By Jesse Burns
Senior Associate

Cincinnati, OH — that’s where the community is in education reform!

Yesterday, my post focused on the topic of low community engagement in relation to Washington State’s education reform efforts.  ss articulated this dilemma well in the comment:

“It has always been a recurring and problematic theme that the community, parents and students are left out of the equation. This is not new and still troubling“.

Will we ever figure out community engagement in education reform?  Evidence from case studies and research demonstrates that community engagement (as defined as mobilizing groups, not individuals) can:

1) Tap ideas, energy, and experience of parents, citizens, and community constituencies;

2) build enduring constituency support for school improvement and reform (helpful for providing consistency when principals, superintendents and principals are transient);

3) legitimize reform efforts, as a variety of constituencies are fighting together for reform, rather than isolated groups fighting alone; and

4) build persistent public participation in public education to ensure high quality schools for future generations.

While I am a firm believer in using research and evidence for decision-making, sometimes real examples blow away the data.  The greater Cincinnati region is just the example to do just that.

In total, over  300 organizations (over $7 billion in assets) have voluntary joined a coalition that provides comprehensive services for students from… Birth to Career!

Known as Strive, this massive effort aligns the work of corporations, non-profits, schools, universities, advocacy groups, and any other group that voluntarily joins the effort. Strive is catalyzing positive outcomes in both academic outcomes and social/developmental outcomes, all driven by research-based practices focused upon student learning.

Furthermore, Strive’s model involves organizations with co-creating indicators of impact and sharing their data about progress.  Consequently, all organizations in the network (including parent groups) are able to avoid redundancy of efforts, gain access to valuable data about performance to improve their efficiency and impact, and bridge previous or potential divides amongst all of these organizations.

Everyone is playing for the same prize:  improving the educational future of the greater Cincinnati region’s children.  How about that for a real-world example of community engagement?

More to come on how Strive gets all of these organizations to work together–and how Seattle might be ripe for a Strive-like initiative.

Serpentine Wall photo by Angleskiss31 on Flickr.

By Jesse Burns
Senior Associate

Where’s the community in education reform?

The federal Race to the Top education reform initiative has some deadlines that require moving quickly, but that shouldn’t have to mean the exclusion of important voices in the education community.  In a recent Seattle Times article about Washington’s process for putting together a grant for the Race to the Top, I noticed some omissions in the parties listed as key stakeholders. Do you see what I see (or don’t see) in:

“Gregoire said the plan is a compromise between all the people involved in education – teacher, principals, district superintendents, lawmakers and other government officials.”

What about the community, the parents, the numerous nonprofits and programs that contribute to learning outcomes for students?  Is this simply an omission by the reporter, or a more persistent trend?

Without being able to ask the Governor directly, I can only rely on my research and observational skills to piece together a picture of how the state views the importance of community and parent engagement in education reform efforts.

Evidence that Community is overlooked in Reform Efforts

January 13, 2010 QEC Initial Report to the Governor & Legislature

The Quality Education Council arose out of ESHB 2261 (the 2009 WA State Ed Reform Bill), and was tasked with submitting a report of recommendations as a first step in the process of education finance reform.  The QEC made thirteen recommendations for funding (outlined in the report), and was wrapped up by a minority report from Senator Rosemary McAuliffe.  Senator McAuliffe shared specific thoughts on the recommendations, as well as a more general recommendation:

Over the last few months I have sought input from our educators, parents and students regarding what are their goals for education reform. Despite these difficult economic times, I have heard teachers, parents, principals and superintendents across the entire State say that they want us to continue to move forward on education reform. However, they want us to move forward on this reform together.

Notably, Senator McAuliffe identifies in her minority report the broad desire to move education reform forward with the input from parents and students.  It is interesting to me that the notion to move forward with community engagement arises within the minority report rather than in the main section of the report (the TVW Broadcast of the QEC’s last meeting (Jan 6, 2010) here).

What do you think about integrating parent and student input into education reform?

Would you, as a community member, have any interest in getting involved in education reform?

How?

UPDATE:  Senator McAuliffe wrote a piece Washington’s reforms are well on their way for the Daily Herald outlining why and how Washington is poised for reform.  A relevant statement from the article about community engagement

“Missing from many news articles on the subject is the back story and true success of our education effort. It takes countless hours of meetings, discussions, collaboration and compromise among education stakeholders, business leaders, school districts, state agencies, teachers and unions. Not only is it important to note this is one of the top reasons why Delaware and Tennessee won millions of dollars in RTTT grants, it also shows that Washington listens and is therefore successful in implementing education reforms. By taking small, collaborative steps over the last 30 years, we are building toward big victories.”

