Dropouts and the Unemployment Rate: Joshua Understood Cause and Effect

Posted on September 11, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua Calhoun lacked a formal education, but he had the common sense to appreciate that actions have consequences. Even one hundred years ago he understood that his children needed to finish school if they were to have the best chance at success. Were Joshua alive today, he would be quick to point out to those who ring their hands over unemployment that those who lack a good education probably lack the skills to obtain and keep a good job.

The latest numbers on unemployment were released a few days ago and minimal change was reported as new and breaking information. The analysis of the jobless numbers suggest we should expect or hope for dramatic change in the unemployment numbers without dramatic change in the skills and circumstances of the unemployed population. If the news media, pundits and politicians paid as close attention to the school dropout rate as they do to the unemployment rate, perhaps two problems could be solved with one solution. Focus on students at risk of dropping out of school, ensure all students are college and career ready and prepare every student for 21^st century jobs, thus increasing the likelihood of cutting the unemployment rate.

Although some progress has been made in reducing the number of students who leave school without obtaining a diploma, a quarter of all high school students still drop out of school every year. Among African American and Latino students, the number is closer to 50%. While some of these students eventually obtain GEDs, the probability of a dropout finding a job that will allow them to support a family and move up the career ladder is slim. Job projections for the next decade indicate that more than half of all new jobs created will require some post secondary training.

If they hope to reduce the unemployment rate in this country, employers and policymakers should align their concern for unemployment to a concern for graduation rates. They should support efforts aimed at reducing the dropout rate. The Grad Nation Communities of America’s Promise is a good place to start for examples of how this work is getting done. The National Association of State Boards of Education former partnership with the US Army called Project PASS, demonstrated significant potential. There are other efforts all aimed at increasing graduation that could use exposure and support.

Truancy is a predictor of dropping out of school. Policymakers can enact programs and policies the cut truancy, especially at the elementary and middle school levels. Increase the age for mandatory attendance. More than half the states allow students to leave school before the age of eighteen. Provide incentives for cross-collaboration between successful schools and districts and those struggling with low graduation rates.

If the jobless numbers are important to report each month as an indicator of how the economy is doing, so too are the numbers of young people who drop out of school each month. For once I would like to see the morning news and talk shows get worked up over the pending announcement of just how many students we have allowed to put their futures in jeopardy by dropping out of school. Joshua would have understood the connection.

School Choice for Joshua’s Children

Posted on July 11, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua’s children and grandchildren attended the segregated elementary schools in Georgia’s Bibb and Crawford Counties. When the time came for them to attend high school, Joshua the patriarch had to make a choice between the only two high schools in the community serving black children. He could send them to the “colored” occupational high school (manual and domestic training) or pay tuition for Ballard Normal, a non-public school developed as a college preparatory and normal school.

Not surprisingly, Joshua opted for Ballard for most of his children and grandchildren; not just because he wanted them to attend college, but also because he wanted their academic education to continue beyond the eighth grade. Yet he also sent some to the occupational high school because of their individual interests and because of his realistic understanding that all of his children and grandchildren would not attend college. My mother was sent to Ballard and tells the story of having to work during her high school years to defray the three dollars tuition cost and ten cents athletic fees. But she never questioned that the decision to send her to Ballard was about her, not the system or the adults who ran it. She also knew that the decision to send some of her cousins and siblings to the occupational school was grounded in a child-focused perspective of providing and facilitating learning to the strengths and aspirations of each one.

Today the debate on school choice too frequently focuses on the misguided notion that choice is necessary because public schools have failed to effectively serve a significant portion of the student population. Some choice proponents argue that expanding public charters and private vouchers will, through competition, ultimately improve public schools. They have driven the public policy debate on school choice in a way that is concentrated on ideology and competition, not on what a comprehensive, first class, twenty first century education system should be or on what students need.

There are clearly some schools that have and, regrettably, continue to do an inadequate job of educating its students. But access to charters or vouchers is not the solution to improving those schools. Improving low performing schools should be a goal of its own merit. School leaders and policymakers should fix or close ineffective schools. Leaving any school open that fails to educate its students is immoral.

