A couple of interesting ideas to emerge from last Friday's Green School conference at the Nittany Lion Inn came from the table conversation with other attendees. Among others, I spoke with Donnan Stoicovy, principal of Park Forest Elementary, who has long been an advocate for environmental responsibility coupled with student engagement. I came away more convinced of the importance of approaching "green" issues holistically.
In particular, a lot could be gained by integrating our commitment to environmental responsibility with the district's wellness policy.
For example, should we rethink the district's busing policy, which currently provides transportation to elementary students who live more than one mile from school? (The secondary threshold is 1.5 miles; the state requirement is 1.5 miles and 2 miles, respectively.) Potentially, this could reduce vehicle emissions, save money, as well as give students a little more physical exercise.
Should we be trying to purchase more locally grown food - or perhaps, try growing it ourselves, as part of the curriculum? In addition to the environmental impact (less pollution from transportation), and the potential for a healthier diet, what would be the educational impact of having students seeing how their food is "made"? I suspect that our eating habits would change for the better overnight if our food production processes was more transparent.
(In a related note, Slow Food USA’s Central PA chapter recently announced a Labor Day “Eat In” to be held from 3-5pm at the Panorama Elementary School. The community pot-luck is in support of Slow Food’s goal of “getting real food into school lunches.”)
There are also clear benefits to actively involving students in these decisions, both for the educational value, as well as for the increased sense of student engagement in the school community. One presenter showed us four short student-made videos that were produced to encourage environmental awareness within their school. Locally, first and second graders at Park Forest recently took on the challenge of reducing paper towel consumption. - this involved some impressive math - resulting in "One or two will do" stickers being placed on every towel dispenser.
Subscribe To SchoolBoardBlogger
Posts
All Comments
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Small Learning Communities and Building Design
Readers: what follows is the second half of the report I gave to the Board last night. It's an extension of my April 13th post on "Professional Learning Communities"
One of the presentations I attended at NSBA's April conference was by a school district that – like State College - was facing the imperative of significant renovations to their high school facility. Marysville School District in Washington state decided this was an opportunity for them to re-vision what a 21st century high school might look like.
With a guiding committee of about 50 teachers, parents and students, Marysville began by brainstorming a "day in the life" of a high school student. This lead to the establishment of a set of guiding principles.
The central principal centered on relationships.
Their year of planning included virtual tours of successful schools, along with site visits.
One of the things they discovered was that if you ask people what they want in a new school, they'll tell you that what they want is what they've always had. This made clear the importance of giving as many people as possible the opportunity to experience successful educational systems in other communities. Most people need to see an actual example in order to imagine doing something different from what they already know.
As a result of student and faculty surveys, Marysville ended up with eight high school options: This included five "interest-area" schools of about 400 students each:
Four of these learning communities will be located in separate buildings on a new 1600 student campus, surrounding a “Community Commons” area that houses shared functions such as physical education and food service. The academic buildings are designed for future flexibility, with the load-bearing walls and plumbing located around the perimeter. This makes it easier to rearrange the interior spaces, should that become necessary.
Their Arts school and their Heritage school - this is an area with a large Native-American population - are located at a second facility. The Mountainview school, which is somewhat analogous to our Delta program, has its own building. Eventually, their original high school building will serve the approximately 1200 students who want the opportunity to explore several options.
One of the presentations I attended at NSBA's April conference was by a school district that – like State College - was facing the imperative of significant renovations to their high school facility. Marysville School District in Washington state decided this was an opportunity for them to re-vision what a 21st century high school might look like.
With a guiding committee of about 50 teachers, parents and students, Marysville began by brainstorming a "day in the life" of a high school student. This lead to the establishment of a set of guiding principles.
The central principal centered on relationships.
- Students should be known, valued and inspired to perform at their highest potential.
- Collaboration (at all levels) personalizes learning.
- Every student should have an adult advocate.
Their year of planning included virtual tours of successful schools, along with site visits.
One of the things they discovered was that if you ask people what they want in a new school, they'll tell you that what they want is what they've always had. This made clear the importance of giving as many people as possible the opportunity to experience successful educational systems in other communities. Most people need to see an actual example in order to imagine doing something different from what they already know.
