Author: Joseph Thibault

The bad news in Vermont (and any other state) is that they need to cut education spending (1. because it’s somewhat out of control and 2. because you can’t squeeze the rest of the state spending for $40,000,000 without taking a close look at the Ed budget).  The good news is thatthe House actually posted what each district’s slice of the 2009 Stimulus Pie will be.    

All told the State of Vermont’s education system is going to receive LOTS of money.  In fact, it probably could rival what the state gov. is trying to cut from it right now (which might make a few claim it’s moot–I would beg to differ though).  

The information for all of the states is available on the House blog site.  Look up your district and see how they are going to make out.  It’s like knowing what you’re going to get for Christmas!

My elementary school is getting about 500,000 dollars of the nearly 40 billion going to schools…I guess that’s fair since there are less than 200 students.

I’ve recently been thinking about how credit costs are come up with.  It seems that X college just picks a number that covers their costs, marks it up and relies on their “brand” to justify the cost.  I’ve seen accredited universities sell their credits for 50 bucks (not including the cost of content and teachers…which can’t be all together that expensive when spread over 20 students in a course, offered 3 times a semester 6 or 8 times before the content needs upgrading/revision.  

As the recent post on Open Education relates, 

But Robb saves his strongest criticisms for higher education. Beginning with the costs for collegiate education, expenses that have increased 4.39 times faster than inflation over the last three decades, Robb indicates that higher education is no longer affordable for most households, especially as median family incomes stagnate.

via John Robb on “The Education Bubble” and the Opportunities Provided — Open Education.

It’s possible that there is no justification for the prices colleges are charging these days.  Moreso, the article and Robb go on to say, it’s possible that those foregoing higher ed. are just as well off as their counterparts who attend a 4 year cruise to nowhere (college) in the long run.  What!?  

If this bubble bursts things are not going to go well.

“We worked for a number of years before we had kids,” she said. “We know how to research and find information and connect the dots. To expect us to show up and just make photos or write checks does not sit well with this generation. If you are going to invite parents in the door . . . it should be more of a partnership.”

via Well-Connected Parents Take On School Boards – washingtonpost.com.

It was only a matter of time before someone acted to make change.  Education seems more and more resistent to change (just look at Vermont’s decades long funding debate).  The unfortunate part is that parents are just as resistent to funding changes and closing unnecessary schools.  So much for progress.

When 43 was elected a lot of people claimed that he was someone they’d be able to kick back and have a beer with.  No doubt some of that sentiment changed over the 8 years in office.  

I wonder what people say now.  It seems to me that Obama has simultaneously elevated the Presidential brand while bridging the gap between Presidential superstar and plain old civilian.  Yesterday I watched a news cast of Obama reacting to the school closings in DC (they got a bit of snow) and mentioned that he thought it was crazy (though he said it more diplomatically than I have).  That’s right, the President, commenting on a school closing.  Has that ever happened in the history of the US?  I doubt it.  

This may n0t apply to everyone, but I can relate to Barack (for one example, we both work from home).  I’m sitting in Pittsburgh and all of the schools are closed (including early shutdowns of colleges), over 2-3 inches of slushy snow.  His daughter was spot on, we would have been having recess outside on days like that!  Say what you will: that “I’m enamored like the rest of the US public”, or that “I’m in for a big surprise”.  I’m already surprised!  I’m surprised that he actually is the guy I thought he was!  Even his Chef has an eye to policy I agree with.

I think any organization could learn a lot from Zappos.  This is a highly successful business built from the ground up on guidelines that emphasize efficiency and function over form, for example they chose their location because of proximity to easy shipping because the culture of Vegas was more customer oriented, something they wanted to reflect in their business.  I’ve bought shoes from them several times and have always been pleasantly surprised when the shoes show up the very next day (instead of 3-5 days later), free.  There are 10 guidelines, or “core values” instituted by Zappos (Tony Hsieh) himself, they are: 

1. Deliver WOW Through Service
2. Embrace and Drive Change
3. Create Fun and A Little Weirdness
4. Be Adventurous, Creative, and Open-Minded
5. Pursue Growth and Learning
6. Build Open and Honest Relationships With Communication
7. Build a Positive Team and Family Spirit
8. Do More With Less
9. Be Passionate and Determined
10. Be Humble

They even have a book containing essays about the 10 core values.  I’m particularly drawn to 2, 3, 5 and 8.  If these were the guidelines of a school, I think it would be groundbreaking!  

