More money, no sense...

President Obama has good intentions with respect to education, but his reform efforts have little merit. An example is the idea to increase the number of math and science teachers in the K-12 system. The president wants to brings thousands of science and math teachers into the k-12 education pool. To make his vision come true, he has proposed a $10,000 tax credit so that 100,000 math and science teachers will leave more lucrative positions to pursue teaching careers.

Will 100,000 new teachers somehow transform the pipeline leading into the chemistry and physics classes? The answer is, "No." Even if there are 100,000 new math and science teachers, will it necessarily improve math and science instruction? The answer is again, "No." Having taken classes at the community college, state college, and university levels, the best teachers were generally at the community college level. This is because community college instructors generally have better presentation skills than college and university professors. They don't necessarily have the breadth of knowledge of the university professor, but they are better teachers. The point is, that instruction isn't always about knowledge, but presentation.

That isn't to say that knowledge isn't important, but one cannot escape the idea that building the entire product is important, not merely the end product of the education process. The k-12 education reforms are based on
whims. By improving the process of education, we'll inprove the education that students receive. We keep looking for education saviors in the form of charter schools, higher standards, and now "super teachers." Why not find the best lessons and know what works best. I guess we'll try anything but common sense.

Masters and Disasters - terms of the time

The internet is a wonderful tool to see what people are thinking about. For instance, if you look up search terms on "Google Trends," it shows you how much people are looking up certain terms. It might not be surprising that since 2007 there has been an inverse relationship between the search term job and investment. As people spend more time worrying and looking for jobs, they don't look to invest their money as much.

Back in 2004, more people put in the search term retirement, but that is also a downward trend as we head into 2009. It is interesting that in 2004, people were using the search term public education a lot, but that topic does not capture peoples' attention like it did five years ago. There has been a slight increase in interest in charter schools since 2004, but the idea has not captured the publics' imagination. It hasn't helped that charter schools as a whole have not been a successful alternative to public schools.

The truth is that people do not have faith in education's ability to bring the American ship back to stability. Why should they? What jobs will be available in America's future? Although we still are a great manufacturing power, we have shuttered domestic plants to follow low-cost labor in locations through the world. We allow our corporations to set up operations in foreign lands that builds the coffers of countries like India and China. That is where the jobs are.

Corporations with international connections can build merchandise cheaply and then sell it back to the United States. This is beneficial to the corporation and its shareholders (the wealthy), but creates a jobs vacuum in the United States. Wages go down, tax revenues go down, and we can no longer afford services to people who are poor. There are more and more who qualify for government assistance, and therefore, more government programs are needed. Unless we have good jobs that can keep American households at the middle class level, we cannot sustain the republic without taxing the stuffing out of the wealthy. What sort of a future are we giving to the youth of America? What type of future should we prepare them for?

Today, the internet's primary search term is related to who wins the Master's golf tournament. The truth is that a 21 year old Irishman named Rory McIllroy is now winning the Masters by four strokes going into the last round. Will he hold on? The second most popular term is insanity. The economic pathway that we've been moving down is certainly not sane, so we might as well watch the Masters and watch the rest of the world clean our clocks. We can listen to Kelly Clarkson sing her first number one country hit. The truth is that to turn the American economy around will take a huge change in attitude. Free trade is not free to us. Free trade strips our country of jobs, capital, and equality. We cannot sustain an economy in which half the households cannot afford to pay taxes.

Pensions reform... and then what?

When listening to the current fervor over government reforms, it is someone akin to watching a nature program where a fish is grazing along the bottom of the ocean and out of nowhere a shark comes and eats the fish. We have become the sharks who are calling for public employee pension reform. We're all ticked off about the fish who are happily grazing along and eating. These happy grazers, public employees, are going to be comfortable. Damn those fish! They have too comfy a lifestyle. Let's make those fish work harder and longer! The truth is that the public has become the sharks.

The truth is that with uncertainty in the economy, what we are all experiencing is a bit of envy. Why should public employees have such a nice place to feast? We don't the rest of us have such a nice place to retire. There is the problem. The United States has bought into a free-market mentality that has screwed up the jobs market so badly that we're ruined the economy here. It is impossible to have a nice garden inside a glass bubble when the rest of the economy has been ravaged. That is what people dislike.

