Test-Based Accountability Doesn't Work

The groundswell of public opinion in opposition to expanded standardized testing in schools continues to grow. Today in Denver, Colorado, a group of students known as the Denver Student Union held a rally as part of their first State of the Student Address. The primary focus of this group was to encourage the governor to end the culture of high stakes standardized testing in schools. Speakers today argued for a more meaningful educational experience, based on the arts and sciences, rather than test preparation.

And this challenge to high stakes testing - and the accountability attached to it - is also the focus of many education reformers who have seen little progress or improvement in the decade ruled by the No Child Left Behind Act, which basically mandated a system of testing. Marc Tucker of the National Center on Education and the Economy has been writing about the "Failure of Test-Based Accountability." Basically, the use of high stakes test to promote and even guarantee growth has shown little improvement in student achievement. And, research now reveals that grades - GPA - are a more important and effective indicator of student achievement than standardized tests. In fact, students who don't submit test scores are at no disadvantage to those who do.

Ultimately, the backlash against standardized testing is only going to grow. And state boards of education are going to need to re-evaluate the broad-based faith they have put in tests.

Making Millions by Blogging

Most bloggers begin their online writing out of a bit of ego and a genuine desire to share information. They are, mostly, information mavens, which is the term Malcolm Gladwell coined for content-area experts who have a knack for curating useful information for countless niche markets. However, many bloggers would also love to do what they do full time and make a healthy income - if not millions - by doing it. I know a part of me dreams of A Teacher's View being that media source for many and income source for me.

To that end, countless bloggers and internet readers are drawn to articles like "How We Grew a Blog from ZERO to $6 Million."  Those titles are pretty tempting - especially because they make it sound so easy.  Of course, if it were so, I wouldn't still be working a full-time job in schools. Or maybe I would, but I'd do it for fun. But that's not to say that articles by sites and organizations like Digital Marketer are wrong or exploitative or deceptive. The information they provide such as setting goals for subscribers, providing real products, sharing advertising, and maximizing pays-per-click are absolutely on target.

For example, the above article about "Growing a blog to millions" focuses on areas such as selling products, site design, and, most importantly, the idea of content curation or content aggregation. The key to most successful sites is the way they provide readers consistent access to quality information. And they rarely produce it all by themselves. Think about it:

The World Doesn’t Need More Information

I’ll say it again: The world does NOT need more information. Instead, what the world needs (and values) is a trusted authority who will organize and aggregate all the GOOD information that’s actually worth reading into one place. And this concept is nothing new. In fact, the largest, most successful authority sites on the web rarely feature content written by the person who has their name on it.

Think about it: The Huffington Post, The Drudge Report, Bloomberg, Forbes, Breitbart… these sites aren’t famous for the owner’s writing style. They’re famous for the content they present. It's just that making money by blogging does require a lot of work and quite a bit of luck.

Do you see where I’m going here? I sometimes like to jokingly call this “The Oprah Factor,” because Oprah built her ridiculously successful career by bringing the best experts, content, and entertainers onto her talk show. Oprah understood something that most people don’t…

Experts do NOT equal Authority… authorities are people who aggregate and associate with multiple experts. That’s why Oprah has associated with (and in some cases created) expert brands such as Rachel Ray, Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz.

This is the playbook that the most successful authority sites use. They host expert content, associate with the most reputable thought leaders in an industry, and they leverage those associations to build their authority…just like Oprah does (just on a slightly smaller level).

Chipotle is the Future of the American Economy

I love Chipotle.

Seriously, who among us, who has tasted Steve Ells' brilliant creation, doesn't love the carnitas or the barbacoa or any variation of the Chipotle burrito. Things like burritos and tacos have always been the perfect food for me. All food groups represented, delicious and easy, and, oh, so filling. However, Chipotle may be so much more than just a burrito. Slate's Matthew Yglesias wonders if Chipotle might be the future of the American economy.

While Yglesias is arguing that the low skill service work can't be as easily replaced as an accountant, I am more interested in looking at Chipotle as an incredibly well-run company that refused to accept low quality as a by-product of affordable. Like Robert Irvine on the Food Network's Restaurant Impossible, Steve Ells can teach many people about the importance of high quality. When Ells first opened his burrito shop, he intended to simply use it to quickly raise cash to finance his dream of a top tier restaurant. As a unexpected result, he ended up sticking with his business model that changed the nature of fast food. In fact, he may be the pioneer of what is now known as fast casual, the defining characteristic is affordable, high quality fare.

Some people may worry that the future of the economy is fast food, even fast casual. However, if it's the work of visionaries like Steve Ells and Chipotle, that future may be brighter than we think.