The expansion of school choice is a good thing and a natural evolution of a 21st century public education system that can and should offer options to students and their families because it is good for the students and good for the nation. It is time for some of my colleagues to disabuse themselves of the notion that all public schools can be all things to all students. The creation of public charter schools, or even providing access to vouchers in unique circumstances should stand on the merits of how they contribute to a comprehensive education system serving all students.

At its most basic level school choice should be about the needs and aspirations of individual students. Joshua, uneducated and born into slavery understood that, why can’t we?

Joshua May Not Have Been Concerned With Summer Learning Loss, But We Should Be

Posted on June 18, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua Calhoun thought school was important, especially when school was in session. But once summer came, his children and grandchildren were expected to work the farm, go to church and, hopefully in between time, have a little fun. Research as far back as 1906 raised concerns about summer learning loss, but given the times and the issues of the day, one can imagine the topic of summer learning loss didn’t gain much traction with Joshua or public policymakers. It was after all the early twentieth century and 85% of the national economy was tied to agriculture. But now one hundred years later circumstances are significantly different for the country and its students. Summer learning loss and its related ill-effects is a problem that plagues our education system and adversely impacts nearly every facet of the market system.

Our national economic security is dependent on preparing students for complex continuous learning, and summer learning loss is contrary to that very notation. The so called summer slide is a luxury we can no longer afford, especially for low income students. Most students today are not working on the farm during the summer; they have summer plans that generally support learning at some level. Middle and upper income families will make sure their children plow through those summer reading lists. For the most part, their youngsters will not be idle. But for a significant portion of this nation’s poor students, the extended time out of school will exacerbate the challenges they already face in competing with students who have multiple enrichment activities and opportunities to enhance their learning throughout the entire year.

Research shows that all students lose some academic proficiency over the summer months (another argument for amending policies on the length of the school day and year), but research further demonstrates, that summer learning loss for low income students can be devastating. Approximately two months of reading achievement is lost over the summer months by low income students, while middle income student actually show modest gains in reading proficiency. A loss in math aptitude spans across all students and grade levels, but the loss is greater for poor students. What’s most troubling is that the loss is cumulative. Once these students fall behind the probability of catching up is slim. Two-thirds of the academic achievement gap among ninth graders is attributed to cumulative summer learning loss.

This site has argued before for expanded learning time, changing the school calendar and providing greater financial support for students at risk. Sadly, the chances of that happening on a large scale are remote. As the school year ends across the country, superintendents are looking towards the fall with consternation. Reductions in budgets will result in the end of programs, the loss of teachers and in the most severe instances, loss of instructional time. The opportunities and resources to add summer programs and enrichment are simply not available.

Ironically as we witness the demise in summer programming and the perpetuation of summer learning loss, we will be subjected to hundreds of millions of dollars worth of campaign ads, lavish conventions and Congressional inaction. Perhaps our political leaders and fundraising PACS could use a little summer learning loss, our kids might be better off.

Common Core State Standards: Joshua’s Children Had to Compete Beyond Their Boundaries

Posted on June 4, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua’s children and grand children attended college, served in the military and competed in business. Most of their career choices forced them out of their comfort zones, and some out of their local communities. It put them in competition with individuals of different backgrounds and experiences. The situations faced by Joshua’s children at the turn of the twentieth century have amplified for his succeeding generations, and for that matter all of today’s students. Given the new stakes, it is astonishing that the debate on the merits of voluntary common core standards continues in some sectors.

The choices and opportunities available to today’s students far outnumber those available to Josh’s children, and the competition goes far beyond state boarders. Technology is increasing exponentially the number of career choices young people can pursue without leaving their communities, even their very homes. When employers and college admission officers look at the skills of the applicants for on-site employment, e-jobs, or college admissions they don’t take into account math and literacy skills based on the state where an applicant went to school. Despite the rapidly changing world of work and school, we have some who still want to argue about the fundamental value of having a common set of standards to which we hold all students.

