportunity to interview him about his writing and juvenile justice. I also encourage readers to visit his Web site: AskTheJudge.info.
What led you to write about the juvenile justice system?
Since 1976 I've worked in the juvenile justice system, first as an assistant attorney general representing Child Protective Services for nine years. Then I was appointed to the bench assigned to a juvenile court division for 22 years, with one additional year in family court. During my first years with the court, I kept hearing the same questions from kids, parents, teachers, law enforcement and others about the law as applied to children and teenagers. Juvenile law in the United States was a youngster itself, especially since the landmark Tinker case had just been decided in 1969. This led me to write and self-publish a book for Aizona and California families, and eventually a national edition. After a few years I was fortunate to land an educational publisher [Free Spirit Publishing] and in 1997 "What are My Rights?" was published.
How was the transition from judge to writer about laws?
Not difficult since my life involved laws, interpretation of laws and applying the facts in a case before me to those laws. Since 1985 I've dealt exclusively with juvenile and family law thereby providing me with relevant material to write for teenagers.
Overall, have juvenile offenses increased or decreased in the U.S, and why?
The numbers are up because of the teen population, but the percentage of youth in the juvenile justice system remains stable at 1 to 3% at any one time. The emphasis in the 90's on cracking down on juvenile violence by sending more kids to adult court is declining. See Q #5. The crackdown on gang violence, property and drug crimes continues. There's an increase in alcohol and marijuana use among teens, but many kids are diverted away from the system as first time offenders.
How would you assess the quality of legal representation in the juvenile courts?
Based on 23 years with the court in a major U.S. city, the quality of legal representation on all sides is commendable. Attorneys who choose to work in family and juvenile court have a passion for the field, for people and an equitable resolution of these cases. The bottom line many times is what is in the best interests of the child. No one seems to lose sight of that principle. Oftentimes, counsel wears a variety of hats, from social worker to therapist and at the same time, maintaining the professional status of attorney of record in the case. Not an easy undertaking, but rewarding at the end of the day.
As politics have shifted in a conservative direction, have proposed policies for juvenile crimes become stricter? Is there more political support for trying juveniles as adults?
Since the 1990s the pendulum has swung back toward the center where rehabilitation is front and center as opposed to retribution and punishment. Statistics now show that incarcerating juveniles in the adult system is not the answer to fighting juvenile crime. Virtually no services exist for kids in the adult system, consequently years are wasted that could be spent rehabilitating and preparing them for life in the real world. Some states have passed laws authorizing a "reverse transfer" process whereby the teen automatically waived into the adult system can seek court approval for return to the juvenile court for prosecution. We've come full circle in less than a generation of jurisprudence.
What roles can schools play to help reduce incidents of juvenile crimes? What can they do better? What new roles might they assume in the future?
Schools are overwhelmed with maintaining safe environments for learning while at the same time being mindful of student rights [i.e. First Amendment freedoms of expression, speech, etc]. Education and awareness is the key to respecting the rights of others. Students need to be sensitized to the unintended consequences of their acts. Because many kids act out of frustration, or do things as a joke or prank without thinking about the affect on others, they need to be exposed to such things as victim impact panels or powerful, effective YouTube PSAs and videos. Cyberbullying is epidemic and our youth can learn from the experiences of their peers. Civil and criminal sanctions have been imposed on teens regarding their online and cell phone activities. Schools need to address these issues and not shy away from such subjects as sexting, e-world ethics and personal responsibility. Class material should be supplemented with addresses from local experts and role models. Our youth live in a digital age that requires us to stay up to speed with them for guidance and protection when necessary.
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
Shop Indie Bookstores
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Tomorrow is National Day of Action for Education
Student activists across the country have declared tomorrow, March 4, to be a National Day of Action to Defend Education. While I read about the "viral" movement in Inside Higher Education this morning, student groups have already put various social media tools, including Facebook, Twitter and a national Web site, in place. The national site is a calendar of local campus events.