Governor Brewer Vetoes Bill That Discriminates Against Gay People

Sometimes doing the right thing is just obvious. And sometimes people have to bend or even violate their principles to do what's right. Governor Jan Brewer did the right thing today by vetoing SB-1062, which would have basically legalized discrimination.  In a wise and astute bit of explanation, Brewer noted, "Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value … so is non-discrimination." Bam! What a powerful statement to those who so self-righteously attempted to enshrine hate and discrimination in the laws of the land. Being a pragmatic politician, Brewer did not immediately move to dismiss the bill, but instead gave the bill its process and carefully allowed the issue to develop. Both sides were heard, and then she moved to strike down the bill which never should have passed out of committee, never should have entered committee, never should have exited the mind of the first congressman who initiated it. This bill was just wrong. Despite any one person's feelings or values or religion or philosophy or experience, the bill was wrong on so many levels. It's nice to know that Governor Brewer agreed.

The Latest in the Common Core Controversy

Apparently, the Department of Education and the Governor's Association, along with the organization of school boards, have woken the sleeping giant - Common Core critics. They are coming from all sides in this battle which has managed to align the Tea Party with the teacher's unions. With that weird re-aligning of the planets, it would seem natural to take a step back and evaluate the situation before proceeding.

Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute has been following the Common Core/PARCC testing debacle very closely, and he offers the simple pragmatic advice to "Not Fear the Moratorium." Common Core advocates are adamant that the standards be implemented and that testing begin as soon as possible. But, the recent drop in test scores in New York, and the widening of the achievement gap, indicate that being too hasty with the new standards and tests could, in fact, derail some pretty reasonable education reform.

And, from the teaching standpoint, it's worth being cautious about implementation, especially when new research indicates that many CommonCore-aligned materials are turning out to be a bunch of hooey. And, regarding class materials, the Department of Education can't even get the story straight, when people like Arne Duncan imply the standards won't impact curriculum. It seems like teachers are getting suspicious, especially when the teachers unions are starting to push back and ask tough questions. If you lose the teachers, and the parents, you're going to lose the argument.

The debate rolls on.

Writing That Perfect College Letter of Rec

It's that time of year again - high school juniors are beginning to cautiously and humbly approach their favorite teacher for that all important component of the college application process  - "The Letter of Rec." Even English teachers struggle with this assignment, for it's difficult not to become cliché. How do you get past talking about how the student is "a great kid" or a "deep thinker" or "a classroom leader"? This week in The Atlantic writer Andrew Simmons offers advice on writing the perfect letter of recommendation.

Retirement at 65? Or Never ...

Retire? Me?

I've always joked to my students - and my wife - that I will be "pushing my walker" across the parking lot for as long as I am conscious ... and lucid. OK, maybe just conscious.  The idea of retiring just seems like something old people do. Of course, now, with the new economic uncertainty, "The Other Retirement Plan:" is to work past sixty-five. We've all seen the commercials lately - from every financial advisor in the business - asking us to guess the "amount of money" will need in retirement.  Few would guess correctly on how much that could be.

So, instead people must imagine that a life of leisure at sixty-five (of fifty-five for many public employees) just may not be in the cards. And, some may not want it to be - for, "there are only so many rounds of golf you can play. Is "75 the new 65"? It's possible that the Golden Age of the golden years may be past. And no one may ever retire again like the WWII generation and Baby Boomers were able to do.

And that's probably OK.

Amazing Race Is Back - All Stars 2014

Start your engines, Race fans, the Amazing Race is back in action with an All-Star cast returning once more to try their luck in a "race around the world." Season number 24 of the most popular and successful of reality TV shows kicked off tonight on the campus of UCLA and, after some brief drama and background, sent eleven teams off to GuaDong, China " in search of their next clue."

I have to admit I was a little disappointed that the Race is once again starting from Los Angeles. The producers need to mix it up a bit and consider some other departure cities. It's always fun to guess what Destination City will be, but it's become a bit tiresome for the contestants to always take off from LAX. As it stands, there was a bit of drama with one team facing a medical emergency to start the show. But how heartwarming for fellow Kentucky-an Mallory to join Mark after "Bopper" had to bow out for health reasons.

My early favorite is, once again, the Cowboys - Jett and Cord. They are fan favorites because they are just so darn sweet and such good competitors. It's been heartbreaking to see them lose twice. I was also thrilled to see the GlobeTrotters, Flight-time and Big Easy back. If they win, I won't be disappointed. Margie and Luke are also a heartwarming team, though Luke's emotional issues can be tough to watch when they weaken his chances. And, the father-son team of Dave and Connor would be a great win after they were forced out with an injury last time.

Leading the list of teams I don't want, the Sri Lankan girls met my hopes and expectations by going out in the first round. They are just so annoying and rude - I can't imagine why the producers thought anyone would want to listen to them "bitching" at each other for an hour every week. The Afghan-imals are also a bit crass and over-the-top. So, I won't be disappointed when their attitudes lead them to failure. Other teams like the YouTubers and the country singers are just so "ho-hum."

Regardless, it's nice to have Phil and the Racers back. Game on.

Is Walmart Calling for Higher Wages???