However, what then? So, if we cut out employee unions we essentially expose the public employees to the distress in the economy that everyone is feeling. Does this fix the problem? Has the economy gotten better?
Is everyone in a better garden now? The answer is no. Like anyone, we all hate paying taxes, but the reason the tax base has been destroyed is because middle class jobs are being destroyed.

Our legislators signed legislation sat by idly while corportate raiders pillaged pensions funds, signed treaties and agreements to ship manufacturing jobs overseas, allowed horrendous fiscal policies during the real estate boom, and all of this has benefitted the financial markets and the wealthy. The wealthy get more money as corporations build their products overseas. It is argued that what is good for business is good for America. That should be revised to "rich" Americans.

The rich do pay taxes, but don't reinvest the money in local economies the way middle class people will. While the wealthy may pay a capital gains tax on dividends or profits, the middle class pay a large number of taxes that benefit local economies. Without decent wages from manufacturing jobs, governments receive less tax revenue. That's the way it is.

If we don't revive the manufacturing element in American society, unless we are rich, we will all be fighting for scraps. So we can go after the public employee unions, but then what? Where are the jobs for our kids supposed to come from? The destruction of our economy has taken many years. We need to look at the root causes if we are going to fix the problem.

Who will want to go into teaching?

In Wisconsin, the legislature has sent a message to the teachers of the state. We don't care.

Unfortunately, teachers are quite used to seeing the "we don't care" message coming from students, parents, and even administrators. Usually, teachers don't complain about their lot in life. They tend to be rule followers who know that they set an example for behavior. It was somewhat surprising to see the teachers protesting so aggressively in Madison to protest Governor Scott Walker's attempt to kill the education union. What put them over the edge?

Perhaps it was the fact that teachers in Wisconsin average $50,000 per year. A single income household with a teacher in charge would be $18,000 below the national average for a household. The Wisconsin legislature wants teachers to contribute more to their health care and pension costs. This will cut the amount they take home even more. Perhaps the Wisconsin teachers will be eligible for public assistance. If the average salary for teachers is $50,000, the salary for beginning teachers must be near the poverty level.

People in college who consider teaching for a career may not think about it very long. Why should they? Why would you go into a profession that may not allow one to live a decent lifestyle? Does the public expect teachers to live single in boarding houses? If so, who will want to become a teacher?

Governor Walker: Shameful

How would you characterize a government that made promises to people and then reneges on them? Some people might say that that just a politician at work. If a politician’s mouth is moving, then a lie is being told. With the situation in Wisconsin, a Governor comes in and decides to renege not only on promises, but on contracts. With teachers, there is an unwritten contract that the government job will pay less, but there will be more stability than a private sector position. When teachers take the job, they are trading earning potential for stability. There is an implicit understanding that comes with taking a teaching, law enforcement, or fire fighter position. Yet, when a state like Wisconsin suffers an economic downturn, the Governor of the state decides that he doesn’t have to honor agreements made to the employees of the state.

This is a question of honor.

When you think of governments that unilaterally break contracts, Americans think of the Soviet Union and China, not Middle America. Governor Scott Walker is acting more like a communist dictator than a leader, and frankly it is a sad moment for America. While the country’s financial sector and the Federal Reserve crafted actions to created the fiscal mess, the government felt it necessary to bail out the banks although the rest of the economy is in the toilet. The actions of Walker break a covenant with people who have served the state in good times and bad. Teachers and other public employees did not make millions in real estate sales or by reselling mortgages. They did their jobs and while unions did negotiate on their behalf, most teachers are not in the job for the money. One of the implications of getting a teaching job is that he or she will suffer economically, but the job is stable and there will be decent benefits.