As a result of student and faculty surveys, Marysville ended up with eight high school options: This included five "interest-area" schools of about 400 students each:
- Construction and Engineering
- The Bio-Med Academy
- International School of Communications
- School for the Entrepreneur
- Arts and Technology
Four of these learning communities will be located in separate buildings on a new 1600 student campus, surrounding a “Community Commons” area that houses shared functions such as physical education and food service. The academic buildings are designed for future flexibility, with the load-bearing walls and plumbing located around the perimeter. This makes it easier to rearrange the interior spaces, should that become necessary.
Their Arts school and their Heritage school - this is an area with a large Native-American population - are located at a second facility. The Mountainview school, which is somewhat analogous to our Delta program, has its own building. Eventually, their original high school building will serve the approximately 1200 students who want the opportunity to explore several options.
Friday, June 12, 2009
The budget discussion
I thought it might be useful for my readers to have the unabridged version – you can’t print everything - of my comments to the CDT in regards to its recent story on the school district’s 09/10 budget.
My concern is that we're putting a lot of unnecessary effort and administrative time into preparing for a worst-case scenario that is highly unlikely. Every state budget is a negotiation, and as I said at the last board meeting, my guess is that the eventual state appropriation is likely to be closer to the governor's proposal (which would result in a net gain to the district of about $200,000) than to what the senate passed and which the house rejected (which would have resulted in a net loss of $600,000).
The most likely outcome, therefore, is that we’ll have to cover a shortfall of $100,000-200,000. (Keep in mind that the Governor has a pretty good track record of getting what he wants.)
In the proposed budget, we have already set aside $3 million from our fund balance in preparation for the spike in the mandated contribution to PSERS that will be occurring in 2012-2013. That still leaves us with over $500,000 above and beyond the 5% that has been established by board policy - more than enough to cover any shortfall from the state. In fact, these unexpected situations are precisely the reason that you have a fund balance.
While there are savings to be found in any budget, significant cost-cutting should be approached thoughtfully, deliberately, and with consideration for all the implications. This is especially true if we are dealing with a long-term issue, which appears likely. In my opinion, this is not something we should be trying to do in the twenty days we have left to pass this year’s budget.
The long-term solution: a change in the fiscal calendar that would let school districts know the state appropriation well before they have to pass their budget. This also seems highly unlikely, but Senator Corman has indicated that he’s willing to consider it.
My concern is that we're putting a lot of unnecessary effort and administrative time into preparing for a worst-case scenario that is highly unlikely. Every state budget is a negotiation, and as I said at the last board meeting, my guess is that the eventual state appropriation is likely to be closer to the governor's proposal (which would result in a net gain to the district of about $200,000) than to what the senate passed and which the house rejected (which would have resulted in a net loss of $600,000).
The most likely outcome, therefore, is that we’ll have to cover a shortfall of $100,000-200,000. (Keep in mind that the Governor has a pretty good track record of getting what he wants.)
In the proposed budget, we have already set aside $3 million from our fund balance in preparation for the spike in the mandated contribution to PSERS that will be occurring in 2012-2013. That still leaves us with over $500,000 above and beyond the 5% that has been established by board policy - more than enough to cover any shortfall from the state. In fact, these unexpected situations are precisely the reason that you have a fund balance.
While there are savings to be found in any budget, significant cost-cutting should be approached thoughtfully, deliberately, and with consideration for all the implications. This is especially true if we are dealing with a long-term issue, which appears likely. In my opinion, this is not something we should be trying to do in the twenty days we have left to pass this year’s budget.
The long-term solution: a change in the fiscal calendar that would let school districts know the state appropriation well before they have to pass their budget. This also seems highly unlikely, but Senator Corman has indicated that he’s willing to consider it.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Rigor and relevance
Upon returning from the DWMP Community Dialogue last night, I did a little channel surfing to see whether the Penguins might still be playing. I stopped briefly at PCN, where Pennsylvania's Secretary of Education, Gerry Zahorchek, was testifying - yet again - to the benefits of a state-wide curriculum and state-wide graduation exams.
I only stayed for a moment, so perhaps I missed something. But in defense of state exams in Algebra II, I'm pretty sure that I heard him say, "students who successfully complete Algebra II are more likely to go to college, and far less likely to drop out of school."
Well, duh. Do I have to say it? Correlation does not imply causality.
What Dr. Zahorchek did, unwittingly, was make an excellent case for giving students opportunities to take probability, statistics and logic, instead of a required Algebra II course.