Regarding wages and the stagnation of the middle/working class, I once heard the most fascinating encapsulation of the irony that plagues corporate America:

Henry Ford knew he had to pay his workers well enough that

they could afford to buy a Ford;

Walmart, by contrast, pays its workers so poorly that

they have no choice but to shop at Walmart ...



And we could add to that, "draw food stamps and Medicaid." Is that all changing? This week, business writer Al Lewis investigates the strange and unexpected support of a hike in the minimum wage by retail behemoth, Walmart.

Note to the National Retail Federation: You can't keep fighting increases in the minimum wage and then wonder why consumers aren't spending more money in your members' stores.

 

"It's simple math--if the cost of hiring goes up, hiring goes down," said NRF Chief Executive Matthew Shay. He said this in a Jan. 28 news release opposing President Barack Obama's proposal to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour from $7.25 by 2016.

But for low-wage retail king Walmart, it's not so simple. Corporate America, and many in the top 2%, have never seemed to understand that America is a demand driven economy, with consumer spending accounting for nearly three-quarters of the economy. Thus, if the bulk of workers don't have money to spend, corporate earnings will have to go down. And, while the top tier has been able to exploit and profit from low wages for decades, it may have reached the breaking point.

And, of course, this has huge implications for the education world as well. For, as schools and business leaders continue to promote a "College for all" mentality, voices are beginning to counter that "wisdom."  Millenial writer and social critic Matt Saccaro recommends that young people "not go to college," because the debt is not worth the payback. The argument for college has always been that college grads make more money.

So, perhaps the discussion should be about wages .... and not educational credentials.

Is ADHD Even a Real Condition - Or Is It Just Over-Diagnosed

No one who works in schools or has children is very far removed from discussions about Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD.  In fact, it has become a common excuse or punch-line for just about any instance of absent-mindedness or carelessness or shortcoming. It seems these days that nearly everyone has ADD or ADHD, and that's not too far removed from the truth. For, diagnosis of these conditions related to lack of concentration or focus have skyrocketed in recent years, especially among boys. And some are wondering if the education system is to blame.

As the diagnoses continue, and the research continues, and the problems continue, and the pressure to succeed in an increasingly standardized school system continues, Alison Gopnik, who writes the Mind & Matter column for the weekend Wall Street Journal, is wondering "Are Schools Asking to Drug Kids for Better Test Scores?"  This conclusion results from the increasing criticism of excessive diagnosis of young people. And, of course, most of the problems seem to be related to kids not "being able to sit down and pay attention" in school. Wow, this is new? That's actually a medical problem? Apparently, every boy between 4 and 18 has ADHD. Or so could be the conclusion that not toeing the line in school is a disease, or worse a mild form of mental illness.

The research on both sides is extensive, and it would take a MD and PhD to sift through it all and make sense of it. Which is exactly what Stephen Hinslaw and Richard Scheffler have attempted to do in their new book, The ADHD Explosion.

Capitalism with a Human Face - Some Work for Others

"But wouldn't you rather own your own business?

Those future-killing, dream-draining, naïve words represent some of the worst counseling I have heard given to young people in their formative years. Basically, students who have an interest - such as fixing cars or painting houses - are told that their goal is insufficient because they aren't going to be their own boss. So, instead of graduating high school and going to work full time in the area they enjoy, the students are shamed into enrolling in college classes that they have no interest in taking. It's not enough that a kid wants to be a mechanic - he has to get a business degree, so he can own his own shop. And, certainly, there is an argument to be made for inspiring kids to want a bit more. That shop owner will almost certainly make more money - and in some ways, I guess, not "work as hard."

However, this advice ignores some serious realities of the labor market and our economic system. Not everyone can own his own business, or all businesses would fail. There just isn't enough "business." And, so, advisors to young people should realize - and must understand - that the market will decide who rises to management. There are countless quality workers who would, and do, make terrible bosses and businessmen.  David Brooks of the New York Times develops a side of this issue in his discussion of "Capitalism for the Masses." Brooks uses the story - and the philosophy - of American Enterprise Institute president Albert Brooks to argue as he long has that business leaders have a moral responsibility to provide for the people who man their shops and factories.

Not everyone can or should be the boss. However, the foundation of capitalism must be that an individual can earn a decent living by have a valuable skill and working hard. It must not be that to be successful or prosperous or even moderately get by that everyone has to "move up the ladder." We know, or we should, that while the CEO who guides the company and the talented programmer/designer/engineer who create the products are of paramount importance, the people who actually manufacture, sell, deliver, and repair the devices are equally valuable.  The problem, of course, is that Dickensian business leaders have always seen the lower cogs as replaceable and, thus, not at all valued.

And that's a terrible model. 

College, Academic Standards, Welding, & Wages

"College graduates make more money than high school graduates."

