As Bill Gates weighs in on education, I can't help but think how clueless he is about education reform. In my book, I praise Gates for his efforts to focus on education issues, but I also point out that his efforts never seem to hit the mark. Now, Gates is discussing teacher pay. He states that the current pay structure in public education is unfair. No kidding!
You see, in a speech to the Council of Chief State School Officers in Louisville, KY, Gates says that 10% of all money paid to teachers does not result in gains to student achievement. This is because the salary scale that keeps teachers employed rather than changing jobs every year is a bad thing. Mr. Gates, do you really feel that educators have been over-compensated for their efforts?
While all the technology boom was going on in the early and mid 90's, driving around Silicon Valley, it was difficult to miss all young people in their 20's driving around in new BMW's. It was simply amazing to see such visible signs of opulence for such young people. Housing prices in the area were being pushed into the stratosphere and it would have been impossible to live in the area on a "teachers" salary. When the tech boom started to dry up and the government was faced with a stalled economy, it simultaneously created low-cost loans and a large supply of money. This government policy managed to artificially buoy the economy of the United States. During these "good times" in the economy, teachers didn't drive BMWs. We didn't make the huge salaries that executives made by creating economic Ponzi schemes. Teachers didn't get the benefit of the good economic times. Now that times are not as rosy, you think that teaching is a great profession to be in?
Let's give Gates his kudos for trying. There is an issue of constancy that Gates seems to ignore. Education will not survive on cycles of boom and bust. The school system needs continuity. The kids' needs are constant. How does Gates think he will hire these "great" teachers he seeks. There is no absolute way to screen for them. Besides, the system of education is more than individual teachers. It is an education system.
It is the system of education that needs to be improved. We need to find a way to improve the lessons that are delivered. We need better ways to match the lessons taught to student abilities. That is what needs to be done to improve the system. Teachers teach in a "system" and improving the system is the answer. All the steps in the education journey have to improve in order for the system to improve. Hoping to hire "super teachers" that will automatically excel at teaching and hoping that it will improve the education system is a bad idea.
Though one has to give Gates credit for continued effort, one would hope that he could look at the school system and understand the improvement that are needed. My book essentially says that we need to fix the school operating system. Of course, fixing operating systems have been a problem for Gates of late; perhaps he should be asking Steve Jobs for advice.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Good intentions and education reform...
Good intentions are the basis of most education reform efforts. People intend to do good things in education, but most of the time, the efforts do not work. Recent events have brought the "free market" into the arena of education. People were told that private schools did a much better job teaching for less money. Private schools did a better job at educating kids. However, a government study showed that when private and public school students were compared from equivalent demographic groups, private schools and public school results were very similar.
It would seem then, that the private school does not necessarily have better instruction than the public school. What really seems to set the private school apart from its public counterparts is the selection process. The selection process is private schools is determined by family income. Students from higher income families that have more advantages can go to private schools that can be "selective" in admission policies and standards. Thus, by selecting students that will be successful, one can create a successful environment.
The same thing happens in public schools. As David Berliner of the University of Arizona points out, the financial lines are drawn across zip codes. It is easy to predict public school success or failure based on factors like family income. Thus, in many ways, the data shows that schools, both public and private, have been rather inert in creating "reform" efforts, good intentions have not managed to find a way to overcome demographic factors.
The question that must be asked is what is the difference between schools where students come from relative wealth and those who do not. While looking at the problem for some time, it became clear that the common denominator between wealth and school success is less disorder. There is not only less disorder in the schools for wealthier students, there is also less disorder in the classroom. Students who are grouped according to ability will create a learning environment that is easier to deal with. It is much easier to teach to a group whose reading levels range from 8th to 12 grade levels as opposed to 3rd versus 12th grade levels. Schools in wealthier areas will have students who are more prepared for the classes, and therefore, the classes will be easier to teach.
The answers to improving education comes from insuring that students are properly prepared for the classes they take. Can legislators do things to make education more important to people who make less money? How about eliminating the child tax credit for students who fail in school? How about deportation for families whose children fail to attend school? Does it sound cruel? Well, the data seems to indicate that schools can work, but that the home environment must support the education process. How can people who are less fortunate put more of their effort and resources towards the education process? If you want to improve education, one way is to change the schools, but if it is really important, the family must also be involved in the solution.
School reform is a subject that is always discussed. However, if American education wants to improve, the schools are only one part of the solution. The importance of education must also be felt in the home. Poverty and education are intrinsically interwoven, and poverty follows along family lines. Unless given an incentive to succeed in school, how will it happen?
It would seem then, that the private school does not necessarily have better instruction than the public school. What really seems to set the private school apart from its public counterparts is the selection process. The selection process is private schools is determined by family income. Students from higher income families that have more advantages can go to private schools that can be "selective" in admission policies and standards. Thus, by selecting students that will be successful, one can create a successful environment.