I recently had a conversation with a retired high school Math teacher, who told me that the standard Algebra-Geometry-Trigonometry-Algebra II/Calculus curriculum originated in the 1930's, in order to prepare future engineers. She questioned why everyone had to take a curriculum that was designed for less than 1% of the population. So - until the PSSAs came along - she would often teach elective courses in discrete mathematics and personal finance as a way to make math more interesting and/or relevant for students who had no intention of ever adding "PE" to their business cards.
In the national endeavor to improve public education, there is a general agreement that three critical components of educational reform are "rigor, relevance and relationship." But somehow, we've adopted a very narrow definition of "rigor" and we've applied the same definition to everyone.
For a future engineer, "rigor" might take the form of AP Physics. but for an aspiring attorney it might be a course in "Constitutional Law". Someone who wants to be an automotive technician needs to take rigorous classes that lead to industry certifications.
For what percentage of students is Algebra II relevant?
I only stayed for a moment, so perhaps I missed something. But in defense of state exams in Algebra II, I'm pretty sure that I heard him say, "students who successfully complete Algebra II are more likely to go to college, and far less likely to drop out of school."
Well, duh. Do I have to say it? Correlation does not imply causality.
What Dr. Zahorchek did, unwittingly, was make an excellent case for giving students opportunities to take probability, statistics and logic, instead of a required Algebra II course.
I recently had a conversation with a retired high school Math teacher, who told me that the standard Algebra-Geometry-Trigonometry-Algebra II/Calculus curriculum originated in the 1930's, in order to prepare future engineers. She questioned why everyone had to take a curriculum that was designed for less than 1% of the population. So - until the PSSAs came along - she would often teach elective courses in discrete mathematics and personal finance as a way to make math more interesting and/or relevant for students who had no intention of ever adding "PE" to their business cards.
In the national endeavor to improve public education, there is a general agreement that three critical components of educational reform are "rigor, relevance and relationship." But somehow, we've adopted a very narrow definition of "rigor" and we've applied the same definition to everyone.
For a future engineer, "rigor" might take the form of AP Physics. but for an aspiring attorney it might be a course in "Constitutional Law". Someone who wants to be an automotive technician needs to take rigorous classes that lead to industry certifications.
For what percentage of students is Algebra II relevant?
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
"Real-world" skills
As part of the Career and Technical Center at the high school, the Diversified Occupations program - in a terrific partnership involving dozens of local employers - students get “real-world” work experience and marketable job skills in preparation for life after graduation. This is for students who are interested in occupations for which no specific CTC program currently exists.
In addition to their other classes, students meet one period per day in the classroom and work with employers in the afternoon or on weekends.
One of the students who was honored at last week’s Employer Appreciation ceremony talked about his experience with the classroom part of the program.
Among other things, the course syllabus included sections on budgeting (students had to develop and maintain a budget throughout the year); credit, what's involved in renting an apartment, as well as employer expectations and how to prepare for a job interview.
At the conclusion of his remarks, I turned to the high school principal who was sitting next to me, and we said in unison, "every student should take this course."
Of course, that's probably not practical, but still...
In addition to their other classes, students meet one period per day in the classroom and work with employers in the afternoon or on weekends.
One of the students who was honored at last week’s Employer Appreciation ceremony talked about his experience with the classroom part of the program.
Among other things, the course syllabus included sections on budgeting (students had to develop and maintain a budget throughout the year); credit, what's involved in renting an apartment, as well as employer expectations and how to prepare for a job interview.
At the conclusion of his remarks, I turned to the high school principal who was sitting next to me, and we said in unison, "every student should take this course."
Of course, that's probably not practical, but still...
Monday, May 18, 2009
Math Wars
A couple of weeks ago, Steve Piazza requested that the current candidates for school board respond to the following question: Do you support the recommendation of the SCASD math coordinators that the 2nd edition of "Investigations" be adopted throughout the District as the core math curriculum? He has posted the responses on his web site.
My reply follows:
I fully support the recommendation to adopt the 2nd edition of "Investigations". The new edition will allow our teachers to build on the progress that our students have made over the past few years, while specifically addressing the aspects of the program that needed strengthening.
