Yesterday Varner’s readers got a glimpse inside a family fight that typically goes on behind closed doors. The fight pits the leadership of the powerful teachers’ union (Washington Education Association – WEA) against the centrist faction of the state Democratic party. The issue is education reform.

Although differences between the two factions have been simmering for years, the battle took center stage recently when Nick Hanauer, a major Democratic party donor, criticized the WEA’s refusal to embrace what he considers mainstream education policy reforms. In a blistering and now viral email, Hanauer took his party and the teachers’ union leadership to task:

I am despondent over my political party’s intransigence on the most important issue in the state – public education reform. I have seen the enemy, and it is us.

Hanauer continued:   ”It is impossible to escape the painful reality that we Democrats are now on the wrong side of every important education-reform issue. Today, the [WEA] is literally strangling our public schools to death with an almost infinite number of institutionalized rules that limit change, innovation and excellence.”

A handful of moderate Republicans in the state legislature have stepped in, joining forces with some centrist Democrats to fight for reforms that the rest of the country and the Obama administration have championed for years, such as replacing seniority-only based hiring and dismissal rules with a fairer, more merit-based system.

Yet the WEA maintains such a tight grip on state education policy that it successfully thwarted passage of a modest bill introduced in January to lift the statewide ban on charter schools (Washington remains only one of nine states where it is illegal to open a charter school). The sole African-American member of the state legislature, Rep. Eric Pettigrew (D), sponsored the bill. It would have allowed up to ten charter schools to open per year, targeting at-risk communities.

According to Varner, in other states teachers’ unions and political leaders are coming together on many of the major education issues of our time. In places like New Haven, Connecticut and New York state, teachers’ unions are signing onto evaluation systems that take student performance into account, make tenure less automatic, and give school districts more control over teacher hiring and placement decisions. Varner observes that nationally, the American Federation of Teachers “has wisely chosen to work with state legislatures shaping teacher-evaluation systems.”

In Varner’s view, compromise will only happen here in Washington if WEA leadership starts listening to state Democratic leaders who want the state to “go big” on education reform:

“For [Washington Democratic] lawmakers, it will be hard to tell that ally [WEA], ‘I’m sorry, but I can’t support you on this issue.’ But that’s leadership. Tough love is difficult, but as any parent will tell you, it’s necessary sometimes.”

Beth T. Sigall

February 22, 2012

According to The National Center for Education Statistics, as reported by The Wall Street Journal, only one-third of U.S. schoolchildren scored proficient on national reading exams. The scores have remained stubbornly flat for two decades.

The rationale behind these bills, according to state legislators, is a large body of research that shows significantly negative outcomes associated with children who do not read proficiently by third grade. For example, the Annie E. Casey Foundation found that children who can’t read at grade level by third grade are four times as likely to drop out of school.

Moreover, after third grade, there is a leap commonly described as transitioning from “learning to read” to “reading to learn” that happens across academic subjects. This means that students in fourth grade are expected to read text and understand its content independently. As such, children who are still struggling readers in fourth grade and beyond end up deficient in other academic areas, particularly those dependent upon reading and learning from a text (e.g., social studies). The result is a student who ends up behind in multiple subjects, and never quite manages to catch up.

While the decision to retain can be difficult, Florida teacher Kyla Burd described it this way:

Holding back a child is not an easy decision.  But the alternative is you just move them ahead, hope for the best and then watch them struggle in fourth grade.

Burd is a third-grade teacher who has held back students, and has two retained students in her current classroom.

Critics of these bills, and of grade retention generally, point to research studies showing mixed results on the effectiveness of repeating a grade, while others worry that repeating a grade will cause low self-esteem in students because of the social stigma associated with it. But proponents of grade retention contend that illiteracy is a far worse social stigma than grade retention.

In Florida, former Governor Jeb Bush and the state legislature ended social promotion in 2002, with a goal to dramatically increase reading proficiency. By 2011, fourth graders in Florida were scoring above the national average reading, although 8^th grade scores remain flat.

My take: For retention to really work, the student can’t merely repeat the grade using the same interventions that didn’t work in the first place. That’s why the policy proposed by Iowa Governor Terry Branstad (R) is a good choice. He wants to commit $10 million to fund specific reading programs focused on getting children to grade level; it would include an additional 90 minutes a day of reading instruction for those students who need it. The bills in New Mexico, Colorado and Iowa make a similar commitment to early literacy.