It is encouraging to hear that all of the stakeholders, business leaders, school districts, state agencies, teachers and unions met, discussed, collaborated, and compromised.  I would suggest that a change in perspective is needed–students (and parents) need to not be seen as just stakeholders, they need to be seen as central to everything.  Upcoming posts will exemplify successful, bold approaches for improving student learning.

By Georgina Allen
Global Development Intern

The more deeply I become involved in the global development community, the more I can’t help but think of The Four Stages of Learning.  In psychology, this theory describes the stages through which one passes when learning a new skill.  It goes something like this:

Unconscious incompetence > conscious incompetence > conscious competence > unconscious competence

I have been feeling overwhelmed at the prospect of progressing past the stage of “conscious incompetence” when it comes to learning everything there is to know about global development.  What do I mean by this?  Technology has made information on this topic readily available, inspiring a whole wave of new activists in this community who inevitably become eager to share their own perspective.  Reviewing all of this material online is an impossible task, so finding a strategy to sift through it all is a crucial element of effectively combating global development issues.

In a June 2009 speech in Cairo, Obama stated “There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground.”  While this statement was made in the context of a discussion on U.S.-Arab relations, it seems to have resonated with the global development community.  Last week, USAID launched Global Pulse 2010, a 3-day online discussion marathon for people working in the field of development in an effort to aggregate great ideas from around the world.

Upon its conclusion, the staff of Global Pulse selected “hot ideas.”  Many of these emphasized the importance of building community and communication.  My favorite suggestion was in the “Inspiring a New Generation” forum, where one person advocated for the use of video conference capabilities in classrooms around the world.  Some responded with information on organizations who are already working to make this a reality, such as One Laptop per Child and Global Nomads Group.

In this discussion, other websites working to break down communication barriers and build community were also mentioned.  Panwapa.org offers a space where young children can connect with other children from around the globe based on their interests, for example, soccer.  Children can select from a list of pre-translated messages to send to other members.  On news.meedan.net, links to news articles in English and Arabic can be posted and instantly translated, making alternative perspectives on current events available to those without the necessary language skills.

The World Bank is another organization who has recently taken on the task of strengthening the global development community with their new Urgent Evoke website, which is promoted as “A crash course in saving the world.”  Each week, a “mission” is released to all members.  For example, this week’s mission, which is related to “empowering women,” gives members points for a blog entries summarizing related news stories, personal efforts to empower women and their vision for the future of women’s’ empowerment.  All of this user-generated content is shared on the site, and active members are given priority in contests for mentorships, scholarships and even investment money.

While some of these innovative organizations and websites use community and communication to inspire a sense of responsibility, by aggregating and streamlining information they are also facilitating my quest to learn about effective solutions to global development issues and overcome my “conscious incompetence”.

Photo by Avant Game on Flickr.

Like many organizations creating innovative solutions for the toughest challenges of our times, Re-Vision Labs looks to the connections between digital media and learning for some of its answers.

According to HASTAC and The MacArthur Foundation (sponsors of the Digital Media and Learning Competition), recent studies of young people’s participation with digital media – including games, mobile devices, social networks, and virtual worlds – suggest that young people are re-imagining learning on a daily basis. They are engaging in “participatory learning” – an intrinsically motivating, inherently interactive, and creatively experimental form of learning.

This is the kind of learning that has the potential to catalyze engagement and action around the big challenges of our times: climate change, pollution, wealth distribution, food and water security, access to information, and the list goes on. So why digital media?

Because in regard to participatory learning, digital media can “significantly lower the barriers to production and distribution, invite social engagement and interaction, promote the possibility of contribution, and challenge traditional notions of authority and expertise.” ¹ Arguably, social and interactive learning has immense value for learners of all ages – not just young learners.  Imagine being able to sign up for a quick online course on Cellular Physiology or Music Theory, offered by experts for just a few dollars. Or addressing racism in the work place through “serious online games.”

Interested in some of the intriguing digital media tools out there? They’re not all video games – take a look.  We’ve separated our suggestions for young and adult learners.

For Young Learners:

Sesame Street – The Sesame Workshop continues to use television media to create effective characters that appeal to children across large (physical and cultural) expanses and foster global citizenship at an early age.

Galli Galli Sim Sim’s Boombah (Property of CPB):  Meet Galli Galli Sim Sim’s Boombah, a gregarious, cuddly lion who loves eating vegetables and dancing to Bhangra music. Or watch Global Grover’s Russian dance. And The Workshop is digging even deeper, researching ways that handheld learning products can help revolutionize teaching and learning. Read the report.