As I’ve stated previously, I certainly understand the frustration of parents, who having been taught Math the old, “algorithmic” way, struggle to help their children with their homework. I also think that more can be done to bridge the “old” and “new” approaches. The latest edition of Investigations Math addresses both of these issues.
The parental involvement piece is very important. Our children’s success depends on a partnership of students, teachers and parents; we should do everything we can to ensure that parents are fully engaged in their children’s education. I applaud the efforts of teachers, administrators and fellow board members who have reached out to address the legitimate concerns of parents, and the parents who have reached back.
We also need to recognize that for most of our elementary teachers, this was a new approach to math instruction. As with any new teaching strategy – particularly one that is being applied across an entire organization - even with good training, there is a learning curve. (As well there should be! Educators who aren’t continually learning and getting better at what they do are in the wrong business.)
While it is important to allow teachers to adapt their strategies and resources to what works best for particular students, it's also important that we maintain curricular consistency across the district. The improvements in the new edition mean that our teachers will be less dependent on outside resources.
From my personal perspective - as someone whose best subject in school was Math - this conceptual approach to Math instruction is a very welcome change. Although I was taught the old, algorithmic way, the reason I excelled at Math – and perhaps, just as importantly, the reason I enjoyed it – was that I understood it conceptually.
It is a crime that generations of Americans have been trained to believe that “they’re not good at Math” or that “Math is boring”. Forty years ago, it may have been sufficient for 10-20% of our students to be “good at math”. That is no longer acceptable; maintaining the status quo would have been a disservice to our students.
People are generally resistant to change, especially when the "way we used to do it" worked just fine for them. Clearly, if you're a university math professor, the "way we used to do it" worked exceedingly well for you.
But I also think there's an important distinction between having a deep knowledge in a particular field of study - as university professors have - and knowing how to impart that knowledge to others. Universities have struggled with this conundrum for generations.
If I need the solution to a difficult math problem, I'll go to a math professor. But if I need to know how to teach a math concept, I would look first to the professor in education who has that expertise.
Finally, the evidence in support of Investigations Math – as it is taught in the State College school district – is overwhelming. It would be irresponsible for the school board to ignore that. Parents have a right and an obligation to advocate for their children. As school board members, we have the obligation to advocate for everyone’s children.
My reply follows:
I fully support the recommendation to adopt the 2nd edition of "Investigations". The new edition will allow our teachers to build on the progress that our students have made over the past few years, while specifically addressing the aspects of the program that needed strengthening.
As I’ve stated previously, I certainly understand the frustration of parents, who having been taught Math the old, “algorithmic” way, struggle to help their children with their homework. I also think that more can be done to bridge the “old” and “new” approaches. The latest edition of Investigations Math addresses both of these issues.
The parental involvement piece is very important. Our children’s success depends on a partnership of students, teachers and parents; we should do everything we can to ensure that parents are fully engaged in their children’s education. I applaud the efforts of teachers, administrators and fellow board members who have reached out to address the legitimate concerns of parents, and the parents who have reached back.
We also need to recognize that for most of our elementary teachers, this was a new approach to math instruction. As with any new teaching strategy – particularly one that is being applied across an entire organization - even with good training, there is a learning curve. (As well there should be! Educators who aren’t continually learning and getting better at what they do are in the wrong business.)
While it is important to allow teachers to adapt their strategies and resources to what works best for particular students, it's also important that we maintain curricular consistency across the district. The improvements in the new edition mean that our teachers will be less dependent on outside resources.
From my personal perspective - as someone whose best subject in school was Math - this conceptual approach to Math instruction is a very welcome change. Although I was taught the old, algorithmic way, the reason I excelled at Math – and perhaps, just as importantly, the reason I enjoyed it – was that I understood it conceptually.
It is a crime that generations of Americans have been trained to believe that “they’re not good at Math” or that “Math is boring”. Forty years ago, it may have been sufficient for 10-20% of our students to be “good at math”. That is no longer acceptable; maintaining the status quo would have been a disservice to our students.
People are generally resistant to change, especially when the "way we used to do it" worked just fine for them. Clearly, if you're a university math professor, the "way we used to do it" worked exceedingly well for you.
But I also think there's an important distinction between having a deep knowledge in a particular field of study - as university professors have - and knowing how to impart that knowledge to others. Universities have struggled with this conundrum for generations.