Beth T. Sigall

February 13, 2012

Robelen writes that the “creativity” movement has been gaining steam in business, political and education groups. The movement recognizes that fostering creativity helps students learn to take risks and to apply problem-solving skills successfully in novel situations. Robelen adds that the creativity push is gaining popularity in countries like South Korea, where the former minister of education states that “creating the type of education in which creativity is emphasized over rote learning” is a top priority for the government there.

In California, the Senate passed a bill requiring the development of a “Creative and Innovative Education Index” where schools would measure their creative education opportunities on a voluntary basis.

In Massachusetts, a new commission is formulating recommendations for a “Creative Challenge Index” for its public schools, in response to legislation. Examples cited in the legislation include arts education, debate clubs, science fairs, filmmaking, and independent research.

And in Oklahoma, Governor Mary Fallin has announced the formation of a public-private partnership to develop a creativity index. The governor views the index as a “very valuable tool to help Oklahoma be a national leader in innovation, critical thinking, and entrepreneurship.”

Proponents hope the index will promote more balance in school curriculum, and provide incentives to schools to spend more time developing creativity in their students.

My take – This is a much-needed movement with laudable aims. But the dust of education reform history is littered with well-meaning yet ultimately misguided checklists and rubrics designed to do one thing, but delivering quite another. Robelen is right to point out the concerns of some involved, such as Robert J. Sternberg, the provost and a professor of psychology and education at Oklahoma State University: “We don’t want an index that trivializes creativity, such as by counting numbers of activities that, on their surface, sound creative rather than exploring what is actually done in the activities to encourage creativity. We don’t want to encourage quantity over quality of activities.”

Beth T. Sigall

February 6, 2012

In kicking off his new virtual college, Thrun wasted no time with small ideas. His first course offering on building a search engine is described this way: “Learn programming in seven weeks. We’ll teach you enough about computer science that you can build a web search engine like Google or Yahoo!” Given Thrun’s Google pedigree, this is a promise he should be able to handle.

As previously explored in this space, Thrun and his colleague, Peter Norvig, set out to experiment with online learning by offering their top-rated Stanford course on AI to anyone for free. Their aim was to give the rest of the world access to the same instructional quality and content as those taking the traditional brick-and-mortar Stanford course. To remain in the course, online participants had to successfully complete the rigorous weekly homework assignments.

Felix Salmon wrote about this major announcement in a blog post Udacity and the Future of Online Universities from the Digital Life Design (DLD) Conference in Munich. At the conference, Thrun revealed some intriguing facts about his game-changing online learning course:

• there were more students from Lithuania alone in the course than students at the physical Stanford class altogether.
• the physical class at Stanford started with 200 students but shrunk to 30 students because, according to Salmon, “the online course was more intimate and better at teaching than the real-world course on which it was based.”
• Of all students who took the course, only 248 scored perfect (meaning never missed a homework or exam question). All of them took the course online.
• And according to a DLD press release, one student in Afghanistan described “risking his life” just to reach a hotspot so he could finish his assignment.

It’s unclear why Thrun chose to sever his relationship with Stanford. It’s a risk for Thrun – will as many people sign up for an online case without the world-class Stanford name attached? Was the competition between the online and brick-and-mortar Stanford students a necessary ingredient to the success of the initial AI course?

His stated goal is certainly a worthy one.

Maybe we should rethink education. If we can make education free and accessible for the world, we can achieve things we never thought possible.

According to Salmon, Thrun’s transition to online teaching was inspired by the Khan Academy model. The Khan model turns the traditional system on its head through its focus on mastery over grades. Khan Academy students can access lectures and materials as much as they need in order to master content. Thrun admitted that in his years as a traditional professor, the goal in part was to weed out students with hard coursework, mostly designed to make the professor look smart. But, with Udacity, Thrun intends to reach and teach as many students as possible.

Beth T. Sigall

January 23, 2012

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the answer is “yes.” In an “informal discussion letter” that could have far-reaching and profound implications for persons with disabilities seeking employment, the EEOC held that under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) employers cannot use a high school diploma requirement to weed out qualified applicants with disabilities. The employer must instead consider whether the essential functions of the job could be performed regardless of diploma status. If yes, then the employer must make “reasonable accommodations” for the person to perform the job (although the prospective job applicant need not be given preferred status for the job over a non-disabled applicant). Here’s how the EEOC articulated the standard:

“If an employer adopts a high school diploma requirement for a job, and that requirement ‘screens out’ an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of “disability,” the employer may not apply the standard unless it can demonstrate that the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity. The employer will not be able to make this showing, for example, if the functions in question can easily be performed by someone who does not have a diploma.”

