Vocational Ed Gets the Ax in AZ

Apparently, a 2009 bill in the Arizona legislature cut $550 from the state's Department of Education. That included reducing funding for Career and Technical Education (CTE) from $11 million down to $57,000 - a 99.9% reduction. This is truly sad, and it continues to reinforce how clueless Americans, and especially elected officials committed to low taxes/limited government, are when it comes to the actual needs of the education system and necessary reforms.

While schools and politicians continue to appease voters with increasing test scores and college admissions, ignoring college graduation rates and the needs of the workplace, the area that gets neglected is good, old-fashioned vocational education. This is the aspect of the system that needs the most focus and reform.

Just Showing Up and Living Deliberately

Recently, I had an interesting conversation with a friend who works in a supervisory position, and we discussed the absolute rarity of consistent self awareness and a reasonable work ethic. Occasionally, her employees will note how "things just seem to run so much more smoothly" when she is there. Amazingly, it is lost on these employees that the situation is true precisely because she actively makes it so.

Because there is a sales and customer service component to her job, we discussed how important it is to pay attention to detail. People, be they customers or colleagues, like to be acknowledged, and something as simple as using someone's name or creating comfort out of shared interests can be so important. This is something I learned growing up with a personnel director as a father, as well as working in restaurants. If I heard a customer's name mentioned in passing, I could use it when I delivered their food. If someone was wearing a Cardinal's shirt, I could comment on the game. It is simply called paying attention.

This was reinforced to me when I took the kids to a rock climbing gym the other day. The manager was so attentive to our needs, regularly using our names when she saw us. Of course, we go there regularly, but we also hand in our ID cards each time ... so she knows who we are, and she lets us know that she knows. It's a nice touch that is the sign of a well-run business. And, it's not only natural - though that helps - it comes from working hard at the job and "paying attention to details."

I try to impart similar lessons to students - for, regardless of our subject, effective teachers know that so much of what we do is imparting knowledge and skills on "how to live." Much of life is "showing up" and being self aware. Being organized and self motivated is so important. I tell my students what a special commodity they will be if they simply show up on time each day and do their jobs on a regular basis without having to be reminded. Surprisingly, that is so uncommon.

This extends to the concept of self awareness, paying attention to details, or what Henry David Thoreau liked to call "living deliberately." Early in the year, I have a variety of activities in class focused on teaching students to pay attention to details and become close readers. We look at visuals and key in on details before interpreting them. I encourage students doing research to spend copious amounts of time simply reading. That way they know what they are talking about before they sit down to write. This is what Bob Dylan meant when he wrote "know your song well before you start singing."

From reading literature to conducting research to performing computations to public speaking to interviewing to meeting new friends or asking a girl/boy out, kids need to be taught those basic skills that come from living deliberately.

Super Average Tuesday

In the forty years I've lived, Americans have preceded practically each national election with the mantra and pledge to "throw the bums out." This year the Tea Party hysteria was lauded as the force that would bring that "change." And while there have been a few notable upsets, the reality is that while America has contempt for "Congress" and "government," they don't really have a problem with "their congressman" or "their government." Most of the challenged incumbents retained their seats in the primaries, and the reality is that the country and the world is not nearly as terrible as the pundits claim.

Celtics-Lakers

I was happy to see the Celtics even the score on Sunday night because Kobe Bryant just whines way to much for me to hear about him winning his fifth ring. Kobe has definitely got game - but I'm not really interested in hearing the Jordan comparisons, or the Magic comparisons for that matter. So, as Augustana sings, "I think [we'll] go to Boston, I think [we'll] start a new life ..."

However, let's hope the referees learn to swallow their whistles. The excessive fouls and calls - especially the bumping off the ball - is really annoying, and it is killing the game. Garnett and Odom and Perkins and Gasol with three fouls in the first half? That was ridiculous. They're big boys - let them play.

Primary Boredom

Democrats hold Senate 52-48 (with two Ind.) In the House the Dems lose 20-25 overall after picking up a few unexpected. It will be pretty standard for a first term mid-term. Of course, coming off an economic catastrophe and into two unfunded, poorly run wars, that'd be a pretty impressive showing.

I concede many criticisms of the Democrats and the Obama Administration. However, as an independent, I don't see the reason for overwhelming faith that the GOP can effectively run the government, especially with the loss of people like Bennett in Utah and Crist in Florida. At least they still have people like Lindsay Graham and Olympia Snow, and someday Paul Ryan will be worthwhile when he grows up.