Xeko – This online eco-adventure and endangered species card trading game sticks to its focus of “Gaming for Good;” Xeko partners with nonprofits to promote causes through games. Kids who meet their game goals can activate a donation to a nonprofit, thus connecting their gaming actions to a real world of good.

Little Big Planet – This video game’s tagline says it all:  Play. Create. Share. Users play a character, modify and contribute to the game levels, and participate in a vibrant online community. Plus, LBP is one of two games highlighted in the DML Game Changers Competition; a cash prize is at stake for the designer of the next best level.

For Adult Learners:

SpacedEd.org- This online learning platform allows lifelong learners to choose a from an online course list, answer a few questions per day, and gain knowledge that you want, when you want it. Find courses by Harvard Medical staff, or learn tips and tricks for using your iPhone. SpacedEd provides a space for both development and delivery of content.

Institute for Digital Learning- Find work-based & games-based e-training resources, often multilingual and using multiple formats. Examples include the Union Learning certificate program, an online higher ed course for Trade Union reps, and the Diversity & Inclusion e-training Toolkits.

City Rain – Yes, a video game for PC or Xbox. BUT, this isn’t just any video game. Eco-urban planning meets action-packed simulation game. Says the creator, “In City Rain, you play as a member of an elite environmental Swat Force in charge of restructuring cities, before they are penalized by the World Environment Protection agency.”  Maybe City Rain’s creators should get together with Seattle’s own sustainability reality television show Mission: Sustainable.

Apps – Instead of waxing poetic about the benefits of some great iPhone or smartphone app, why don’t you tell us which ones you like? What are you learning? Would you be learning the same using another format (e.g. reading a book or googling the topic)?

The world of digital media resources for learning is expansive, and growing. We look forward to hearing about the ways you’re noticing digital media changing the face of learning across the world. Post comments here.

1.  Reimagining Learning.  Digital Media and Learning Competition.  http://www.dmlcompetition.net/reimagining_learning.php.

Albert Einstein is attributed with a famous quote about insanity: “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

While Einstein wasn’t an educational philosopher, his notion is relevant when looking at how our current educational system does or does not prepare students to live in a collaborative, rapidly evolving world.  This quote reminds me of the challenge of the current educational system to both provide a quality education for all students, while simultaneously developing deeper, more nuanced interdisciplinary understanding within our students so that we have individuals ready to face the interdisciplinary problems (such as poverty, climate change, etc.) of our time.

To achieve this outcome, learning systems will need to develop the capability of applying insights from cognitive science about how brains actually work, while simultaneously informing teachers, parents, principals, and policy makers about the necessity of appropriately incorporating insights from cognition, neuroscience and biology research into their classes, homes, and communities.

With an eye towards applying these findings in real life practice, I have been involved with a variety of projects that intentionally design learning environments to promote interdisciplinary understanding.  This is not an easy task, as truly interdisciplinary work requires an awareness of the mental models and epistemological foundations that pervade ones mind.  Given the complexity of these issues, how can we incorporate effective interdisciplinary learning into educational and organizational learning so that we can create the yet unseen tools to enable current and future generations to address the dilemmas of their time?

Some fascinating work is providing a hint of how and where such opportunities may arise.  I am a big fan of the Interdisciplinary Studies Project, as this research group is focusing upon demystifying the components of quality interdisciplinary education.  Their research looks at the MIT Media Lab, which may be the pre-eminent interdisciplinary work group in the world.  While not a comprehensive answer, their work is identifying trends for in successful and expert interdisciplinary work:  purposefully integrating disciplines while maintaining rigorous standards for conducting expert work while applying disciplinary tools.

A program that I’ve been fortunate to have some contact with is the Three Degrees Project, housed at the University of Washington Law School.  I am keen on this project because they are undertaking truly interdisciplinary studies–simultaneously developing real solutions to help impacted communities adapt to the impacts of climate change while managing a group process to ensure all participants productively collaborate.  Given the trend of collaboration emerging in our world, and especially amongst younger generations, I wonder if achieving quality interdisciplinary work will be easier for a generation who is steeped in working across boundaries?

While there is no silver bullet for creating interdisciplinary insights, there do appear to be some traits that appear time and time again in effective interdisciplinary work—the ability to learn about a topic while simultaneously learning how to manage a complex, tension filled group process (more on interdisciplinary learning and work later), as well as a shift in perspective about knowledge form being absolute to being relativistic.