How much does a teacher in Wisconsin make? According to Department of Education statistics, in 2009 the average K-12 teacher in Wisconsin made $50,231 per annum. Over twelve months, that averages $4186 per month before taxes. Before you all run out to get your teaching certificates, an examination of Wisconsin’s attempt to take away the voice of teachers (and other public employees) will destroy the covenant that draws people in to teaching. Teachers and other public employee have already had their wages cut as they pay more salary to health care premiums. Yet, on top of this fact, Wisconsin’s teachers have also lost when their salaries are measured against the Consumer Price Index. Inflation has outdistanced Wisconsin’s teacher’s salaries by 3.4 percent since 1969-70. Thus, in a profession that has put in more hurdles, yet the salaries have remained stagnant, or more accurately, regressed.

As we march into 2011, the Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, has walked into the job and decided to show the unions and teachers who is boss. The problem is not that Governor Walker is taking on the Unions, it is that he is destroying the fabric of America itself. This is not the Soviet Union, and people that are covered by lawful contracts should not be abused. The State of Wisconsin agreed to support its education system and the data suggests that teachers are not unfairly compensated. The legislators made agreements that they want to destroy. The problem is, we don’t live in the Soviet Union. As far as I know, we still live in a country that allows negotiations to occur. So Walker not only threatens to breech contractual agreements, he also wants to destroy the workers’ freedom of speech. Thank God we live in a place where we honor personal rights. If Governor Walker wants to bring this sort of leadership, he is in the wrong country.

The United States is a country where a person’s word means something. The written agreement of a contract is the basis of our economic system. We do not tear a contract because it is inconvenient; especially to people who have served the state. Not only is every school teacher in America following the events in Wisconsin, so will every person considering education as a future occupation. There is a larger moral question at stake and it drives at the very heart of the American way of life.

It is quite astounding that the federal government will bail out corporations who have acted reprehensibly while standing aside while its public servants are set up as scapegoats. Governor Walker does indeed have the right mindset to lead, but it should under a different time and place. He seems misguided about the moral fabric of leadership. He seems more suited to lead under the banner of hammer and sickle, but not the stars and stripes.

Thanks Mr. Gates....

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.

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?

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.

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.

Let's evaluate the politicians based on today's economy...

Governor Jim Doyle of Wisconsin wants to change the way that teachers are evaluated. He wants student test scores to be part of the teacher evaluation process. He talks about tracking the progress of students from kindergarten through graduation (for the 75% who make it). The governor told students:

"You are coming along at a time where the world is becoming increasingly competitive and the education that we provide has to be even better than it ever was in the past."

Hey Jim, what does the "the world is becoming increasingly competitive" mean? Haven't the laws of survival of the fittest been in effect for thousands of years? What hasn't happened is a standard of life in America that allows someone without a college education to maintain a good lifestyle. According to graduation statistics, our country is educating more people to a higher degree than at any time in the country's history. Obviously, teachers must be doing a terrible job. So let's get rid of teachers whose students don't do well. There is a problem with this.

What is the incentive for students who are tested to do well? This is a good question. Since there are no incentives in the testing process, students can tank on the test without any repercussions. The teacher being evaluated could do an excellent job and be chastised for the student's lack of effort. Is this fair? Let's apply the same standard to a politician.

Since the state coffers of most states are bare, let's blame all the governors. The governors will blame the economy and the state legislators who are responsible for the budget. Are governors to blame for the poor economy? Not really. Can teachers be held responsible if they teach kids that are poorer, less able, and less enthused about education? Apparently the answer is, "Yes" if governor Doyle is asked.

The problem with this approach is that education is a process. Students do not fail in a day, nor does an economy get goofed up by a single day. How does evaluating students after the fact help the students learn? It doesn't. Looking at the current economic problems will also be meaningless unless lessons are applied to processes going forward. The lesson learned must be put into the system of education. For any system to improve, it must learn from itself. Both education and economic systems require that good processes be in place. As the economic catastrophe showed us, measuring performance after the fact is usually too late.

The education system must help the teachers identify the best lessons. It is the lessons that make up the process of learning. The book "Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change" discusses the general impotence of the top-down approach to education reform. Using the methods of Dr. Edward Deming, the book discusses a method for improving the education system by improving the process of education.