I'm no apologist for Pelosi or Reid, but McConnel and Boehner bring nothing to the table.

"Republicans run on the premise that government can't work, and then they get elected and prove it." - PJ O'Rourke

A Loss for Moderate Pragmatism

The first casualty in the "tea party" hysteria about incumbents is the loss in the primary for three-term, moderate, bi-partisan conservative William Bennett of Utah. This is a true shame. This kind of reaction is not even rational, and it doesn't bode well for the country.

Responsible Republicans

Great piece by Jacob Weisberg in Slate today about the loss of responsible government among Republicans. It was last prominent in the early days of the Reagan presidency and last practiced by the responsible Bush presidency - that was the first one.

Responsible conservatism is so important in our democratic republic, and it is a shame that the moderate voices of the GOP have been so crowded out. Hopefully, the Lindsay Graham's and the Judd Gregg's become the new leaders of the party.

Hopefully.

Tax Reform that Works?

Congressmen Judd Gregg of New Hampshire and Ron Wyden of Oregon - two of my favorite pragmatic and rational problem solvers - are proposing a serious, and I mean serious, tax reform bill that makes so much sense, it will never pass. They propose to simply the tax code, eliminating thousands of deductions and offering three simple, progressive brackets. It also proposes lowering the corporate tax rate to a flat 24%. I am definitely intrigued.

However, while it proposes to be a deficit neutral bill, that quality will do nothing to alleviate a trillion dollar deficit and a $12 trillion debt. Additionally, the GOP-side continues to push the corporate rate change on a comparison to other countries - even though, because of deductions, most American corporations pay almost nothing in taxes as it is now. I don't see corporations giving up all their deductions and increasing their tax liability to 24%, but we will see.

With those problems, I don't see a lot of hope. But it's better than the status quo.

Teacher Pay

Teacher pay was addressed in two entertaining editorials in the Denver Post recently. First, libertarian talk show host Mike Rosen offered this piece comparing teacher pay to that of professional athletes. No fan of teachers, Rosen called out teachers for complaining they should be paid as well as professional athletes (a dubious charge that I have never heard a teacher utter). Rosen's piece was followed by this one from a former teacher and guest columnist Mark Moe, challenging Rosen's accusations and breaking down the flaws in Rosen's criticism of teachers.

Moe's response is an effective and thorough deconstruction of a standard Rosen commentary. Of course, it's worth noting the unique twist on Rosen's two subjects - professional sports and teaching. Rosen's piece, like the sports world, is meant to entertain, not to educate. Mark Moe provides the insightful anti-thesis.

In twenty years of teaching, I have never encountered teachers who argue they should be paid like professional athletes. However, I regularly hear that suggestion from others outside teaching. When people discuss education with me, they will inevitably lament the fact that pro athletes and movie stars are paid so much, while teachers aren't. I'm not so outraged, as I know it is basic economics.

Pro athletes are paid as they are for one simple reason - the money is there. Advertising for popular sporting events generates huge revenue. And I do not fault athletes for earning the money they do. By contrast, teaching generates no advertising revenue. Though, I am intrigued by the idea.

Perhaps, teachers could wear corporate logos on their shirts, as well as post ads around the room. Teachers could hand out tests and quizzes "sponsored by Subway or Nike." I envision coupons at the back of the textbook, encouraging students to do well and support the companies. Incentives for achievement could be provided by corporations. The highest test score could receive $50 off their next purchase of Reeboks. And the best teachers who hosted the most popular classes and produced the greatest results could generate even more endorsement deals. This could radically restructure school funding, and might even solve many of our budget issues.

Hmmmm. Rosen might be on to something.

Health Care Mandates and the Constitution

Upon the passage of the health care reform bill, the opponents are already planning to file lawsuits or seek repeal based on the idea that the American people don't want the bill and the mandate to buy insurance is unconstitutional. Certainly, I don't claim to speak for the American people, as it is a varied voice. It's the last part that has me a bit baffled.

While the government has passed reform based on the ability to regulate inter-state commerce - certainly a reasonable idea considering the GOP always offers "buying across state lines" as the panacea for reform - critics argue that citizens can't be forced to buy insurance. They claim it as a "tax just for living." They argue that is unconstitutional, and that it will not stand up in court?

