Principals Make the Difference

According to the Denver Post, Principal's persistence sends Lincoln High grad rate soaring. At Lincoln High School - of the notoriously struggling Denver Public Schools - the turnaround rate in dropouts to college applications has been impressive, and:

Part of the reason for the rebound is the school's principal — Antonio Esquibel, a Lincoln alum who grew up about half-mile from Lincoln. He has made it his mission to change the culture for the Lancers. Esquibel has borrowed techniques from successful charter schools, putting an emphasis on attendance, credit recovery and college readiness.

Esquibel has set clear expectations, from attendance to grades, and his enforcement of this pro-academic culture at his school is fundamental to its success. Granted, there is a long way to go. Though the message is clear. A culture of learning is integral to the success of a school community, and that culture is set by the administration.

Got a problem with the school? Start at the top. It's no different than in sports. Failing teams fire their coaches, and successful teams result from strong leadership.

Education Blogosphere

A fond farewell to a strong voice in the edu-blogosphere - Dennis Fermoyle at Public Education Defender posted his last entry on the blog he has hosted since May of 2006. Dennis' blog was one of the first I discovered when I started blogging about education and life, and he was a source of great insight and inspiration for discussions of public education. One of my earliest postings - which was also featured in the Denver Post - challenged Sean Hannity's rant that "the government ruined public education." Dennis posted part of my piece on his blog, plus a link, and he has continually endorsed the notion that I argued - that public education is not only not "ruined," but by and large successful. Dennis signed off today with this long-running sentiment:

I firmly believe that public schools in America are doing a better job than they're given credit for. Oh, we have our flaws--there's no question about that, and I've written about a number of them. When I say we are doing are doing a good job, however, I base that on two basic points.
First of all, in the great majority of public schools around the nation, any kid who really wants a good education can get one. The kids who don't give a rip don't get very much out of it, but the kids who want to go to a vo-tech are able to do that, and the kids really want to get prepared for college are able to do so.

The biggest problem in American public education today is that so many kids don't put much effort into their own education. Some kids are incredibly lazy and irresponsible, and that problem is combined with the fact that the American public does not want to put too much emphasis on school in general and academics in particular. And that leads to my second point: American public schools are giving American parents what they want.

Bill Gates and other business gurus can complain all they want, and say that American schools should be turning out more academic wizards. I'm not saying they're wrong, but that is not what the American public wants. The American public wants their kids to be "well-rounded." That means they want them get some academics, but they also want schools to enable their kids to be be sports stars, and/or work part-time jobs, and to be able to go on family vacations that last a week or more during the school year, and have homecoming and frosty-fest coronations and pep rallies during the school day, and use class time to vote for kings and queens and other things, and to be able to miss a day or two here and there for various other reasons and still get decent grades. Bill Gates might not like it, and sometimes I might not like it, but we are "public" schools, so it's our job to give the public what it wants. And that's what we do.

Finally, my last post wouldn't be complete if I didn't harp on the subject I've harped on more than any other. As good as public education is, it could be so much better. Public school teachers and principals need more power to demand better effort and behavior from our students. The bottom line on that is that it has to be easier to kick kids out. I know how harsh that sounds, but it really isn't. Believe it or not, I am not an old curmudgeon. In fact, I think it's fair to say that I'm one of the most popular teachers in our school. But 35 years as a teacher and coach has taught me that kids understand limits. Make it clear to them that a certain level of behavior and a certain level of effort is required and there will be very few who will have to be shown the door. And for those who are shown the door, allow them to come back and try again next semester or next year if they finally realize that their education matters. I have seen too many bright kids allowed to get by with performing miserably, and I've even seen some end up dropping out because we were so damned tolerant.

Those are some pretty valid points. Thanks, Dennis.

American Princesses

"When women shave their heads, cut out the make-up, and stop wearing high-heel shoes, they will take over the world."