The process of education needs revision. We all agree on this point. How will a threat to base teacher evaluations on student performance change what has already occurred? Will such a threat really change the practices of mostly tenured teachers who are protected by unions? The answer is obvious. Improvements are needed in the process, not the outcome.

Common Assessment is the Right Thing to Do...

Many of the things that the United States Department of Education will be throwing stimulus money at education, but one thing that Education Secretary Arne Duncan proposes is right on the mark; common assessments for student. There is no reason for 50 states to have staffs that must duplicate the work to create tests for students. Not only do the tests cost money, but they also stop states from being compared to each other.

If Duncan gets his way and a common test is actually implemented, perhaps the states can address common standards for students. To create 50 bureaucracies to punch out standards is another waste of resources. There may have been a time when there were regional differences that made certain programs (agriculture in Iowa for example) more relevant, but the need and look of schools is rather uniform. Why put the extra expense and time into re-writing curriculum across the country?

Hopefully, Arne Duncan will be able to adopt a common education standard. It is one of the things called for in "Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change" by Rodney Larson. It calls for change in the education system that is based on continuously improving education at the classroom level.

Health package doesn't taste good when crammed down throat

As President Obama made the Sunday talk show circuit last week, he spoke about health care in the United States. He said that it a huge problem and that health care costs were out of control. He said that something had to be done to change health care.

That is true. Something should be done to address the problem of health care in the United States.

Let's start with the problems. First, there is the cost issue: Rising health care costs are outpacing inflation; and second, is the issue of the uninsured. People that do not have health care coverage in the United States.

Let's start with the first issue. Why have health care costs outpaced inflation? How much of the problem is caused by legislation?

One of the things one must keep in mind is that medical coverage may be a right, but it is also a service that costs money. Whether one likes to hear it or not, the price of health care has far surpassed the benefit that is gained by the consumer. Though health care providers can provide more service than at any time, we have not seen marked increases in longevity in the American population.

The most expensive care in the world is not necessarily the best. The government has had a large role in running up health care costs. It needs to have a role in removing excessive burdens to taxpayers. However, the people have to be have proper incentives to use the health system in a responsible manner. We shouldn't all pay for other people's idiocy. There have to be incentives that reward people for taking care of themselves in terms of lower costs.

President Obama's health care plans aren't evil. The problem is that they don't really cut the fat from the system. We all know that what is being proposed will cost more. The whole point of the reform effort is to get a system that costs less.

Harry Potter should fix education...

Today the news came that Orlando will soon be the home of the Harry Potter theme park. After arriving at the airport, your first test of wizardry skill will be to see if you can avoid the toll road that is specifically design to remove cash from a tourist's wallet. It will be located at the Universal Theme park and be called The Wizarding World of Harry Potter.

Visitors to the venue can explore Hogsmeade Station/Hogwartz Express, The Owlery, The Owl Post, and you'll be able to see magic performed as your wallet gets progressively lighter. You'll be able to head to Hogwarts Castle and Professor Snape will be there to put you in detention if you get our of line. There will be several rides planned that will allow one to get the feeling of being swept about in the warmth of the humid Florida climate. Most of you wonder if you'll get to ride on a broom? Let me tell you something: Sitting on a round stick that supports your weight is used as a torture technique in several places. Besides, think about this; even if there were flying brooms, would you want to re-use one after the last pair of sweaty cheeks in Orlando got off it?

Okay, I know after that appetizing thought, food will be out. It will be interesting to see people take to seeing Harry Potter in the flesh. Anyone who wanted to could have seen Daniel Radcliff's flesh in Equus. What a learning experience it must have been for the young who wanted to see Harry live. Speaking of learning experiences, this blog is supposed to cover education, not advertise for J.K. Rowling's expanding bankroll. Talk about magic!

The Harry Potter series has done a great deal to help get kids to read. Our current wizard is more like the man from Oz-bama than Dumbledore. The great wizard Ozbama is sitting behind the screen making proclamations about the greatness of his new health care plan. People claim that it will cost taxpayers over $800 billion over 10 years. The Ozbama can make that kind of money disappear faster than the Treasury can sell notes to China.