Imagine a school that embraces and drives change (rather than resisting new technologies).  One of my contacts in school was talking about the difficulty in being able to upgrade from IE6 to 7.  I know it’s driven by time constraints, but surely there is a solution to get computers optimized.  Same goes for arguments against using Linux and other FOSS, letting students work on computers or letting students bring their own laptops to school.  

Fun at school?  Imagine that.  It’s funny, when I read articles about KIPP the students strike me as having fun.  They learn in an environment that is more strict than most schools, and some of the rules may be weird, but overall the students seem to embrace the challenge and they even crack a smile!

Learning: it’s the goal of schools (I hope), and if teachers aren’t pursuing growth and learning then students are in big trouble.  Luckily states are mandating lots of Professional Development, otherwise, we’d probably be screwed.

Finally, do more with less.  As state budgets shrink this is evermore important, but it’s probably the hardest thing states are attempting.  It’s hard to argue with the perspective of not cutting education funding.  And more so, the mindset is to at least maintain current funding levels.  But the solution is doing more with less.  There are ways to find educational efficiencies (I think one way would be through national standards), schools just need to have the mindset that they can.  In fact, we should reward schools that find ways to do more with less.  Achievement, success and total funding can all be measured, as success goes up (or stays the same) maybe schools retain some of their savings (this is how some efficiency utilities work).  

What would be the guiding principles if you built a school from scratch?

PS: note that Zappos has a very unique strategy of paying employees to quit…1000 bucks! (Harvard Business Review has a great video interview)

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=6654468&page=1

 

20/20 report on why college degrees have become so inefficient (not to mention ineffective in the job search…

The article above was found on Scribd, and is a report from an Irish teacher about the state of education and the possible/perceived/hoped impact of web 2.0.  Overall the article is well put together and poses some interesting points.

The gist is that web 2.0 is more in line with how students interact with the world today, so it should be used in education (page 6-7).  Making a concession to the methods of students could promote better learning outcomes, etc. because we’re meeting them on their ‘playing field’.  I agree and have often touted the benefits of using good instruction in learning management systems because students are used to playing online, it’s not a hard stretch to believe they would also succeed at learning online.  However, my assertion is flawed: terrible instruction in the classroom, ported to an online forum is still terrible instruction.  The success of online resources is solely attributed to the successful pedagogical practices of the facilitator/teacher.  

On page 9 the report goes on to say, 

What ever the merits of our traditional education system and whatever the future needs of our pupils might be, it seems likely that the future economy will require an adaptable workforce with the skills, confidence and autonomy to take on new learning.  Web 2.0 can help prepare our students for this future…

I believe this also to be true.  Working with today’s technology is the only way to prepare for the leaps technology will make in the future (for it’s the experience our students have with current technology that will push the brightest to reassess the need for such technologies or provide them the inspiration to advance current technologies beyond recognition or imagination.  Afterall, this is why we think STEM is so important.  

The issue I have with this article isn’t so much the points of the author, but what it says about the outlook of educational researchers worldwide.  

What if we’re going about educational research mostly wrong?  When I was writing my thesis about education in Vermont (USA) I took for granted a very important tenet observable in educational research: that there is a way to measure educational success and that the mountains of available data shows that some areas/schools are better at it than others.  But the article makes me ask a question which I think is important.  What really are we supposing that educational success is?  (if we aren’t clear on that how can we be certain about what means are better than others?).  And if the goal of education is creating an “adaptable workforce with the skills, confidence and autonomy to take on new learning” are we certain that students just need to learn in groups and on the web?  Are those contradictory? I mean it in this way: if we’re certain what the goal of education is–adaptability–why would we compromise to meet students halfway when forcing them to adapt is really the point?

As you can tell, I’m currently confused by the assertation that technology is part of the answer.  Especially so when I have no idea which goal we’re trying to meet.  Standardized tests, college graduation, jobs, HS graduation?

Thanks to Darren Walker for penning the piece and doing the great research (I plan on reading several of the sources to get a better handle on this topic and more.