Unlike past times, such as the Vietnam Era, students and university administrators stand in agreement on the major issues: cost, affordability and declining state support for public university systems. But according to this Inside Higher Education story, it has, at least in California, for students and schools to stand together when there is not exact agreement.
For instance, students will oppose a tuition increase of any kind, as well as the imposition of student fees, often used in lieu of tuition, to cover college costs. Faculty and administrators are unlikely to take as hard a line. Tuition and fees mean revenues, which pay salaries and services. This makes me wonder: why don't public institutions build their case within their community before descending upon a state legislature?
The Vietnam Era was a time of distrust between students and the people who ran their schools. However, it was also a productive era. Students learned where they could properly influence policy. Faculty and administrators also learned to listen better. Many who led protests as students later worked for the institutions they protested. And today, as college costs still exceed inflation, parents are finding their voices, too.
Harnessing the energy and opinions of disparate voices is exceptionally difficult. In a community such as a state university, everyone needs to come out a winner on some issues, but also a loser on others. The key is to form an agenda where all parties agree, as well as a Plan for Action. Many business decisions that a public university must make do not require acts of state government.
In December, I heard the president of Rutgers describe his agenda for the university's 250th anniversary in 2016. It included investments in new faculty, athletics, student services and campus planning. Given that 2016 is only six years away, the president also said that he needs to raise $1 billion, maybe more. He wants to raise as much privately as possible.
I know, from serving on alumni committees and attending events, that this president sought widespread opinion, including students, before putting a vision to paper. Listening as just as important as actually solving problems.
This president will succeed because he can communicate and share his vision with students, parents, alumni and friends of the university. People want to be part of something that is good, and getting better. Aside from campus activists, people who fund and support a university do not want to hear of problems and struggles. They give you money when you offer solutions they support.
Unlike past times, such as the Vietnam Era, students and university administrators stand in agreement on the major issues: cost, affordability and declining state support for public university systems. But according to this Inside Higher Education story, it has, at least in California, for students and schools to stand together when there is not exact agreement.
For instance, students will oppose a tuition increase of any kind, as well as the imposition of student fees, often used in lieu of tuition, to cover college costs. Faculty and administrators are unlikely to take as hard a line. Tuition and fees mean revenues, which pay salaries and services. This makes me wonder: why don't public institutions build their case within their community before descending upon a state legislature?
The Vietnam Era was a time of distrust between students and the people who ran their schools. However, it was also a productive era. Students learned where they could properly influence policy. Faculty and administrators also learned to listen better. Many who led protests as students later worked for the institutions they protested. And today, as college costs still exceed inflation, parents are finding their voices, too.
Harnessing the energy and opinions of disparate voices is exceptionally difficult. In a community such as a state university, everyone needs to come out a winner on some issues, but also a loser on others. The key is to form an agenda where all parties agree, as well as a Plan for Action. Many business decisions that a public university must make do not require acts of state government.
In December, I heard the president of Rutgers describe his agenda for the university's 250th anniversary in 2016. It included investments in new faculty, athletics, student services and campus planning. Given that 2016 is only six years away, the president also said that he needs to raise $1 billion, maybe more. He wants to raise as much privately as possible.
I know, from serving on alumni committees and attending events, that this president sought widespread opinion, including students, before putting a vision to paper. Listening as just as important as actually solving problems.
This president will succeed because he can communicate and share his vision with students, parents, alumni and friends of the university. People want to be part of something that is good, and getting better. Aside from campus activists, people who fund and support a university do not want to hear of problems and struggles. They give you money when you offer solutions they support.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
New Jersey Teachers and Friends Enlist Social Media to Challenge Christie
Today NorthJersey.com had a story about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's new media liaison and the job he has ahead of him. Essentially, the story suggests that 25 year old Patrick Jones will be one of the busiest people in the State House in Trenton. It is easy to see why, when the power of social media can be effectively used against you.
Within approximately two weeks, one Facebook group, New Jersey Teachers United Against Governor Chris Christie's Pay Freeze, has signed up more than 43,000 members. The online community is not affiliated with the New Jersey Education Association, the state's powerful teacher's union.