Given that the 21^st century is loaded with opportunities to demonstrate expertise with interdisciplinary work (a.k.a. make headway with massive 21^st century dilemmas like poverty, climate change, educational access, etc.), how have you taken steps to improve your capacity for being involved in this tough work?

Is there hope for federal K-12 education reform?

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA, currently authorized as No Child Left Behind Act of 2001) is coming up for reauthorization.  Both President Obama and Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan are presenting the reauthorization of ESEA as an opportunity to help provide greater transparency in the accountability system, harness the power of incentives and rewards within the education system, and focus upon turning around under-performing schools.

Given the polarizing debate that has ensued since the authorization of No Child Left Behind, I wonder how the current administration is poised to address a real divide between parties that, until recently, focused upon arguing about the existence of the Department of Education.

As recently as George W. Bush’s tenure as president, Republicans assumed a position that the Department of Education, and thus federal involvement in education reform, should be abolished, as outlined by this Cato Institute piece. Interestingly, the Cato Institute piece demonstrates that Republican perspectives about abolishing the Department may be shifting.

Conversely, Democrats are most commonly aligned with increasing the funding of the Department of Education, assuming that its presence and status are given, as exemplified by perspectives put forth by the Center for American Progress.

While the current administration in Washington D.C. is supportive of federal involvement in education reform, I wonder if there is enough political will and support for a significant overhaul of the NCLB.  Consider what Arne Duncan has identified as ways in which the federal government will create a common definition of success:

1. Raising standards for all students,
2. Rewarding success in schools,
3. Supporting and rewarding effective teachers and leaders,
4. Turning around low performing schools, and
5. Helping schools develop a well rounded education.

I would imagine that most people, regardless of political affiliation, could support these ideas.  However, the role of the federal government in bringing forth these ideas raises two fundamental questions: How involved should the federal government be in the US education system?  What is the end goal that the federal government is aligning the education system? Is it to

…produce economically successful individuals, as researcher Richard Murnane proposes?

…produce workers with the needed skills for the global economy?

…develop global consciousness in our students?

…ensure that each child simply has access to education?

While this question could serve as a basis for multiple Ph.D.’s, conferences, and summits, one take home point stands out: the educational system is moving forward at full speed without a consensus as to where it should be headed.  In the interim the heading is focused upon using education as tool for promoting economic growth.  Who is willing to argue with the proposition that better education will position individuals and the US for future economic growth?  If I had kids, I would definitely be considering the financial implications of my kids educational opportunities and growth.

However, without developing some agreement on why we educate, we may be reliving history.  Consider this quote from Patricia Graham:

“Public purposes for education change as the society perceives its needs and priorities differently.  Currently our old educational shiboleths have been rejected but new ones have not yet been accepted.  The critique of contemporary educational processes is intense, but there is little articulate reformulation of either educational goals or of means to achieve them.”¹

26 years ago these words were scribbed, and it seems that we may well be articulating means to achieve something, without first deciding upon what we are to achieve.

Is there hope for your school?

Can we afford not to have the federal government involved in this debate?  With state budgets crashing, federal stabilization funds from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act are playing an important role in maintaining adequate funding for schools.  Furthermore, the next budget put forth by the Obama administration proposes to raise the Department of Education’s discretionary spending budget by 7.5%, the largest increase ever proposed.

Without having fully analyzed the Obama administration’s budget and plan for education, I’m initially impressed with the focus upon utilizing data for making decisions.  Any attempt to increase the availability, rigor, and applicability within the education system seems very worthwhile, especially considering the historical lack of using data to drive decisions within the education sector.  It would be even better if the administration clarified the need to use data in a formative manner (to improve teaching), which is no small task given that data has been utilized mostly as an outcome metric over the last 10 years.

I’m hopeful that federal involvement will accomplish a couple things:

1. Provide a temporary bridge in funding for cash strapped states, and that states effectively deal with a precipitous drop in funding that is on the horizon once the ARRA funds are gone.
2. Elevate education reform within the public agenda
   1. I don’t care if takes federal intervention or complete state autonomy.  Our system has room for improvement and we need to apply all the currently available resources to improve it.
3. Engage communicates in education reform beyond local levies and limited campaigns to bridge federal education reform with local education reform
   1. To do so will require some sort of organizing body to align all of these efforts.  In Cincinnati an effort coordinate by Strive aligns over 300 organizations, in total over $7 billion dollars in resources, to move kids from birth to their career through an aligned system.