That is how many of my students would characterize one of my standard rants in class each year. While it is a bit of my standard hyperbole, the spirit of the argument is sincere. There is much that girls and women do which adheres to historical subjugation of the rights of women, and there is much in those areas that adhere to control by men. The "princess fantasy," or expectation is another symptom of this dichotomy, and it is making the news lately, especially with the onslaught of marketing from Disney over the past decade. Is this "princess syndrome" a hindrance to the growth and independence of identity in young girls? Or is there a positive
side to the "ideal life" image of the myth?

My students would laugh at the possibility that I could see anything positive about representations of girls and women by Disney. I've written before about my opposition to my children seeing Disney movies - actually they've never really seen any movies. However, my daughter just turned four and received several Barbies from her friends. It didn't bother me, and I concede that much of the opposition to popular culture is overblown. Of course, the standard rational response - of which I am always a fan in any discussion - is the use of moderation and common sense.

We'll see what the pundits and sociologists have to say. I'm not worried about my daughter, or my students, precisely because of the openness and discussions we have.

The Net Generation

Since finishing up Tony Wagner's The Global Achievement Gap, I have been intrigued by some similar insight in two other books - one is Richard Nesbitt's Intelligence and How to Get it, and the other is Bob Pletka's Educating the Net Generation.  I want to discuss Nesbitt's extensive research at some point, but, in terms of Wagner's insight about transitioning schools to a curriculum and training more relevant to their lives, I am intrigued and seeking ways to improve my approach based on his research.  Pletka's point is a high-tech analysis of the concept that we must teach students where they are, not where we'd like them to be.  This is relevant as I seek to incorporate applicable technologies into the classroom without feeling like I'm losing the important content and rigor of the classical education of our school and community.  One example would be a desire to utilize blogging and other cyberspace formats.  While there won't soon be a Facebook page for "Mazenko's English," (though I would love it), I will try to simulate that as much as possible with applications on Blackboard.

One insightful aspect of Pletka's work is the importance of connecting to students in ways that are not only relevant to the way they currently think and communicate, but also to the ways they will do so in the workplace soon enough.  Pleska states:

46% of the variation in the students sense of involvement and belonging is the result of instruction.  Whereas instruction dominated by lectures and note taking is associated with increased rates of disengaged students, lessons that encourage student discussion contribute to their sense of acceptance and membership in school.

While this could be perceived by some critics as "foo foo education" and a pathetic offshoot of self-esteem movements, it doesn't have to be, and I believe it can be integrally linked to rigor and development of core competencies as well as innovation.  It reminds of the "flow experience" that I've written about concerning adolescent male literacy which was so well explained in Michael Smith's Going with the Flow: How to Engage Boys (and Girls) in Their Literacy Learning.  The whole concept reminds me of the descriptions I used to read of Dean Smith's basketball practices at UNC where everything worked like a well-oiled machine.

Total engagement is my (albeit unrealistic) goal. 

Conservative Decline

The drumbeat continues of the GOP's conservatism marching toward the grave. Of course, that is hyperbole, though they've definitely lost their way when the conservative voices are turning on the GOP. They will still vote that way, as they don't want to be in the Libertarian Party, and the The Libertarian Party doesn't want them. Though some may become Obama Republicans. One notable voice - an older version who echoes some of what Brooks and Parker have been saying - is Richard Posner, whose new book decries the GOP's naive understanding of capitalism. I really enjoyed the insight in his latest blog post:

The following comments, I found particularly insightful:

By the end of the Clinton administration, I was content to celebrate the triumph of conservatism as I understood it, and had no desire for other than incremental changes in the economic and social structure of the United States. I saw no need for the estate tax to be abolished, marginal personal-income tax rates further reduced, the government shrunk, pragmatism in constitutional law jettisoned in favor of "originalism," the rights of gun owners enlarged, our military posture strengthened, the rise of homosexual rights resisted, or the role of religion in the public sphere expanded. All these became causes embraced by the new conservatism that crested with the reelection of Bush in 2004.