Sadly, that is the one regular argument that schools, teachers, counselors, parents, business people, and the press make to students today. They should pursue a post-graduate degree because they will make more money. So, then, perhaps the problem we should be discussing about schools isn't really about schools at all. Perhaps the problem is about wages.  Of course, that means the conversation should shift - as so many have tried to do - to the value of skilled labor.

Wages are high when the work is skilled, in demand, rare, or highly valued. Thus, it's not that we should be encouraging students to "go to college" because that will earn higher wages. For, if we had countless, trained doctors and lawyers and accountants and programmers and statisticians and engineers, then the wages would no longer be so high. Simply going to college isn't going to guarantee anyone the higher wages that will lift them out of poverty. It's acquiring skills and knowledge and becoming valuable that will do that.

Years ago, Bill Gates argued that 80% of students should earn a bachelor's degree. And that just seems like an absurd statement for brilliant businessman. Clearly, the economy doesn't have that many high education jobs for that many people, and their knowledge and talents would simply be wasted. Instead, people should be responding to the market. That will prove to be more successful.

Gifted Kids - Are They Being Left Behind?

The basic premise of the Common Core national standards - and the associated national tests created by PARCC and SmarterBalanced (not the vegetable spread) - is to create common grade level expectations for all students to ensure equal access to a high quality education which will prepare them for college and careers. At least that's the premise. Of course that commonality and "standardization" is troubling to some in the education community, especially those who exceed the standards. Clearly, the quality of schools across the country - and even across cities and districts - has been varied. And there was a good chance that if a child moved schools, or states, he would arrive either behind or ahead of his peers. The problem, on the other hand, is that not all children arrive at school at the same levels, and not all children learn at the same pace.

One common mantra in the current controversy and debate about Common Core is that the standards are designed to "create a common floor," not a common ceiling. However, the standards in practice were bound to create challenges for sub-groups outside of the basic age-level expectations. This conflict received a sensationalized exposure in the past week after Chris Weller for Newsweek offered this claim: "America Hates Its Gifted Kids." The premise is that schools working toward the Core are inevitably going to slow down advanced learners. And, it's tough to argue that isn't happening as schools begin to move away from tracking or clustering of kids and instead maintain heterogeneous classes with the expectation that a teacher will "differentiate instruction" to meet all kids learning needs. It is a wonderful goal and theory, though some argue that differentiated instruction is dog that won't hunt.

Ultimately, kids don't arrive at school all at the same level, and not all arrive ready to learn. Certainly, not all learn at the same pace. And it's tough to argue for holding some learners back, or limiting options for advanced learners to progress. Certainly, people are aware of the controversy over where Common Core stops - algebra II.  That limit is what led Stanford math professor James Milgrim to refuse to sign off on the standards - because they do not prepare kids for top tier colleges and STEM careers.  I know as I began to prepare for state testing this week, I had to laugh at preparing basic level tests for students to take when they were clearly beyond them. For example, many middle school students are ready for - and even succeeding in - high school level math classes like geometry, algebra II/trig, and calculus. And, it is simply silly - and a huge waste of time - for ninth grade students taking calculus to waste their time doing a state or national test geared toward algebra and lower. They should be exempt. For, the only people their grades should be truly accountable to are their parents. So, while Weller is certainly over-the-top with his title, I am not so sure that CommonCore and PARCC aren't going to hold kids back and waste their time.

Who knows?  Age level grouping may be the next big challenge in schools.

The "Hechinger Ed" Look at Education

I am generally well-informed about the world of education policy, including the prominent voices in the discussion. From EdWeek to EdNext to Edudemic to HuffPo/Atlantic/WashPo education pages, I listen to many voices, and I often try re-frame and inform others from what I've learned. So, I was a bit surprised to discover another education voice offering an interesting perspective on the comparison of America to the schools of other nations, particularly Asian, specifically Singapore. Thanks to a tweet from edu-writer (and edu-punk) Anya Kamenetz, I've discovered the HechingerEd Blog, featuring the Hechinger Report. Check it out.

STEM Needs Help - STEM to STEAM

The value of the arts, design, innovation, creativity, and right brain thinking gets a boost this week in The Atlantic as education and parenting writer Jessica Lahey argues "STEM needs another letter." While STEM - the focus on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math - is getting all the press in education these days, many voices are beginning to raise the profile of the arts. The STEM to STEAM movement argues for a re-evaluation and re-organization of standards and pedagogy to promote an infusion of right brain thinking in a left brain education world. Ideas guru Daniel Pink has exquisitely articulated this in his best-selling non-fiction work A Whole New Mind: Why Right Brainers Will [and should] Rule the Future.

Is Six Years of High School the Answer?

 As some people talk about the idea of limiting seat time and not promoting college to all students, other people are exploring the idea of extending high school beyond the traditional four years. With concurrent enrollment opportunities expanding in high schools, more students are discovering the opportunity to graduate from high school with college credits, or even an associates degree. The next step is a model by which community college and high schools are joined in a single program. In the city of Chicago, major tech companies are joining forces to support six year high schools.