The same thing happens in public schools. As David Berliner of the University of Arizona points out, the financial lines are drawn across zip codes. It is easy to predict public school success or failure based on factors like family income. Thus, in many ways, the data shows that schools, both public and private, have been rather inert in creating "reform" efforts, good intentions have not managed to find a way to overcome demographic factors.
The question that must be asked is what is the difference between schools where students come from relative wealth and those who do not. While looking at the problem for some time, it became clear that the common denominator between wealth and school success is less disorder. There is not only less disorder in the schools for wealthier students, there is also less disorder in the classroom. Students who are grouped according to ability will create a learning environment that is easier to deal with. It is much easier to teach to a group whose reading levels range from 8th to 12 grade levels as opposed to 3rd versus 12th grade levels. Schools in wealthier areas will have students who are more prepared for the classes, and therefore, the classes will be easier to teach.
The answers to improving education comes from insuring that students are properly prepared for the classes they take. Can legislators do things to make education more important to people who make less money? How about eliminating the child tax credit for students who fail in school? How about deportation for families whose children fail to attend school? Does it sound cruel? Well, the data seems to indicate that schools can work, but that the home environment must support the education process. How can people who are less fortunate put more of their effort and resources towards the education process? If you want to improve education, one way is to change the schools, but if it is really important, the family must also be involved in the solution.
School reform is a subject that is always discussed. However, if American education wants to improve, the schools are only one part of the solution. The importance of education must also be felt in the home. Poverty and education are intrinsically interwoven, and poverty follows along family lines. Unless given an incentive to succeed in school, how will it happen?
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Education: Lowering Disorder in the System
The previous post discussed Improving the Odds: Raising the Class, a book that identified two components of the education system that need to be addressed for long-term improvement of the education system. The first issue that must be addressed is to improve the education process that occurs in the classroom. The lessons delivered to students must be improved. The second issue is to control disorder or entropy that disrupts the delivery of the lessons.
These two factors are the primary focal points that must be addressed to obtain systematic change. If America is truly serious about improving education, then improving the product delivered by education has to be a priority. The current system cannot and will not improve because it has no way to effectively insure either better lessons or the conditions that lead to better learning. Until the system learns to deal with these issues effectively, make sure that your kids have a good teacher; it is the only barrier between your child and mediocrity.
These two factors are the primary focal points that must be addressed to obtain systematic change. If America is truly serious about improving education, then improving the product delivered by education has to be a priority. The current system cannot and will not improve because it has no way to effectively insure either better lessons or the conditions that lead to better learning. Until the system learns to deal with these issues effectively, make sure that your kids have a good teacher; it is the only barrier between your child and mediocrity.
Education Reform: Two things that matter.
When writing Improving the Odds: Raising the Class, the book looked at long-term factors that would affect public education. The two factors are: 1. better curriculum delivered to the classroom; and 2. lowering the entropy or disorder to the education process. What is clear regarding most education reform efforts is how little they address either of these key issues.
The United States does not have a coherent system of putting forth the best lessons into the classroom. This is not the fault of the teachers, unions, site administrators, but of the system itself. There simply is no real system to collect information about what lessons work best in classrooms. What teachers try to do is to present lessons the best way they can. What if medicine worked the same way?
Medicine has developed methods for analyzing and treating patient to improve their conditions. Individual doctors do not go into the office and come up with novel approaches to treating diseases. Doctors learn the best techniques that are delivered to the health system by researchers in the field. In fact the skill that doctors have is not related to making up diagnoses on the fly, the skill is related to knowing how best to apply what the system of medicine has learned.
If teachers want to be considered "professionals," then the school system must create a system to train teachers and insure that each one follows the best educational practices. The second factor that the education system must address is removing entropy or disorder from the education system, a factor that will be discussed in the next post.
The United States does not have a coherent system of putting forth the best lessons into the classroom. This is not the fault of the teachers, unions, site administrators, but of the system itself. There simply is no real system to collect information about what lessons work best in classrooms. What teachers try to do is to present lessons the best way they can. What if medicine worked the same way?
Medicine has developed methods for analyzing and treating patient to improve their conditions. Individual doctors do not go into the office and come up with novel approaches to treating diseases. Doctors learn the best techniques that are delivered to the health system by researchers in the field. In fact the skill that doctors have is not related to making up diagnoses on the fly, the skill is related to knowing how best to apply what the system of medicine has learned.
If teachers want to be considered "professionals," then the school system must create a system to train teachers and insure that each one follows the best educational practices. The second factor that the education system must address is removing entropy or disorder from the education system, a factor that will be discussed in the next post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)