It is ironic that our nation has standards for meat, toys, drugs, and a host of other things that are not only accepted, but also expected; yet there are still those who find common core state standards for mathematics and English Language Arts threatening. The standards, which define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, do not define how teachers should teach or what curriculum should be used. They are voluntary and they are benchmarked against the nations that regularly outperform students from the United States on international assessments. As states move closer to full implementation, efforts to undermine the common core must cease.

There are a few states that proclaim their own standards are superior to the common core. Some consider the common core an effort for a national takeover of public schools and want no part of such a notion. Both arguments are a stretch. The development and vetting of the common core standards were comprehensive and inclusive. Although they are not perfect, they are a start and policymakers would be wise to build a meaningful governance system to make sure the standards adapt to changes in knowledge and information. Adoption was the easy part of the common core; implementation, oversight and the upcoming assessment are where the heavy lifting will be.

There are still individuals and organizations that are rooting for failure in the common core. Rooting for failure means rooting against students and rooting against the United Sates as a global leader in education. Students will compete beyond their boarders, boarders that are local, state, national and international. Common core state standards are an essential element of equity, access and accountability. Policymakers cannot back away from the commitment to high standards for all students and they need to ensure that students and teacher are ready for the coming changes.

Lila Calhoun Davis: A Teacher and Principal Who Understood the Power of the Arts in Education

Posted on May 14, 2012 by Bwelburn

Lila Calhoun Davis was born in 1904 and was the youngest child of Josh and Missouri Calhoun. As a child Lila and her siblings made a practice of creating mini productions that included music, dance and other forms of the arts to entertain themselves and their friends. Lila grew to love the arts and later, when she became a teacher and a principal, she used them to enrich her instruction and her school. Lila considered the arts to be such a powerful teaching tool that she also used them to teach the adults in her church who had either no education or one that was subpar about the world around them. She taught them how to read and how to understand their place in American history. She discovered that the plays she wrote and directed encouraged students of all ages to want to read more and learn more about the subjects depicted in the amateur productions.

In this country the arts play a pivotal role in the lives of nearly every citizen. From the philharmonic to reality television we learn, we participate and we relish the arts. We also give voice to its importance in our schools, but too often that voice is muted by budget cuts or a lack of understanding that all students, especially those who are struggling academically, benefit significantly from arts education. Too often arts education is curtailed or eliminated so that students can receive supplemental instruction in other subject areas such as math and English Language Arts. Research shows that scores are higher for students who have the arts well integrate into instruction, as stand along subjects and as co-curricular activities.

Depriving any student access to quality arts education is shortsighted and a disservice to the students in question. It is also unfair to teachers and it deprives the nation of future citizens who have received an enriched and comprehensive education. At a time when imagination and creativity feed a growing knowledge-based society and economy, we cannot afford to deprive any student the advantages provided by arts education.

The benefits of arts education to students is well known, but recent studies indicate that teachers also gain advantages from integrating the arts in their instruction the way Lila did so many years ago. The creative approach to teaching and learning through the arts has increased teacher enthusiasm and provided multiple approaches to instruction. According to a study cited by the Arts Education Partnership, it has reduced teacher burnout and absenteeism in much the same way it has done for students.

We know too that it is not only teachers and students who benefit from arts education, our whole society benefits. We benefit from the global understanding of other cultures that is often enhanced through arts education. We benefit from the gifts that are nurtured in students who pursue the arts and entertain and inspire us. We benefit from the appreciation we all develop from access to the arts. We benefit from women like Lila who take a little vision and use it to make the world a better place.

Educator Evaluation and Teacher Quality: Joshua Focused on Continuous Improvement

Posted on April 26, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua’s success as a farmer and businessman was due to his unrelenting determination to improve his crops every year. No matter how good he was at farming, he knew he could be better. There is significantly more science in farming today than when Joshua farmed, but I suspect there were fundamentals at play back then that are still true today. Joshua needed to understand the skills of effective farming, the land had to be in good condition, he had to have good seeds and he needed to understand how to deal with weeds.