Meanwhile, in the back of his mind, Ozbama has ideas to promote education in the United States. Unfortunately, I believe that Harry Potter would have more success waving a wand and shouting "learnalot earnalot" than anything Ozbama has suggested thus far. Thus far, Ozbama has been more adept at saying "spendalot lendalot." We're all sort of hoping these spells do not backfire. I suppose we should all have faith.

The mighty wizard, Arne Dunbledore leads the Ozbama education campaign and we may see the whole Ozbama crew posing at the Wizarding World Theme Park in Orlando. We all know how much Ozbama likes a camera, and frankly, the camera likes him too. Hopefully Ozbama and Arne Dumbledore can make their way to Florida. Maybe they'll find some magic in the place; let's hope so because there is no magic in the Ozbama education policy.

Education Reform? Where is it?

Presidential Obama's educational reform ideas are are going to change much. They are similar to the George W. Bush reforms that forwarded ideas about giving people choice, but really didn't worry about the nuts and bolts of giving them an education. That would involve knowing what is going in education and knowing the root of problems in education.

What Obama and Bush are playing is a shell game. They shift responsibility for improving education to everything but the government (and themselves). If you open up these great new Charter schools, you've given people choice. It doesn't mean that you've offered them a better education, but choice has been put into the mix. Charter schools have not out-performed the normal public schools. Let's explain the free market system to Bush and Obama: you have to offer a better product! That's the problem.

So, read my book (Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change) and it discusses that you actually have to improve the quality of the lesson in the classroom (the product) for schools and the education system to improve. Currently, our high-tech superpower of a nation ranks fairly low in the K-12 education world. It's hard to imagine that we can maintain our standard of living without maintaining our technical superiority. It isn't going to happen if we don't find better ways to deliver the goods.

Parents, Policymakers, and Truth

When looking at the wide divergence between parents and policymakers about school reform, the data shows that parents think the problems are social (cultural problems) and politicians tend to believe the problems are related to curriculum and standards. The teachers overwhelmingly favor the parents view and believe social habits and behavior of the current crop of kids is the largest problem.

The truth is, both sides are right. The data clearly shows that social factors such as parental income and education contribute mightily to both student and school success. Wealthier kids seem to go to better schools where achievement is measured by the number of kids who attend Ivy League schools each year. Poor kids measure success by the number of kids who don't drop out of school. In the poor school, the curriculum being taught is less rigorous than that taught in the wealthy school. The culture and societal factors affect the curriculum.

A survey then said that 69% of parents thought that their kids were "Ready for College." Surveys have also said that parents generally think that the schools that their kids attend is pretty good (74%). Policymakers think that we should ramp up the math and science skills of students, but parents think that science and math education is currently sufficient.

One would have to agree with the policymakers on this count. When one walks through the typical graduate engineering department at a University of California campus, one is often hard pressed to find a native-born American student in the program. Bill Gates has long decried the lack of qualified people to program computers. So, it would appear that we have not done an adequate job of pushing the math and science envelope.

The policymakers also tend to hear another startling statistic. When compared against other industrial nations, the United States is middle of the road academically. We are a country that is abandoning manufacturing to become a knowledge based economy. Problem is, it will be pretty tough for us to maintain a lead based on intellectual capital if our citizens are stuck in the middle of the intellectual pack.

The truth is, in our K-12 education system, we must do things better. We have to find ways to lift the American student out of the middle of the pack. Whether we like it or not, the expansion of knowledge has made education more important than ever. So, is academic rigor the problem? Is the crazy culture a problem? Yes and yes. The truth is, both problems have to be solved to get our schools to the level they need to be.

Quality

In education, it is often difficult to value the contributions of individuals to the education process. Yet, people on a campus know whether or not tend to know whether a person is good at what they do. Robert Pirsig’s book "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", examined quality issues as they pertained to life. Quality is something people recognize, but it has an intangible quality. People just understand quality when they see and can compare it to a less qualified standard. So it is with personnel.