In Praise of Michael Sam - a Model NFL Player

It was a triumph of courage last week that Missouri defensive lineman and SEC Defensive Player of the Year Michael Sam publicly announced he is gay. Sam, who is expected to be a top pick in the NFL draft next week, has shattered an illusion and a barrier about homosexuality. And one of the nation's most intolerant clubs - the NFL - will soon have to face the issue that many thought might never happen. A gay man will be - publicly - in a professional locker room. There have, no doubt, been countless gay men in all levels of locker rooms before … and this should be no different. Alas, there is "controversy."

Perhaps the two best responses to the announcement that I've seen have come from broadcasters unafraid to speak the truth. First this from Daily Show host Jon Stewart:

And, then there was an even more powerful statement out of the heart of Texas:

Dale Hansen said it all when he addressed the hypocrisy of a sports world that believes there is no room  for a gay man.  The NFL has long had a problem with the criminal, violent, and inappropriate behavior of its players. It is a problem they have attempted to address, though it's been slow going. And then some have the audacity to believe and even articulate that the presence of a gay player in the locker would somehow be destructive and inappropriate because it would make people feel "uncomfortable."

And that must change.

Congrats to you, Michael Sam - a man among boys.

Colorado, PARCC Tests, & ACT Aspire

Another recent piece for the Denver Post:

Colorado Should Replace PARCC Test with ACT Aspire

Replace PARCC with ACT Aspire

In Colorado’s rush to judgment in an attempt to Race-to-the-Top, it’s time to put PARCC testing in park.

Following seven other states who adopted Common Core standards, Colorado should immediately withdraw from the PARCC consortium until the state has a chance to publicly review, evaluate, and critique Common Core standards and PARCC. As an alternative, Colorado could put a moratorium on standardized testing, or it could continue with its own test, the CSAP/TCAP. If a test is deemed necessary, and TCAP is considered insufficient, there is a better option.  In place of PARCC testing, Colorado should instead contract with ACT whose new Aspire program is aligned with state standards, as well as college readiness measures, and is available for grades 3 through 11.

One of the primary problems with the PARCC test is the mystery and ambiguity of both the organization and its assessments. PARCC, which stands for the Partnership to Assess Readiness for College and Career, is an un-proven standardized test created by a private consortium that has provided very little information or transparency on what their tests will look like. On the other hand, ACT is a familiar, trusted, and time-honored testing service that has released as many sample items in the past six months as PARCC has released in more than two years. ACT is a known entity with a proven track record, and ACT’s tests actually mean something to parents, students, and, perhaps most importantly, colleges.

From a purely financial standpoint, choosing ACT or even maintaining TCAP is preferable to spending Colorado’s tax money on tests created by a nebulous unproven organization. Currently, PARCC tests are estimated to cost roughly $30 per student, whereas ACT will do it for $20.  And with PARCC, states still don’t really know what they’re paying for. The problem with PARCC is most evident in the scant materials it has released to the public. Having watched numerous presentations on Common Core and PARCC, I’ve seen the same tired and limited sample questions again and again. It’s simply not enough information. And while people are fairly confident about what established tests like ACT tell us, no one knows if PARCC questions or scores mean anything at all. While proponents argue that PARCC offers a more rigorous test of critical thinking and application of knowledge, there is no comparison by which to draw that conclusion.

An important consideration in choosing a testing program is to consider what colleges expect. ACT is a classic benchmark for college readiness. In fact, ACT scores are one of the primary measures Colorado uses to rate schools on college preparation. And colleges actually trust and care what ACT results reveal. No college intends to use PARCC scores for college admission – and our students must still take the state-mandated ACT.  ACT’s Aspire program is specifically scaffolded to prepare students for the ACT, even as the ACT evolves to meet changing needs and expectations of colleges and careers. Regardless, the ACT and its program matter to colleges in a way that PARCC doesn’t.

The organization of Colorado moms, who initiated a bill calling for a timeout on Common Core and PARCC testing, have reasonably questioned the validity of PARCC. For, in a country where roughly 60% of adults had little-to-no understanding of Common Core and PARCC as late as last September, it seems foolish to proceed with implementation before the involved parties fully understand it. Though Senator Michael Johnston has argued that people simply don’t understand the values and benefits of the test, he fails to concede that very misunderstanding necessitates a “time out.” And, as the Denver Post recently reported, the vote by the Colorado State Board of Education to adopt Common Core and contract with PARCC was made by a slim 4-3 margin. That represents a disconcerting “consensus” and demands further discussion and review.

While Common Core proponents confidently claim 45 states have “adopted” the standards, they don’t acknowledge that as many as seventeen have serious misgivings, including discussions of withdrawal. If that’s the case, and states are bailing out of the PARCC test, then Colorado should certainly not accept the role of guinea pig for an unpiloted test with serious transparency issues. While the state claims to be piloting the tests this year for implementation next year, that schedule is simply irresponsible. After a pilot year, the people of Colorado need time to review the tests, the results, and the conclusions drawn from the data.