If I need the solution to a difficult math problem, I'll go to a math professor. But if I need to know how to teach a math concept, I would look first to the professor in education who has that expertise.
Finally, the evidence in support of Investigations Math – as it is taught in the State College school district – is overwhelming. It would be irresponsible for the school board to ignore that. Parents have a right and an obligation to advocate for their children. As school board members, we have the obligation to advocate for everyone’s children.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Legislative Update: Charter schools
One more item from the advocacy conference in Harrisburg.
It was enlightening to hear from the respective chairs of the state House and Senate Education Committees, Rep. James Roebuck, and Senator Jeffrey Piccola.
Among others things, Senator Piccola is a strong supporter of the charter school movement.
When the Pennsylvania charter school law was passed in 1997, it was based on the premise that it would create opportunities for experimentation with educational innovation on a small scale, without the usual red tape. The result would be another option for parents, and if the innovation proved successful, perhaps a model for broader implementation.
(State College has a couple of good examples of this theory in practice: one charter school dedicated to project-based learning and the use of technology, another to foreign language instruction for elementary students.) The objection of local school boards is not to the theory, but that charter schools are funded predominantly through the local budget, even though local boards have little control over what charter schools do.
So the comment that turned heads was Senator Piccola's assertion that "if a charter school is ineffective, the local school board has the right not to renew their charter." While that statement is technically true, what he left out was the fact that PDE (the Pennsylvania Department of Education) has to give its approval anytime a school board declines a charter school application, or fails to renew one - and except in the most egregious of situations, that never happens.
School boards understand that if the "I"s and the "T"s have been dotted and crossed, they have little recourse. State College has learned from experience that PDE will overrule their decision on appeal, so it's not worth the time and taxpayer money to fight it.
During the Q and A, a school board member suggested that local schools be allowed to create their own charter schools (under the same basic premise of encouraging innovation). To which the Senator replied, "you already can." When challenged, the senator repeated his statement.
The language of the charter school law doesn’t permit this, but it doesn’t explicitly prohibit it, either. So perhaps, it is technically possible, like the aforementioned approval process. But it seemed a bit strange that the chair of the Senate Education Committee didn't seem to understand how the charter school law works in practice.
But he did say he would look into it.
Postscript: And indeed, he has. Just this week Piccola announced the need “for a comprehensive rewrite of our commonwealth’s Charter School Law, which I have made clear is one of my legislative priorities.” So we shall see.
It was enlightening to hear from the respective chairs of the state House and Senate Education Committees, Rep. James Roebuck, and Senator Jeffrey Piccola.
Among others things, Senator Piccola is a strong supporter of the charter school movement.
When the Pennsylvania charter school law was passed in 1997, it was based on the premise that it would create opportunities for experimentation with educational innovation on a small scale, without the usual red tape. The result would be another option for parents, and if the innovation proved successful, perhaps a model for broader implementation.
(State College has a couple of good examples of this theory in practice: one charter school dedicated to project-based learning and the use of technology, another to foreign language instruction for elementary students.) The objection of local school boards is not to the theory, but that charter schools are funded predominantly through the local budget, even though local boards have little control over what charter schools do.
So the comment that turned heads was Senator Piccola's assertion that "if a charter school is ineffective, the local school board has the right not to renew their charter." While that statement is technically true, what he left out was the fact that PDE (the Pennsylvania Department of Education) has to give its approval anytime a school board declines a charter school application, or fails to renew one - and except in the most egregious of situations, that never happens.
School boards understand that if the "I"s and the "T"s have been dotted and crossed, they have little recourse. State College has learned from experience that PDE will overrule their decision on appeal, so it's not worth the time and taxpayer money to fight it.
During the Q and A, a school board member suggested that local schools be allowed to create their own charter schools (under the same basic premise of encouraging innovation). To which the Senator replied, "you already can." When challenged, the senator repeated his statement.
The language of the charter school law doesn’t permit this, but it doesn’t explicitly prohibit it, either. So perhaps, it is technically possible, like the aforementioned approval process. But it seemed a bit strange that the chair of the Senate Education Committee didn't seem to understand how the charter school law works in practice.
But he did say he would look into it.
Postscript: And indeed, he has. Just this week Piccola announced the need “for a comprehensive rewrite of our commonwealth’s Charter School Law, which I have made clear is one of my legislative priorities.” So we shall see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)