I’ve written a book called "Improving the Odds: A basis for long-term change" that shows that the “system” that makes up education doesn’t do enough to improve the process of education. The current system of education often implores teachers to do more, to do it better, but doesn’t provide any real tools or guidance of how it should be done. Many teachers merely hope the administrator will not impede their teaching efforts.

There are administrators, however, that make a positive difference in the education process because they understand that what happens in a classroom matters. It is rare that people who work “downtown” in school district offices ever return to a school site. However, it wasn’t a surprise to see Cliff Weaver say good-bye to the San Jacinto district office to open a new school.

Those who had served under Mr. Weaver knew that he possessed the capacity to find and deliver quality. As an administrator in San Jacinto, Mr. Weaver had already earned the “Administrator of the Year” award for his efforts in his new setting. Yet in k-12 education, quality can only go as far as the students one serves. It wasn’t surprising to see him move back toward a place where he’d make a difference.

Those of us who have served with Mr. Weaver know what his new employees will now experience. It was nice to get up in the morning and arrive at work and feel that you are on a quest. There will be changes, and you may not know exactly where you’re going, but you’ll feel that you’re destination is certain… you’ll be moving toward quality.

Learning online may be better,... well, maybe.

There was a recent post here that reported that on-line students (mostly in college) had performed better than students who were taught in the traditional classroom. Before anyone gets all charged up about effectiveness of on-line programs, one should recognize that the data were collected for people who were able to finish the class.

The beauty of statistics is that they give validity to the improbable and plausibility to the impossible. While there are reasons why on-line students might do better when tested than their classroom counterparts, one must also examine the population that completes a class versus one that completes an on-line class. It may be that there is a higher attrition rate for the on-line class, or perhaps the on-line learners may have higher skills than their classroom counterparts. This is not meant to negate the study that showed on-line studies to be superior, but to show that perhaps the superiority was skewed. Better information is necessary.

Then again, the on-line option might be the best way to go. There needs to be a system to analyze what works best. We're a country that loves freedom and self-initiative, but academic freedom is a bit of a crock when it comes to a classroom setting. As Bill Gates said with reference to problems with education, "It is the system." Bill was right. Unfortunately, we don't have the best system to make sure we're using what works the best. Until we have a means to find what works best with students, we might as well have Paris Hilton as the Secretary of Education. While not a role model, at least no one will take her seriously while she sells the bag of goods being sold by Arne Duncan.

Kennedy will live on through his efforts...

There is a little less light in Congress as this day ends. Ted Kennedy's death on August 25th as the result of a malignant brain tumor ends the life of a political icon. Kennedy's life spanned from 1932 to 2009, and much of that time was spent as a member of the United State's Senate. At the time of his death, only one other senator (Robert Byrd of West Virginia) had longer tenure in the senate.

Another person that was recently lain to rest was Robert Novac, the conservative columnist who covered the politicos of the Beltway. To republicans like Novac, Ted Kennedy was akin to an evil force. In a recap of President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, Novac said that Bush "had capitulated to Ted Kennedy and George Miller (California) on education," who had wanted more federal funding for education. In fact, Novac referred to NCLB as a Kennedy-Miller bill. Well, that confirms that no one seemed very happy with NCLB. It was a compromise. Senator Kennedy knew how to get what he wanted from a bill. For that his memory should be applauded.

As bad as NCLB was, the version that the republicans wanted was even worse. For that, we owe Mr. Kennedy a great deal. Somewhere in Cape Cod, a star burns a little brighter in the sky looking down from the heavens.

Arne Duncan: Same old promises for education

Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan recently gave the American education system a "B" grade in an article ($5 Billion bet on education). An article that quotes Duncan, "A $5 billion bet on Education," points out that the United States' students fail to graduate on-time about 25% of the time and that the country ranks 18th out of 36 industrialized countries in education. Secretary Duncan thinks that with the backing of Obama's stimulus money, he said "With unprecedented resources and unprecedented reform, I think we have a fundamental and historic breakthrough." One has to wonder what planet Mr. Duncan is on.

The "reform" that Duncan has proposed: improving teacher quality; higher standards; overhauling low-performing schools; and better tracking of student performance were all part of the Bush education plan. How is Mr. Duncan's plan supposed to evoke a historic breakthrough when there are no fundamental new ideas to base change.