Opposition to PARCC testing is not about opposing high standards. Many teachers, parents, and students accept the new Colorado Academic Standards and Common Core. The standards are not the primary concern. The problem is a high stakes test by an entity that has no track record, no transparency, and no connection to Colorado. Douglas County School District, which opted out of Common Core, recently passed a resolution opposing state and federal testing. It also requests the right to opt out of mandated testing without penalty. DCSD’s motivation is grounded in opposition to tests that do not meet their needs, arguing PARCC is not an “authentic assessment.” Numerous states agree. Kentucky – the first state to fully implement Common Core – has withdrawn from PARCC, following Massachusetts, Florida, Oklahoma, Utah, Alaska, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Alabama, who are all pursuing alternative tests.

The Colorado State Board of Education will soon need to make a decision about renewing the contract with PARCC. Until we know more about what the full test looks like and what the results actually mean, Colorado should not renew PARCC. 

The State Board of Education will meet on Wednesday to discuss renewing with PARCC.

(Don't) Follow Your Passion

Here is my most recent piece of commentary for the Denver Post:

(Don’t) Follow Your Passion

“Follow your passion? That may be the worst advice I ever got.”

This insight from Mike Rowe of the Discovery Channel’s Dirty Jobs runs counter to every bit of advice teenagers receive from parents, teachers, and counselors.  Yet, it may be the best and certainly most honest guidance they hear. Now that high school seniors have filed their college apps and patiently wait to see which school will make their dreams come true, and high school juniors plan for the ACT and choose classes for senior year, it may be time to reflect on the belief that our jobs should make us happy and that college majors and career decisions should be based on ambiguous and nuanced ideas like passion.

Recently, Mike Rowe has been focused on promoting the value of skilled labor in a world that no longer appreciates it. Currently, there are roughly 3-4 million unfilled jobs in skilled labor, yet students are racking up a trillion dollars of debt for degrees they may not need. And, while there is certainly value in a liberal arts education, many students “follow their passion” to degrees which provide few of the skills they need for a career. Even in colleges the focus on “passion” has shifted. AP reporter Beth Harpaz explains, “While some top-tier schools can still attract students by promising self-discovery and intellectual pursuits, many colleges have changed their emphasis in the years since the recession hit. Instead of "Follow your passion," the mantra has become more like, "We'll help you get a job."

 

Writers and researchers like Daniel Coyle and Cal Newport agree with Rowe’s suspicion about following passion. In his book The Talent Code, Coyle recommends that students work on developing skills and talents rather than pursuing ideas like passion and personal happiness. In the real world, most people aren’t passionate about work or filled with zeal during the daily-ness of their jobs. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Additionally, following passion is a challenge for young people, many whom don’t have a passion, or at least not one easily linked to a career.  Cal Newport concurs in his book So Good They Can’t Ignore You, titled after a quote by actor Steve Martin.  A prominent entertainer and pop culture icon, Martin has written numerous best-selling books, an award winning play, and is considered one of the premier art collectors in American society.  He is also a renowned musician whose prowess with the banjo rivals the best in the business.  Steve Martin is just so good at what he does.  So, when Steve Martin was asked for the secret to success, he responded, “Be so good they can’t ignore you.” That advice – focused on developing skills and talents – is far better advice than pursuing “passion.” 

Incidentally, Newport’s book is subtitled, “Why Skills Trump Passion in the Quest for Work We Love.” As a computer science professor at Georgetown, Cal Newport advises young people to work on simply being good at what they do. And rather than compare themselves to others, they should seek instead to understand themselves and develop individual strengths.  For those wondering what they want to do with their lives, he offers this advice: “Passion is not something you follow. It’s something that will follow you as you put in the hard work to become valuable in the world.”  If people continue to grow and learn and develop talents, they will find their passion and success.

Robin Williams in the movie Dead Poets Society urged students to “Make your lives extraordinary.” And many are doing exactly that. However, beyond that maybe we should advise students to “Make yourself indispensable.” The best way to secure a career is to have talents the world requires. In the first episode of the HBO show Girls, Hannah is fired from her unpaid internship, only to learn her replacement is actually being paid for the job. When she adamantly confronts her boss, he says, “Well, she knows PhotoShop.”  While Hannah may tell herself, “I can learn PhotoShop,” the reality is she didn’t.  Thus, the point is to advise kids to be the kind of person who learns Photo-Shop. Hannah is a classic example of a person waiting for passion to lead her to happiness – and it never happens. Successful people by contrast are the ones who work hard and do what needs to be done to get want they want and need.

