A not-dead horse

You might think that I'm beating a dead horse with yet another posting on the governor's proposed Graduation Competency Assessments. 

The problem is that the horse still isn't dead – in fact, he never stopped running. In spite of severe rebuffs from both houses of the Pennsylvania legislature (22-1 in the House Education committee, 48-2 in the full Senate) and in spite of the language of Act 61 "expressly prohibiting the state Board from further promulgating regulations on the GCA proposal" - as well as a rejection by the state’s Independent Regulatory Review Commission - Education Secretary Gerry Zahorchak immediately issued a letter to school districts declaring that the department would not abandon the GCA plan, and would continue to move forward.

Their stated intention is to begin implementation of the GCAs in the 2009-2010 academic year.

I bring this up in light of two recent news items.

You may have read that a commission of some of the country's most influential college admissions officials is recommending a move away from standardized tests (such as SATs) as the best way to determine a student's ability to succeed in college. Instead, there is a growing emphasis in college admissions on assessments that are more closely tied to high school curriculum and content.

Meanwhile, our next-door neighbor, New Jersey, has joined the list of states to embrace the "21st Century Skills" model for its educational system. New Jersey has become ” acutely aware that the skills needed in the context of the global economy include critical thinking, problem solving, effective communication and proficiency in both core subjects and 21st century skills.”

It seems to me that the horse is running in the wrong direction.

Get in on the ground floor

For the benefit of my handful of readers, and in the spirit of using every available resource, consider this your invitation to attend one of five community meetings, in reference to the District Wide Facilities Master Plan.

This will be an opportunity to learn more about the DWMP process, and to offer your thoughts regarding school facilities, both in your area and district-wide.

Pick a date and location that is convenient for you.

September 23: Houserville Elementary or Park Forest Elementary
September 24: Mt. Nittany Middle School or High School South
September 25: Ferguson Twp. Elementary

All meetings are scheduled from 6:30-8:00 p.m.

Also coming up is the first of three Community Dialogues - the "Futures Conference" - which is scheduled for Tuesday, October 7, from 7-9 p.m. in the Mt. Nittany Middle School cafeteria.

Steering the conversation

Another “duel-hat” post

What strikes me about the process being used to develop the District Wide Master Plan are the similarities to Public Issues Forums. In several respects, the role of the DWMP steering committee corresponds to that of a task force for an issues forum.

The most important thing about putting together a PIF task force is getting all the stakeholders to the table. This accomplishes two things. Because the various stakeholders are likely to have different connections in the larger community, they are individually well-positioned to encourage community participation.

Just as importantly, having the right people at the table helps to ensure that every perspective of the issue is considered. If an issue has been well-framed, acknowledging the consequences and trade-offs associated with each potential course of action, then the public will be able to make informed choices. Deciding what should be done about an issue is not the task force’s responsibility.

Likewise, the steering committee’s role will be primarily two-fold: to encourage community participation, and to provide the tools to help the community make an informed decision; that is, to “steer” the community conversation (or at least help it to stay on track).

At the conclusion of public deliberation at a forum, the moderators – who are often members of the task force – help participants identify areas of common ground, or the lack thereof. The task of the DWMP steering committee will be somewhat different, in that their job will not be complete until that common ground is reached and identified.

Steering the DWMP

Sometimes a motion is so complicated, or contains so many components, that when a board member votes "no", the rationale for that vote is not entirely obvious. So I thought it might be useful to explain why I voted against the motion at the August 25th meeting that established the make-up of the steering committee for the District Wide Master Plan.

Most of the proposed adjustments to the steering committee list passed unanimously, but there were a couple of exceptions. I thought it was a mistake to eliminate the seats for the three building principal representatives (one from each level: elementary, middle school, and high school).  In my view, the experience of principals is unique, in that they understand building issues - including curriculum, staffing and space allocation - from the broader, building-wide perspective; a point-of-view you're not likely to get from anyone else. Principals also receive, as part of their job, a significant amount of community input - they hear both sides of practically everything.

I also think there is value in having a representative from the law enforcement community at the table. Their specialized understanding of safety and security issues would, I believe, greatly inform the community's conversation.

Those two issues were the basis of my "no" vote.