My theme is the intellectual decline of conservatism, and it is notable that the policies of the new conservatism are powered largely by emotion and religion and have for the most part weak intellectual groundings. That the policies are weak in conception, have largely failed in execution, and are political flops is therefore unsurprising. The major blows to conservatism, culminating in the election and programs of Obama, have been fourfold: the failure of military force to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives; the inanity of trying to substitute will for intellect, as in the denial of global warming, the use of religious criteria in the selection of public officials, the neglect of management and expertise in government; a continued preoccupation with abortion; and fiscal incontinence in the form of massive budget deficits, the Medicare drug plan, excessive foreign borrowing, and asset-price inflation.

By the fall of 2008, the face of the Republican Party had become Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. Conservative intellectuals had no party.

I hope for some pragmatic discussion by people in the GOP, but first they must turn down Hannity/Limbaugh/O'Reilly, and start reading instead.

Country More Centrist Than Before

Well, so much for "Painting the Country Red," as a moderately-selling conservative tome claimed just a few years ago.  Surprisingly, for all the criticism, the results of a new broad survey from the Pew Research Center, the country is becoming more centrist and more independent.  And, those independents are, for at least the time being, siding with the Democrats.  So, again I note, so much for the claims that the GOP lost in the state level, in Congress, and the White House because they weren't conservative enough.

According to the Pew analysis:

On issues, independents' viewpoints don't fit neatly into liberal or conservative frameworks.

This group hews more closely to Democrats than Republicans on social values, religion and national security. But it also is more conservative on several key issues including the economy, partly because of steady defections from the GOP, and more skeptical than two years ago of expanding government assistance, a typically Republican position. More in line with Democratic thinking, most independents support expanded government intervention and regulation in the private sector, albeit reluctantly.

In another GOP trouble spot, the economy has overtaken social values among voters' most pressing concerns. The recession has essentially robbed Republicans of a potent political weapon. The survey also found that the percentage of Americans holding conservative views on family, homosexuality and gender roles has steadily declined over the past decade because younger people are less conservative than older people.

As one of those independents - and one who would have voted for John McCain had he been the nominee in 2000 (potentially the worst GOP decision in a century, if not ever) - I can assert that these comments from Pew are precisely the situation in contemporary politics.  And the GOP simply can't figure this out.

The Myth of the Bachelor Degree

"A degree in economics doesn't really prepare you to understand the economy very well."

These words of wisdom, according to an AP story, come from Josh Donahue, "23, who went on food stamps two weeks after leaving Oregon State University with an economics degree that he hoped to use for a job as a financial analyst. He's living with his aunt and uncle in Grants Pass, Ore., and looking for even a menial job."

Josh is the new poster boy for the massive inefficiency and inadequacy of America's K-16 education system. Clearly, no one in the two decades of Josh's life had any serious talks with him about who he is, what he wants, what he's good at, what a liberal education means, or how liberal arts degrees translate (or don't) into marketable skills. Josh came of age during an expanding economy based on false expectations of wealth, and he figured he'd study econ and then go make a killing selling stocks to middles class Roth IRA holders on his way to becoming the next Warren Buffett. Time for a reality check.

Josh could have majored in accounting or finance or business or engineering - but it seems that people who major in economics as a bachelor degree (with no intention of a masters or Ph.D to teach) simply couldn't get into business or accounting schools. So, they majored in - and probably forked over or borrowed $20,000 to $40,000 for - what has become a virtually useless college degree. Just what did Josh think a "degree in economics" would prepare him to understand, or, more importantly, do for a living?

Why Doesn't the GOP Get It?