Federal education programs such as Race to the Top and ESEA waivers have increased the pressure on states to adopt rigorous evaluation plans for educators. Effective evaluations are a critical element of sound educational practice; as is ensuring that the evaluations include multiple measures of competency and teacher effectiveness. In adopting new evaluation plans, states have an obligation to ensure that measuring educator effectiveness and promoting teacher quality do not work at cross purposes. Having an evaluation plan in place that focuses on test scores does not automatically assume that teacher quality is defined in its broadest context or that it is a high priority for the system. Educator evaluations must measure a teacher’s professional growth as well as student growth and academic achievement. If evaluation systems are not designed to inform and improve practice, they miss the mark.

Sates must also be cautious in ensuring that uniform statewide evaluation systems that measure the performance of teachers who practice in very diverse circumstances take those assorted instructional environments into consideration. Evaluation systems should not absolve districts with a disproportionate number of low-income students from making meaningful progress with those students; but they must recognize and celebrate good teaching especially when teachers face significant challenges. State policymakers must use their leverage to incentivize good teachers to teach in low performing schools and compensate for circumstances that put students at risk because they come to school lacking the tools for success.

Not every student or teacher will reach proficiency at the same time, but a good evaluation system will take conditions of teaching and learning into consideration when determining what differences an individual teacher has made on all of his or her students and whether or not the teacher and the student show continuous improvement. Just as Joshua needed to understand the practices of effective farming, Principals need to be able to recognize and evaluate good teachers as well as encouraging emerging good teachers. They must create a work environment that inspires every teacher in the building to reach their full potential as an educator.

Finally we should know that Joshua did not weed indiscriminately. He understood that what was initially considered a weed could be cultivated to add value to the farm and the field. Individuals who are not a good fit for the teaching profession should absolutely be counseled out, but those who demonstrate the potential to be good, even great teachers should be supported, nurtured and left in the garden to flourish.

Expanded Learning Time: Joshua’s Children Have Left the Fields

Posted on April 13, 2012 by Bwelburn

At the turn of the twentieth century it was common to plan life, including the school day and calendar, around the needs of farmers like Joshua. My grandmother Mamie had farm chores before she left for school in the morning and fieldwork once she returned home in the afternoon. The chores and the routine for school children like Mamie were not unusual. The fact that she attended and completed elementary and secondary school and then attended college was unusual, in fact it was extraordinary.

What is also extraordinary is that my granddaughter is on track to follow a similar school schedule as her great great grandmother – one hundred and eighty days, five days a week, five or six hours a day or thereabouts. Very little about the lives of today’s students resemble the children of 1900, yet we cling to this model of school time as if the very lives of children depend on it. In fact, the lives and futures of today’s students are more dependent on the need to understand and integrate flexibility into their learning experience, including the time allocated to schooling. It has been eighteen years since the U.S. Department of Education released the report “Prisoners of Time” and yet only limited progress has been made in achieving what the report encouraged, to make learning the constant and time the variable.

Advocacy for expanded learning time is often focused on the needs of struggling students to have additional instructional time to reach proficiency. Although it is true that schools need to engage in strategies to increase student achievement for all students, expanded learning time is not simply about allowing more time for teaching a targeted group of students; it is about structuring the institution for the twenty first century. It is about acknowledging that different disciplines need differentiated instructional time, it means that virtual classes and enrichment opportunities allow students in rural districts access to AP courses and any student in any district access to uncommon courses at different times of the day or week.

This is not simple about the old adage, practice makes perfect. “Drill and kill” is practice but it doesn’t come close to perfect and it is insufficient for really improving learning. The current school calendar limits the opportunity of many students to high quality instruction and enrichment experiences and stifles creative thinking on the part of policymakers and administrators about the way learning takes place in the twenty first century.