Just how do they explain FICA? What about Medicare and Social Security? Citizens are already taxed to participate in an insurance program - one is medical, the other retirement. Citizens are already automatically enrolled in federal programs as a matter of birth. Clearly, the requirement that citizens participate in these insurance programs has been upheld as constitutional for thirty-five and seventy-five years.

Am I missing something here?

Kids Caring about Kids

So, here's some good news about the world for a change:

This week Cherry Creek High School had our spring Spirit Week - normally a kick off to spring sports. This year, Student Senate teamed up with the Make a Wish Foundation and changed Spirit Week to Wish Week. CCHS students accepted the task of raising money to grant the wish of a seven-year-old boy battling cancer, whose wish is to go on a Disney Cruise.

The Senate set a goal of $5000 to grant this young boy's wish, and they organized various events all week. I was co-host of our first talent show at Creek in nearly twenty years - and that night brought in almost $2600. The Senate also coordinated fundraising at our musical, choir concert, and various school activities. Today, we held a pep rally to present the money to him.

At the rally, Student Senate announced that in this week, CCHS students raised a whopping $17,500 for the Make a Wish Foundation. From what I understand, that amount set a new national record for a single week of fundraising by a high school group. The amount has allowed Creek to grant the wishes of two other Make a Wish children who are also battling cancer.

Let me tell you - it was pretty wonderful to watch a very happy seven year old boy run through a tunnel of arms from our cheer squad into our gym where he received a huge standing ovation from a couple thousand high school students. He also took great joy in throwing t-shirts to the crowd and joining in some of the activities such as spraying Silly String in the faces of more than a few teachers and students.

There is a lot of negativity out there these days, and a lot of criticism of young people. And, so, it's important to acknowledge that we are raising some pretty amazing kids - kids who look out for each other, kids who, quite simply, care.

I am so impressed with our young people these days. They are hopeful, optimistic, caring, tolerant, and more. Feel free to spread the news of this really neat and hopeful moment.

No One Supports Bad Teachers

Several news stories of education gone terribly wrong are circulating lately, and once again the perception of what went wrong is far too narrow. One story is the failure of Kansas City Public Schools failed attempts at reform, despite massive funding. The other story is Newsweek Magazine's call to "fire all bad teachers." While no one can dispute the facts in these articles, the interpretation of cause and effect needs to be clarified.

The Kansas City story is simply what happens when money is mis-spent and mis-managed. The issue is always administration - with the ability to impose high expectations. However, more funds can make a huge difference when well managed - witness Geoffery Canada's Harlem Children's Zone. When extra funds are used to feed and clothe the kids, provide basic health care, after-school programs, Saturday school, extensive tutoring, longer school days, and greater attention, student achievement among the poorest improves.

Of course, it also only happens if the expectations of kids and families have consequences - a key component of public charter schools - with the demand accountability of the student with the possibility of dismissal. It's not about the funds - it's about the management. And public schools can manage the money well. My school district does. Canada's schools do.

The "money helps" versus "money doesn't help" is oversimplified. Clearly, the KC program was a mess - but it doesn't prove anything other than that the program was incredibly poorly managed. Put Joe Clark or Geoffery Canada or Jaime Escalante or even Michelle Rhee in charge of those public schools, and the result is different.

Newsweek is far more egregious in the errors of their subjective evaluation of education's problems and the necessary reforms. The crux of the article was "poor teaching." And we all know that it is out there. Yet the focus of Newsweek's criticism was on teachers, with only passing nods to the idea that 99% of teachers receive satisfactory evaluations.

Thus, the emphasis on the responsibility of school administration was seriously understated in the article. And then its praise of KIPP charter schools quickly glossed over the key to their success - contracts that the students must sign and expectations they must meet. The article emphasizes that the schools don't "cherry pick" their students - the take "all comers." Yet, the point is they do "cherry pick" which students they keep, and they don't keep "all students." They show non-performers the door.

The article implies that the charter schools succeed because they are non-union. That is absolutely wrong. If the public schools could also require a contract and show non-performers the door, then the traditional schools could be as effective. But they can't. When the charter school kicks the kid out for not meeting his contract, where does he go? The public school without such measures.

Thus, I completely agree with getting rid of bad teachers. And I've endlessly cited schools with tenured union faculty that do that. So, the emphasis should be on higher expectations for administration. And the addition of performance contracts for students as well as teachers. Then, we're getting somewhere.

So, while I concede the premise, the article was rather ridiculously disingenuous in the way in which it "cherry picked" its data.