Of course, students don’t only go to college to acquire job skills, and society suffers from such a utilitarian approach. As Robin Williams’ character Mr. Keating teaches the young men, “medicine, law, business, engineering – these are all noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love – these are what we stay alive for.” And, woe to the society that promotes only skill-oriented education at the expense of the arts and humanities. That said, the arts and poetry – those things that often fuel our passion – don’t have to be the source of employment. For as contemporary sage Robert Fulghum has said, “The hardest thing for most people to figure out is that it’s really rare to do what you love and get paid for it. It’s almost better not to because you end up hating the thing you’re doing because you have to do it. A lot of people would be artists if they didn’t also have to make a living.”

As a teacher, I followed my passion. And I am fulfilled emotionally by the very thing that pays my bills. A friend of mine majored in finance because she is really good at math, but she is not passionate or fulfilled by her job. In fact, it can be quite annoying and rather mundane. However, it affords her a great life with her family, which is truly her passion. Another friend makes a great living managing operating systems for a multinational firm. He is not a computer geek by any stretch, but when we were in college, computing was simply a skill he acquired, and he followed it to success in the tech revolution. So, one us followed his passion, another followed her skills, and the third just followed the market. That’s the full story that should be told in advising students on college and career choices.

Michael P. Mazenko works at Cherry Creek High School and blogs at a-teachers-view.blogspot.com. Email him at mmazenko@gmail.com

Kentucky the Latest State to Withdraw from PARCC Common Core Testing

Is PARCC a political and educational house of cards that's destined to crumble?

That may be the case for the most controversial education issue of the last two decades as the state of Kentucky - the first state to embrace and implement CommonCore - has officially voted to withdraw from the PARCC testing consortium. Like numerous other states (Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Utah, Kansas, Utah, Alaska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts), leaders in Kentucky are seeking alternative options for testing the newly adopted CommonCore standards, as they acknowledge considerable unease about the testing process. This problem with PARCC has much to do with the simply lack of transparency about the actual tests, and concern about the tests' ability to reveal evidence of their students' achievement. At this point, Kentucky plans to take bids from testing agencies - including PARCC - for the opportunity to administer state tests, and being a PARCC member could represent a conflict of interest. One of the potential bidders for Kentucky's business (and it's a business worth potentially billions in taxpayer funds) will certainly be ACT which has established a testing system to challenge PARCC and the SmartBalanced consortium. ACT's program, called ACT Aspire, is a comprehensive testing service for grades three through eleven. For an excellent comparison of PARCC vs ACT Aspire, consider this analysis from Dr. Steve Cordogan of Township High School 214 in Illinois.

NCAA Is Not a Dictatorship, Despite Players' Union

Sometimes, it's your language choices that end the argument.

Such is the case with the most recent news in the argument that the NCAA should "pay student athletes" because it is profiting from their hard work - at least that's true for football and basketball players. (Clearly, the lacrosse players and swimmers should continue to exist in servitude because they don't pull in huge TV revenue.) In the latest salvo over oppressed student athletes, the Northwestern football team aligned itself with labor leaders in Chicago in calling for a union to represent these "workers." While the proposed union was not simply about "pay-for-play," student-athlete representative - and Northwestern QB - Kain Colter basically lost the argument when he called the NCAA "a dictatorship."

Kain, this metaphor fails on a dramatic scale, and it is an insult to all people who are currently suffering under true oppression. Student athletes - especially football and basketball players at major universities - are living a life of luxury compared to millions of people living under the brutal control of despots and dictators. People who are basically compensated with an opportunity for an expensive education - potentially worth a quarter of a million dollars - while being academically supported beyond the wildest dreams of the average student have no idea what oppression is. And, it is wildly inappropriate to imply so. It is as patently absurd as Prince writing "Slave" on his cheek over a record contract with Warner Bros. that paid him tens of millions of dollars.

Certainly, NCAA rules regarding student-athlete compensation must be altered dramatically. Student athletes are greatly inhibited from earning spending money by the demands on their time. They should be able to get jobs, or perhaps earn a stipend in some way that enables them to "eat when dorms aren't open" or be able to afford the basic amenities and fun of college. However, for most star players, like Colter, who are on full ride scholarships and come from middle class families, the issue of "spending money" shouldn't be an issue when the family has been excused from room, board, and tuition.  Beyond that, student-athletes are not employees and shouldn't be treated as such.

Perhaps, it is time to divest college football and basketball from the colleges themselves. It certainly is time to divest the NCAA from its tax exempt status based on an "educational mission."

Allusions & the Power of Prior Knowledge

Effective readers - and thinkers - use existing knowledge to make sense of new information. This basic reading strategy, which was first introduced to me in Cris Tovani's amazing I Read It But I Don't Get It, is integral to successful learning, even though it comes easier for some than others. Explaining the power of the technique and developing an understanding of how people learn can be as important as the actual content being taught. That is the power of allusion and understanding how writers draw from existing knowledge and familiar stories to create new stories. Jessica Lahey - teacher, writer, blogger - explains the value of allusion in a great piece for The Atlantic this month entitled, "To Read Dickens It Helps to Know French History and the Bible." Jessica speaks specifically of the idea of cultural literacy and understanding how history and the Judeo-Christian ethic are a necessary foundation to making sense of classic literature, notably the early pages of books like A Tale of Two Cities. I concur on the value of such knowledge, for I have the same discussions with my students when we read the first four pages of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird together. Accessing the allusions is key to appreciating the novel on its deepest level. Though these works can be understood and accessed on a more superficial level, that's really like watching a movie of the action - as in the Harry Potter films - as opposed to truly delving in to the thematic magic of the written works. Allusion matters - as does gaining general knowledge - and it is all part of the job of educators (and theme of my blog and class) "Creating People on Whom Nothing is Lost."