Changing the school calendar is not without its political and policy challenges, but extended learning practices in states like Massachusetts are demonstrating that it can be done with excellent results. Joshua’s children have left the fields. It is time for schools to do the same.

This blog and the ensuing commentaries are dedicated to the memory of Joshua and Missouri Calhoun and their awe-inspiring descendants who motivate me every day to continue the journey.

Education Technology: Joshua Believed in Balance

Posted on March 30, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua’s children and grandchildren did not have an easy time as the brood of a taskmaster who demanded that they do chores, help in the fields, go to school and attend church. Work came first, but Joshua also knew the value of play. He recognized that even the progeny of Joshua Calhoun needed to keep the world around them in perspective. They needed to progress at their own pace and explore their own destinies. Joshua knew that children need balance in their lives.

Education policymakers would do well to channel a bit of Joshua’s attitude on balance and ensure that the pursuit of high quality technology in schools does not come at the expense of using multiple strategies, educational tools and even simple play in teaching and learning.

A recent article in the Washington Post reported a modification in South Korea’s plan to eliminate all traditional textbooks and replace them with digital ones that could be accessed on any screen, anytime, anywhere. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-south-korean-classrooms-digital-textbook-revolution-meets-some-resistance/2012/03/21/gIQAxiNGYS_story.html

In its pursuit of having the most technologically advanced education system in the world, South Korean officials rightly acknowledge the limitations of bound textbooks; but they neglected to consider the implications that the perpetual use of technology devices could have on the social, emotional and physical development of children. Fortunately South Korean educators and parents pushed back on the plan to have, what they considered, excessive student dependency on digital devices. One official was quoted as saying that without changes in the policy, “young students won’t have as much time to experience real life and real things.” Under the proposed changes, first and second grade students will not be using digital devices and older students will use a combination of traditional books and devices.

I applaud the South Korean government for the mid-course correction. Don’t get me wrong. I am not opposed to digital textbooks or educational technology. In fact, I love technology. I have a bunch of the i gadgets – pod, pad, max, phone, tunes, etc., but I am also keenly aware of how caught up I can get with those devices, sometimes to the exclusion of other essential activities. Like the Korean education system I often find myself re-evaluating how these tools usurp “real life and real things.”

When it comes to our children, I believe we must be as vigilant as the South Koreans when it comes to technology. The more tethered children are to digital devices, the less time they spend developing the social and emotional skills essential for functioning in an interdependent society. The more time children spend in front of a screen, the less time they have for exercise and physical fitness. The more time children are exercising their fingers and thumbs, the less time they have for inventive and creative play.

The role of play in child development, healthy living and academic achievement is essential to a whole child approach to education. Play is not simply the manipulation of toys and handheld gaming systems. Play includes movement, activities, actions, strategic thinking and make-believe. All children learn through play. All students need to play to keep balance in their lives.

Joshua understood that over one hundred years ago, shouldn’t we?

This blog and the ensuing commentaries are dedicated to the memory of Joshua and Missouri Calhoun and their awe-inspiring descendents who motivate me every day to continue the journey.

Principals and Administrators: Joshua Understood the Responsibility of Leadership

Posted on March 19, 2012 by Bwelburn

It’s hard to imagine a former slave having share croppers in the early 20^th century, yet my great grandfather Joshua Calhoun defied the odds. He was a land owner with tenant farmers who worked for him. Together they farmed the land and shared in the profits, aspiring to independence and prosperity.

From what I am told, Joshua was a successful landlord because he himself had been a farmer and he understood the work of his tenants. Even after he became a landlord he did not give up the practice of farming. He knew he needed to be current in new trends and evolving farming techniques to ensure he got the most from his land and his workers. Joshua also knew that leadership was about more than just being the boss. He knew that above all, he had to be fair and just and he had to trust and inspire his workers to give their very best.