There are about 2.5 million teachers in the United States and we've just completed summer break. How is the improvement of teacher quality supposed to occur? Is education supposed to improve because teachers are getting better? How? Are teachers being taught better; are they smarter? What is the change among teachers that will bring about a "breakthrough." Higher standards is a stupid idea. Let's set the standard as "Every child must learn Calculus" before graduating." Is that a high enough standard? The problem is that is that it will not happen. Setting hihger standards does not mean that change what happens in the classroom. It's good to overhaul poor schools, but what is the "newer and better" system that replaces the poor school? Finally, a tracking system is good, but unless there is a plan to keep parents and students appraised of their progress, this too can be a moot point. What Duncan needs is a coherent plan to improve the system.

Fundamental changes in the classroom will occur when the quality of instruction in the classroom occurs. At present, there is no comprehensive vehicle for improving instruction in classrooms. What we have is a new Secretary of Education promising to escape the pull of gravity without a vehicle to escape. Education will not improve using the same methods. "Improving the Odds: raising the class" describes the fundamental flaw of the education system to be the system itself. We do not have effective ways to transfer information in a classroom setting. Until we do, it will be the same promises for education.

The Gates Foundation - Cash for Clunkers in Education?

Over the last few days, several school districts including the Pittsburgh Public Schools (PA), Omaha (NE), and Hillsborough (FL) have been salivating over getting grant money from The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to improve schools. They are using the good old method of incentives. They are trying out the idea of merit pay since their foray into funding charter schools didn't work as well as hoped. They are trying the idea out in charter schools in California as well. This does beg the question: Will providing merit be the answer to education's ills?

If Gates is correct on this matter, it will imply that the carrot (merit pay) will alter teacher performance and therefore, student performance. Will the promise of merit pay change the way teachers approach their jobs? In Hillsborough, they are training 200 "master teachers" to give evaluations to their peers and a person's pay could be determined by the evaluation. Thirty percent of a teacher's evaluation will be done by the master teacher and principal evaluation and test scores will apparently be figured into the equation. A novel idea will allow teachers to "jump up" in the salary schedule based on the outcomes of the evaluation and student performances. People can jump up on the salary schedule and earn a lot more money. I wonder if this change in status is permanent or year-to-year? In any case, it allows teachers to make more money.

The thing that makes this interesting is that success will mean that teachers were "dogging it." This program, apparently, is based purely on market incentives. There is some element of the Hawthorne effect in play here, so test scores might be increased due higher levels of attention and appreciation for what teachers do (by the evaluators), but over the course of a year, such effects shouldn't be that great. If nothing else changes (lessons, curriculum, books, facilities), the factor measured will be the incentive offered to teachers. If successful, what this study would imply is that teachers could do more, but are not. If paid better, they would try harder to teach the students.

The implications are that the free market will change education. The Gates Foundation has tried to demonstrate the power of free market forces in charter schools, and having (at best) mixed results there, has elected to try anther free market idea - cash incentives. This is an effort to get teachers to somehow teach harder. Somehow, the quest for gold will change how the teacher approaches his or her job, and they will be better teachers. In some ways, this is like the Cash for Clunkers program that allows people to trade in their old cars to stimulate the economy and clean the air. Here, The Gates Foundation is giving the money and keeping the same teachers. If Gates has it right, then the teachers could have done a better job teaching the students, but didn't due to the lack of a financial incentive. Most taxpayers and parents will not like the idea that teachers were mailing in their effort if scores increase a great deal.

Dr. Edward Deming was a management guru who said that people who worked in a well managed system did a good job. It isn't about the money, but the system. The Gates Foundation is giving the idea of cash incentives a try. The government enacted "Cash for Clunkers" to stimulate auto spending and reduce pollution. The incentives of the program were clear; a clear exchange. The stimulous programs offered to teachers imply that teachers are not doing their best. It is amazing that Bill Gates, who said the problem with public education is "the system" seems totally clueless about how to approach the problem.