Here in Washington State, we have the opportunity to influence the future of this state’s education system—there happens to be a landmark bill (ESHB 2261) passed in by Washington’s Legislature in 2009 that will:

1. increase instructional hours,
2. enhance high school diploma requirements,
3. create a new transportation funding formula,
4. add all-day kindergarten to basic education, and
5. provide new finance structure for transparency.

Maybe Washington State has the opportunity to create a cohesive strategy for aligning federal, state, and local policies to bring about lasting education reform?

How might you want to contribute to this process locally–as a parent, teacher, administrator, or person on the street—what is your stake in education reform?

The passionate nerds in Revision Labs’ Learning 2.0 Lab have been brewing a new, more effectively customized yet community-inclusive model for organizational learning.  I tweet.  But given how much of their fancy philosophizing flies around the office, I thought a tangential blog about how people make decisions around education could be appropriate.

I’ve been working with Professor David Harrison and  SkillUp Washington on an upfront financing mechanism to help King County’s working poor onto a path of sustainability through education and training.  While that sounds boring and tedious (to me initially, at least), the essence for this need stems from the oft-overlooked heterogeneity of decision making models across socio-economic classes.

What?  I know, right?  Different people make decisions differently, and they all (to some extent) deviate from those archaic models of “rational decision-making” that we swallow and regurgitate in every Economics 101 class.

While we all respond to signals slightly differently, there’s a dramatic difference between how the low-income make decisions and weigh trade-offs and their middle and upper-class counterparts.  Cognizance of this alone can help us better customize public policy toward funding around training and education for the working poor.

Arlene’s Decision Making Model

“Arlene” is our avatar.  She is the traditional socio-economic underdog; over 25, under-skilled, working but earning annually less than 200 percent of the federal poverty line.  Arlene struggles to satisfy her basic needs, and the opportunity cost of enrolling in school and remaining actively enrolled is high.  The conventional incentives traditional students are motivated by (well paying job, financial security, social status) to persist through each semester are not the same for Arlene, who can’t consistently afford the time it takes to obtain a degree.  More importantly, her expected value of a degree as far lower, given a lifetime of internalizing social stigmas and/or low-paying, crummy past employment.

The oft-cited “rational” decision-making model is not ubiquitous.  Divergences from the standard model are most obvious among the low-income, who must choose daily between basic necessities like food and rent.  Their immediate future is mired in uncertainty, let alone long-term future, much unlike their middle and upper-class counterparts.

Low-income, often ethnic minorities and/or women, in King County (and everywhere) possess so few tools and resources that the constraints and preferences they juggle in making the most “rational” decision are frequently misaligned with a sustainable future.

Greater income volatility for low-income individuals increases their need for short-term credit.  Arlene’s time preferences and discount rate on future earnings is higher than middle and high-income earners; she can’t afford to prioritize education, given the many imminent constraints working poor face.  Arlene’s expected value of future full-time employment is diminished by daily uncertainties, and consequently far lower than what we may “rationally” predict.  Education has been shown to lower one’s discount rate in decision-making and permit the self-discipline that financial sustainability demands[1].

The inability to “afford” to wait to consume A (food, rent, childcare) over B (books and transportation to school) by Arlene and her counterparts reinforce barriers to graduation and full-time employment.  Arlene’s continued enrollment and active participation in community college and training programs is one of the most crucial building blocks of self-sufficiency, yet it is highly fragile and easily disturbed.  And the reason it is so fragile is because of the above: she can’t afford time and the expected value of that time spent on education is low, shrouded by uncertainty and past experiences.  Promises just aren’t as incentivizing for Arlene as they are for you and me.

An upfront financing mechanism that lowers the discount rate of re-enrolling next semester and raises the expected value of earning a degree would help clear Arlene’s path to self-sufficiency by making it more obvious and more certain.  A pay-as-you-go system that financially supports Arlene’s ambitions to become, for example, a registered nurse by providing partial upfront wages (that she would earn as an RN) would give her both the financial stability and confidence in the future necessary to complete the steps needed to do so.  It is precisely this lack of ready resources that reinforces the traditional barriers to entry to sustained training and employment.  This financing is an investment in human capital.  The outlay cost is the price of Arlene’s increased certainty in earning a degree that secures a good job.  The reward is the development of human capital, satisfying demand for high-demand industries, and the social and economic spillover effects of having the working poor move out of poverty.

We propose helping Arlene along the way to employment and bringing future financial rewards closer to home, before securing a job, and allowing her to repay the investment over time and below market-rate interest, post-employment.

[1] Bauer and Chytilover: The Impact of Education on Subjective Discount Rates in Ugandan Villages. March 2009.  http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1369803