In EEOC: High school diploma requirement might violate Americans with Disabilties Act, Dave Boyer of The Washington Times describes how employment attorneys are advising their clients in the wake of the EEOC’s letter. Attorney Mary Theresa Metzler recommends that employers “review their job descriptions to determine if a high school degree is truly necessary, or would aid the employee in performing the essential functions of the particular job.” Metzler provides perspective on the EEOC’s thinking in the same article:

The EEOC may be inclined to test its view on the high school diploma requirement and its impact on the disabled in a court case. While such a requirement is routinely included by many employers, a deeper analysis may demonstrate that a lesser educational requirement might suffice.

My Take – While some may view the EEOC’s recommendations as sending the wrong message at a time when our national and state education policies seek to increase high school graduation rates, as previously noted in this space, the sad fact remains that the employment rate for persons with disabilities remains unacceptably low. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 21% of all disabled adults participate in the workforce, compared to 70% of their non-disabled counterparts. By insisting that employers examine their threshold job applicant requirements more closely, the EEOC is doing its part to help bring more persons with disabilities into the workplace. Real jobs for real pay for people with disabilities can and should be more than a lofty aspiration. If a person with a disability did not earn a high school diploma because of their disability, but is otherwise qualified to perform a job, employers should do their part to help bring that person into the workforce.

Beth T. Sigall

January 8, 2012

After 15 years of studying and observing classrooms across the U.S., the authors identified common barriers to successful implementation of team teaching. Here are some of the more significant barriers:

• Absence of skills and support structures that would “allow them to orchestrate significant pedagogical and curriculum changes”
  
• Building administrators who are not trained to supervise team teaching, and don’t have the time to guide teachers through it
  
• Teams aren’t trained in the basic skills of team work, such as time management, goal setting, and conflict resolution

The authors describe a school culture that prefers affable exchange over constructive criticism as a major impediment to team teaching.

Since teachers are a congenial bunch, caring very much that everyone gets along, they tend to avoid conflicts and dismiss or ignore alternative ways of doing things.

Boles and Troen’s research reveal that in teaching, as in life, conflict is a necessary ingredient for progress; we can’t get better if we don’t know what needs improvement.

The culture of teacher of autonomy is offered as another barrier to team teaching’s effectiveness. Boles and Troen frequently observed that when one teacher asserts a leadership role by suggesting a new approach to a colleague, the “automatic response” is often “Who are you to tell me what to do?” The result? “Teacher teams often fail to make headway in improving teaching and learning because they fall into predictable pitfalls, such as poor use of common planning time, failure to pursue expert advice, a focus on issues that are peripheral to learning, absence of clear goals, or lack of team accountability for the success of all their students.”

How can team teaching be improved? Boles and Troen devised “Five Conditions” that should be in place to encourage productive use of team teaching.

• Well-defined task focus that is centered on improving student learning, not crisis management
  
• Leadership from all team members, regardless of veteran or novice status, recognizing that all teachers bring certain strengths to the table
  
• A collaborative climate that recognizes the need for legitimate criticism, and sees the value of it
  
• A level of personal accountability that holds members accountable for their performance, for the team’s success and for the success of all its students
  
• Structures and processes that allow the team to measure whether its goals are being met

My Take – Successful team teaching looks and sounds a lot like special education. The lynchpin of special education is the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) – a yearly plan developed by everyone working with the student, including the parent. It sets forth annual goals, describes how these goals will be measured and achieved, and in what settings. If the student does not make progress, the team revisits the plan, and looks to data and related information to determine what should be adjusted so that the child can make progress. These changes can include any number of remedies, e.g., more pull out instructional time, extra support in the classroom, new placement, etc. At the center of all this decision making is an IEP team composed of teachers, therapists and the child’s parent, all acting as equal partners, and all with vital roles to play. Thus special education, when done correctly, has always required the type of conditions Boles and Troen’s describe in their team teaching analysis. It’s a robust process that relies on constant examination of whether a student is making meaningful progress, and if not, why not.

Beth T. Sigall

December 28, 2011

I’m most intrigued by number 1 – the “Uncollege Movement.”  The “who really needs college” uprising gained steam this year when PayPal co-founder (and early Facebook investor) Peter Thiel announced the first winners of his “20 under 20″ Thiel fellows.  From hundreds of applicants Thiel chose 24 entrepreneurs (he couldn’t narrow the field to 20) under the age of 20 to receive a $100,000 grant and access to a network of high-profile mentors so that, in two years, these budding entrepreneurs could turn their business hopes into reality, reports Jennifer Wang in Entrepreneur Magazine.  The only condition: Thiel Fellows cannot attend college while in the program. Why? Because Thiel believes entrepreneurship can’t be taught in a classroom, and that college with its commensurate mountains of student debt serve to hinder, not advance, young talent today. Hence the “Un-college Movement.”