Will someone please tell my why the Republican Party continues to believe they lost control of Congress and the Presidency because they weren't conservative enough? The Gallup poll shows the party was losing significance in nearly every demographic group. The most significant place were the GOP lost votes - especially here in Colorado - is among moderate independents. And, the moderate independents switched their support because, in the words of Dan Haley of the Denver Post, the GOP has "become the party of crazy." There is no evidence of the GOP losing support because they had turned their back on conservative ideals. Granted, they did expand government under Bush. But they also stuck with all the same mantras of cutting taxes, neo-con pursuit of a hegemonic agenda in response to 9/11, "family values" which translated to anti-gay and rigidly Christian and pro-life and anti-regulation of business. The American voters saw them as corrupt in terms of their conservative values. But they also saw them as clueless on health care and the problems created by the Iraq War. Clearly, all the polls and research shows they GOP lost no significant votes among the conservatives and reactionaries. They lost among the people who thought they were too right-wing "crazy" and insensitive, or clueless, to the concerns of ordinary working Americans.

Changing Education in Colorado

The Denver Post reports on the changing nature of the economy and efforts by Colorado colleges to adapt to the needs of its students and the market. This seems to follow what I was reading in Wagner's Global Achievement Gap in terms of what the education system is doing to provide the guidance and skills needed in the twenty-first century. While I am a little suspicious of the 21st Century Skills movement in education, I don't deny the need to modify some of the approaches to education and credentialing. In fact, my recent posts and article in the Denver Post address that very need. There is much we can do to be more efficient and effective in actually preparing kids for what they want, and need, to do.

Re-inventing education

Having finished Tony Wagner's The Global Achievement Gap, I am intrigued by many of his ideas.  Though I was critical of what I felt were some generalizations and red herrings earlier, there is much to investigate.  Some of the areas in which Wagner asks valid questions are "testing," "reinventing the education profession," and "motivating today's students" (in different ways than motivating student years ago).  While I don't believe there are fundamental flaws with the system as a whole, I believe Wagner is right when he asks, "what does it mean to be an educated adult in the twenty-first century" and "how do we define rigor in the age of the information explosion" and "how do we create better assessments and accountability systems that give us the information we need."

In terms of testing, I have never been a vigorous critic of standardized testing, though I acknowledge its flaws.  There is such an arbitrary nature to the questions on the exams, especially in terms of content and vocabulary.  Without a standard national curriculum or even state curriculum with a set vocabulary list, there is a problematic component to reading assessment.  Even the AP exams - while they definitely identify academically committed and skilled students - don't necessarily identify clearly the "critical thinking skills" that Wagner proposes and communities and employers demand.

However, Wagner offers some intriguing information on the new Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) which is "an open-ended, ninety-minute performance assessment in which students have to demonstrate their reasoning, problem-solving, and writing skills while attempting to solve a real-world problem."  From the description of this test and system, it seems like a great development in assessment, and its components should become more standard even in the classroom.  It's worth more discussion.   What do you think?

Race to Nowhere

A new documentary film on the education system - focusing on its misplaced priorities and goals
- presents the following insight: "When success is defined by high grades, test scores, trophies - we know we end up with unprepared, disengaged, exhausted, and ultimately unhealthy kids."

The movie, by Reel Link Films, is called Race to Nowhere and it lays blame with all of us - parents, teachers, communities, government, and even the kids. It is a mantra that has been echoed in books such as Jean Twenge's Generation Me and Denise Clark Pope's Doing School. At the same time that some kids are incredibly deficient in school-related skills, others are merely exhausted with perfecting them.

Ultimately, the feeling from this film is something has to give.

Feeling Good About Conservatives

With the seemingly lemmings-off-a-cliff mentality driving the agenda-less GOP these days, it's tough to feel good about conservatism. As they seek to "re-brand" the party on the way to "returning to its ideals," it's just been tough to defend, or even look at, conservatives lately. Thankfully, we still have people like Kathleen Parker and David Brooks to remind us that there can be good, logical, practical, rational conservatism at work in the Republican Party. I've praised Brooks for educating people about "Burke-an conservatism," and I can always count on Parker to take the hot air out of conservative hot-button issues and offer a rational critique, as she does today with her piece on the comedienne Wanda Sykes' comments at the Correspondents dinner. Three cheers for common sense and pragmatism.