Since the group is so new, I logged into Facebook and followed their historical trail. Within 48 hours, the group signed up 1,300 fans. In later updates:
2/21: Over 8000 fans in 3 days!
2/22: Over 13,000 fans.
2/25: Over 35,000 supporters in less than a week.
2/27: 40,000 fans and counting!
The group's mission message is totally pro-educator, though it also cites previous anti-government statements made by Christie prior to the election.
But, more interesting, the page administrator reported that Facebook had blocked access to the page for updates on February 25, claiming a violation of their "terms of use." But the page attracted 10,000 new fans after the ban, and pages in favor of a teacher pay freeze, the opposing view, have also sprouted up.
If you're on Facebook, the discussion page is well worth reading. Check out this thread: Math Lesson. There are well-developed pro-freeze and anti-freeze arguments here.
Personally, I respect and I am impressed by this group's ability to organize. It's a great example of social media and democracy in action. I don't believe they will convince the Governor to change his mind. However, if they can stay together and adapt their mission to the comings and goings of education finance and policy, they will force Christie to watch out for votes in the not-too-distant future.
Within approximately two weeks, one Facebook group, New Jersey Teachers United Against Governor Chris Christie's Pay Freeze, has signed up more than 43,000 members. The online community is not affiliated with the New Jersey Education Association, the state's powerful teacher's union.
Since the group is so new, I logged into Facebook and followed their historical trail. Within 48 hours, the group signed up 1,300 fans. In later updates:
2/21: Over 8000 fans in 3 days!
2/22: Over 13,000 fans.
2/25: Over 35,000 supporters in less than a week.
2/27: 40,000 fans and counting!
The group's mission message is totally pro-educator, though it also cites previous anti-government statements made by Christie prior to the election.
But, more interesting, the page administrator reported that Facebook had blocked access to the page for updates on February 25, claiming a violation of their "terms of use." But the page attracted 10,000 new fans after the ban, and pages in favor of a teacher pay freeze, the opposing view, have also sprouted up.
If you're on Facebook, the discussion page is well worth reading. Check out this thread: Math Lesson. There are well-developed pro-freeze and anti-freeze arguments here.
Personally, I respect and I am impressed by this group's ability to organize. It's a great example of social media and democracy in action. I don't believe they will convince the Governor to change his mind. However, if they can stay together and adapt their mission to the comings and goings of education finance and policy, they will force Christie to watch out for votes in the not-too-distant future.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Chris Christie versus New Jersey Education Association--The Opening Bell
Today I am reading a very good story on North Jersey.com about the impending battle between New Jersey governor Chris Christie and the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA). If you want to get an idea of how powerful the teacher's union is in the Garden State, check out the statistics in the sidebar. If you would like to read about how non-teachers feel about New Jersey public school teachers, read the comments.
If you read the comments, you might be convinced that Christie has the voters, unless they are public school teachers, solidly in his corner.
But there stills need to be a win-win between the governor and the union. The worst thing the state could do is place the teachers who are close to retirement in the middle of a pension fight. Reality is that the state will need to fund the pension not only for the retirees, but also teachers due to retire during the governor's first term. The minimum retirement age for New Jersey teachers is 62--and retirees vote.
This means a trade--the contribution in exchange for a less expensive health plan and a 401K substitute for the pension for younger teachers. And probably little or no raise for the teachers at the top of the wage scale. I would also expect the retirement age to go up in 2017, as Christie leaves office after a second term.
If you read the comments, you might be convinced that Christie has the voters, unless they are public school teachers, solidly in his corner.
But there stills need to be a win-win between the governor and the union. The worst thing the state could do is place the teachers who are close to retirement in the middle of a pension fight. Reality is that the state will need to fund the pension not only for the retirees, but also teachers due to retire during the governor's first term. The minimum retirement age for New Jersey teachers is 62--and retirees vote.
This means a trade--the contribution in exchange for a less expensive health plan and a 401K substitute for the pension for younger teachers. And probably little or no raise for the teachers at the top of the wage scale. I would also expect the retirement age to go up in 2017, as Christie leaves office after a second term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)