So, if you aren’t Thiel Fellow, but traditional college doesn’t light your entrepreneurial fire, what do you do?  Writer Anya Kamenetz describes the way forward for “Uncollege” credentialing in her book The Edupunks Guide to a DIY Credential (is it too late rename my blog “Edupunks”?).  Kamenetz’s book offers a “comprehensive guide to learning online and charting a personalized path to an affordable credential.”  In assessing the impact of the “Uncollege Movement,” Staton wonders how soon (not whether) employers will accept un-collegians as readily as they do traditional graduates.

And my favorite trend is number 11 – “Schools are scaling, and so are professors.”  Staton recognizes how online university learning has the potential to democratize higher education by bringing name brand schools and degrees like the University of Southern California’s Masters in Teaching to a lap top near you (a huge development this year).  Readers of this blog will recognize the other trend – the scaling of instruction from world-renowned professors through popular online courses offered to anyone and everyone.  Stanford’s Peter Norvig and Sebastian Thru headlined this effort with their wildly popular online course in artificial intelligence.  “Now that the cost of distributing content is zero and the potential to reach anyone is limitless,” writes Staton, “all-star professors should be teaching every class.”

Beth T. Sigall

December 22, 2011

The grades reflected the extent to which states have adopted policies or practices aligned with these ten elements:

• student access
  
• barriers to student access
  
• personalized learning
  
• competency-based advancement
  
• quality content
  
• quality instruction
  
• quality choices
  
• assessment and accountability
  
• funding
  
• infrastructure

What grade did your state earn? Click here find out. You can also compare your state to the “ideal” digital learning state (as defined by Digital Learning Now!).

*** 

My take – The digital report cards provide of wealth of information about the state of play of online learning in each state, including citations to authorizing laws and regulations. Policy makers and others can learn much about the depth of online learning offerings across the U.S. (e.g., access for various grade levels, caps on enrollment, funding, etc.).

One metric used that didn’t quite make sense is this one:

“State law requires students to complete at least one online course to earn a high school diploma.”

Question – How does the requirement that students complete an online course to earn a diploma measure the effectiveness of a state’s online learning programs? Requiring online learning for graduation is a policy decision, not an objective measure of the quality of a state’s digital learning opportunities.

Upshot - The report card is still worth the click for those interested in what’s happening in the world of online learning at the state level.

Beth T. Sigall

December 15, 2011

Fast forward to today – millions of students with disabilities now receive a public education. In this respect, IDEA helped dramatically shift the paradigm of how we think about educating students with disabilities.

But, as explored in two previous posts, what happens to students with disabilities after they exit school? Are they ready for employment in the real world? And is the real world ready to employ them? The answers to these questions have substantial implications, given that an estimated 2.5 million undergraduate and graduate students in the U.S. reported disabilities in 2008 (as described by Toddi Gutner in “How to tap talented students with disabilities”).

Some big-time companies are stepping up to help address this pressing need. And as is so often the case, parents continue to lead the way, primarily through the formation of non-profit groups that provide training, networking and employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

Here are some inspiring examples.

***

Lime Connect – launched in 2006, this program recruits students with “hidden” disabilities, such as ADHD, autism and dyslexia from top universities, including Princeton, Duke, University of Michigan and University of Pennsylvania. Lime Connect helps these students land internships and ultimately careers at major corporations, such as Google, Target, PepsiCo, Apple, Cisco, McKinsey & Company and others, according to Toddi Gunter with Reuters. Students gain both networking experience as well as connections to other students with hidden disabilities; the connections to similarly situated students is one of the more popular features of the program, writes Gutner.

Unlike some job-training programs for students with disabilities, Lime Connect’s selection process is highly competitive; last year, 125 students applied for 20 fellowship slots. Once chosen, interns do not receive special treatment from their respective companies. According to Lime CEO Susan Lang, “they compete with everyone else. All they’re getting is the connection.” Many land jobs with their companies once the internship ends.  And these companies appreciate the unique qualities these capable students bring to the table. 

When these companies get exposed to our exceptionally talented men and women who have already climbed a mountain and overcome something in their short lives to be successful, they want them on their team

Tom Wilson, former head of global talent sourcing/recruiting at Merrill Lynch and Lime Connect board chairman.