Principals and superintendents are today’s school landlords. They are the educational leaders on the ground and their roles are essential to continuous improvement. The most effective school leaders approach their positions much the way Joshua approached farming. They know that in order to understand and evaluate good practice, they must comprehend the complex implementation of good instruction. They know how to help teachers overcome the external deficits that impact student performance and keep students moving forward. Good principals recognize effective practice in their finest teachers and celebrate and reward those teachers. They foster a climate of continuous learning for everyone in the building, including teachers, students and support staff. Like Joshua, they are versed in evolving trends and emerging practices. They are skilled and they are adaptive as leaders. Good administrators acknowledge and promote progress for all schools and students in the district, not just those that are struggling, but those who are meeting expectations because just being good is never good enough.

Leadership is not limited to principals and administrators. Teacher leaders also play a significant role in successful schools, modeling and supporting good instruction. The reciprocal relationship between the principal who respects the contributions of teacher leaders to the overall success of the school, and the teacher who supports the principal in his or her unique challenge of often being both manger and coach is a core component of the successful professional relationship. Whether the position of leadership is at the district, building or classroom level, those who do it best have a fundamental characteristic that is not taught in teacher or administrator preparation. They do the right thing and make the right judgment call, even when it is unpopular.

Too often the importance of doing the right thing is down played until a light is shone on some shameful practice like cheating. Yet, every day school administrators, principals and teacher leaders are given the opportunity to exemplify true leadership and do the right thing. Creating and sustaining an environment that is conducive to learning means that students understand that they are as valued and are as important as every other student in the classroom or school. Evenhandedness in discipline and grading, and placement of problem students with great teachers is the rule rather than the exception. Acknowledging and addressing issues of ineffective practice is the norm. Zero tolerance for bullying is standard. The list is endless, difficult sometimes, yes; impossible no. It is simply the responsibility of leadership.

This blog and the ensuing commentaries are dedicated to the memory of Joshua and Missouri Calhoun and their awe-inspiring descendents who motivate me every day to continue the journey.

Post Secondary Options: Joshua Prepared His Fields for a Good Yield

Posted on March 9, 2012 by Bwelburn

Joshua was a farmer and a firm believer in preparing his fields for the best yield, so I think he would have been solidly behind common core standards and college and career readiness. What I don’t know is how he would have viewed this article in the NY Times on various New York City private and for profit school policies on college counseling, but I have an idea. http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/07/are-ninth-graders-ready-for-college-applications/.

The article focuses on when the formal process of college counseling should begin. Some schools referenced in the article are starting college counseling in the ninth and ten grades; while others prefer to wait until the eleventh grade when they believe students are more mature and capable of evaluating their options. The reality is the students in these schools have been in college counseling mode since birth. Their parents more than likely placed them in a good early childhood or pre-school education programs. They tracked their children’s academic progress from the very first report card. They provided enrichment experiences and opportunities that support a foundation for success. Good for them, I did the exact same thing with my children.

The fact is however, the lessons one gleans from the article are not really on the subject of deciding when to begin college counseling. In reality the spotlight is on divergent perspectives on positioning students for admission into specific prestigious institutions. The more subtle lessons of the article for policymakers, administrators and teachers, are about the importance of setting expectations and establishing opportunities for all students before they even begin thinking about what to do after high school.

The college and career counseling challenge facing policymakers is more complex than at what grade level it should take place. Education policymakers must focus their efforts more on what cohesive preparation for post-secondary choices is included at every grade level for every child. This is one of the purposes of common core standards. But policies need to go beyond setting and teaching to a set of standards. They need to address and provide information, opportunities and options as well. They need to promote strategies to help students navigate the slopes of the playing field, because let’s face it, articles like the one referenced here remind us that we will never fully level the playing field. For most students and their families, college counseling is at best a one shot conversation with a counselor and at worse a notice that comes too late that your child isn’t prepared to go to college. We can do better, but in doing so the message must be clear.

Getting into college isn’t the end game. Four year colleges are not the only post-secondary choice for career training. Preparation, opportunity, and guidance are necessary for students to make good choices. Planting multiple fields that produce a variety of crops makes good sense for our country.