***

Aspiritech - Founded in 2007 by two parents whose adult son with Asperger’s Syndrome had just been fired from his part-time job bagging groceries despite having a four-year college degree, Aspiritech is a non-profit with a mission to “provide a path for high-functioning individuals on the Autism Spectrum to realize their potential through gainful employment.” Based in Chicago, Aspiritech provides a path to employment by aligning “the unique talents of the autism community,” such as attention to detail and technical aptitude, with the needs of the business community. They provide software testing services to companies.

***

Specialisterne stands as one of the most-recognized global efforts at employing people with disabilities. Its stated goal is to create one-million jobs for people with autism and similar challenges ”through social entrepreneurship, corporate sector engagement and a global change in mind-set.” Founded in Denmark by parents of a child with autism, (father) Thorkil Sonne mortgaged the family home to cover the start-up costs. Specialisterne trains people with disabilities like autism to do IT work, such as software testing. Gareth Cook of the Boston Globe writes that Microsoft pays “top dollar” for IT work done by Specialisterne“because the quality is superior.” The company recently was recognized as a “good practices” organization for its compliance with the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Specialisterne now has a U.S. presence in Minnesota.

How can state legislatures help? Massachusetts is considering a bill to revise licensure requirements for special education teachers, allowing them to seek certification in “transitional services.” According to Scott O’Connell of GateHouse News Service, advances in educating students with special needs have “boosted chances at finding employment” but without appropriate transitional support at school “those skills go to waste.” According to O’Connell, some students then “simply go on to receive state services” instead of working.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep Tom Sannicandro, seeks to improve the quality of transitional services offered at the high school level. “Right now they’re not adequately prepared for that transition,” says Sannicandro. “A lot of times there’s a drop-off.” Like IDEA over thirty-five years ago, this bill also has attracted bipartisan support among legislators.

Beth T. Sigall

December 12, 2011

First, some common themes from my survey. As is often the case in advocacy for children, parents are the driving force behind many of these initiatives. One parent went door to door until she found someone willing to help her start a first-of-its-kind program for students with cognitive disabilities at a state university in Florida. Another parent in Flint, Michigan fought to ensure her disabled son received the same education as his peers in public school. Both mother and son now are enrolled at the same community college, where the son who once struggled academically during his K-12 years now has a 3.0 grade point average.

Second, the types of transition programs available vary greatly, reflecting the diverse nature of the needs of students with disabilities. Some job programs and internships are (surprisingly) competitive. Others focus on the mentoring process and teaching general job skills. Still others aim to help demystify life at college or the workplace for those who might have some requisite job skills, but cannot handle the complex social skills demanded on a college campus or in the job market.

Third, resources and ideas for these programs come from many sources. In some instances legislative changes are needed, such as refining teacher training so that faculty can learn how to help students with transition planning. Private industry can also play a vital role, especially in terms of job training and hands-on, apprentice-style experience in the workplace.

***

At Florida International University, the Project Panther Life program kicked off this fall as a way for students with intellectual disabilities to attend college. As reported by WSVN-TV, through this program a group of eight freshman students, all with cognitive disabilities, enrolled in their first college classes this year. According to its founder, parent Liliana Demoya, the program was the first in South Florida to give access to college courses to students with intellectual disabilities. Her son attends the program. Demoya described the challenges she faced:

A program like this one was not available . . . so I started to knock on doors and meet people at universities and meet presidents and put together proposals.

Each student is paired with two mentors whose job is to teach them about life on a college campus, and help them stay on top of assigned work. The program’s ultimate aim is for students to learn how to interview for and land a job.

***

Mott Community College in Flint, Michigan set an enrollment milestone this fall when 274 students who self-identified as having autism, developmental disabilities, or learning disabilities signed up for classes. In a Flint Journal piece, Beata Mostafavi profiled Nicholas Pentecost, a student with autism who endured “vast academic struggles” in his traditional K-12 public school, but has thrived in a community college environment. Colleges are responding to students like Pentecost, considered by some as unqualified for college, with an increased focus on related services and extra help for this expanding community. For example, at some colleges students can request a private room for exams, a note taker, audio books, specialized software, or even weekly counseling sessions. 

At these schools, disability outreach is viewed as part of a broader mission of diversity. University of Michigan-Flint’s accessibility services coordinator, Zachary Tomlinson put it this way:

We talk about embracing diversity and maintaining diversity, and I think it’s important to offer these kinds of accommodations because it creates a level playing field for people. Disability doesn’t always come across people’s minds when you talk about diversity but it’s a huge piece.

***

Next up, how companies like Google and others are discovering untapped talent in the disability community.

Beth T. Sigall

December 7, 2011