Teachers and Facebook

Social media is many things - a connector and a distraction, a tool and a weapon, a benefit and a curse, an insignificant detail and an ingrained component of the social fabric. Regardless of our perception of it and our criticism or defense of it, social media is here to stay. Facebook is the most prominent in our lives currently, and it's the one most likely to stir up trouble. Too many stories of embarrassment, conflicts, and even tragedies cloud the reputation of Facebook, yet billions of users still can't get enough. Teachers are often warned about the inherent dangers of being on Facebook, and it's often a shame that teachers are held to much higher or more restrictive policies regarding personal use. However, the unique situation of interacting daily with young people with their parents' inherent or necessary blind trust leads to a need for teachers to be more judicious in their use of social media. In that regard, it is pretty clear and important advice that teachers should not post any negative or critical comments about their students - or any students at their school - on Facebook. Many use the FB to rant about work - teachers simply should not. It does not matter if names are not used. Posting negative comments about "anonymous" students at a teacher's current workplace is just too close for comfort. They are, after all, children who deserve privacy and care and concern. And that care is trusted to teachers. So, don't rant about students on Facebook. Just .... don't.

Girl Teaches Self to Dance in a Year - And Creates a 100-day Challenge

Persistence. Grit. Determination. Practice.

These are the qualities that are the key to success. Malcolm Gladwell made a big deal about the 10,000 hours of practice necessary to achieve mastery for many skills/talents. And much has been written about how to promote and cultivate these characteristics, especially in children. Of course, it's rare that we can actually see, or have evidence, of the transformation that comes from such consistent practice. That's why the story of the girl who taught herself to dance in one year is so interesting.

Karen X. Cheng's simple challenge to herself - learn to dance in a year - became an inspirational story fueled by a viral video on YouTube. That experiment, viewed by millions, has become something much larger - a challenge to everyone to make changes in their lives by committing 100 days to practice.  Karen's Give It 100 encourages people to practice something - "anything" - for one hundred days and record videos of each day. The whole point is to simply try in a completely shame-free and confident way. So far, thousands have accepted the challenge. And there's no doubt this sort of chain reaction can change lives. For, as Karen notes.

This isn't a story about dancing, though. It's about having a dream and not knowing how to get there — but starting anyway. Maybe you're a musician dreaming of writing an original song. You're an entrepreneur dying to start your first venture. You're an athlete but you just haven't left the chair yet.

When you watch someone perform, you're seeing them at the top of their game. When they score the winning point or sell their company for millions — you're seeing them in their moment of glory. What you don't see is the thousands of hours of preparation. You don't see the self doubt, the lost sleep, the lonely nights spent working. You don't see the moment they started. The moment they were just like you, wondering how they could ever be good.

So, what are you going to do?

What Good Would You Do with $25,000

20th Century Fox studios contacted filmmaker Casey Neistat with an offer to make a movie trailer for the new Ben Stiller film, Secret Life of Walter Mitty.  The studio wanted to launch an ad campaign around the idea of "living your dreams" to inspire people to do something they've never done. Neistat was offered the opportunity to make a video trailer for the movie and this campaign. Instead, Casey responded with a counter offer - they give him the money and he spends the entire budget "helping people in need."  Here's the result:

Sopranos Celebrates Fifteen Years

Could it really be fifteen years ago that we first saw Tony Soprano and Christopher Moltisanti kicking the crap out of a guy with unspeakable violence in that opening episode of HBO's groundbreaking - and rule changing - television drama, The Sopranos.  Alas, it was fifteen years ago this week that David Chase's crime family drama entered our TV-watching consciousness and forever changed the way we think and watch TV. Seriously, would there be a Walter White transforming from a cancer-sufferer and science teacher into meth cook and sinister crime kingpin if we didn't first develop a sympathetic and fascinated ear for the sounds and images of classic anti-hero Tony Soprano bearing his tortured soul to his psychiatrist, Dr. Melfi? Probably not. Or not this soon anyway.

Not only did David Chase change the genre by pushing the limits, but in working with HBO, he changed the rules and structure for how primetime shows are produced, packaged, and delivered.  The shorter seasonal format, where there were far fewer than the standard 22-27 episodes on network television, and the season began whenever the network was ready. This greater freedom allowed for greater creative control of the writers and an overall better production. In fact, the networks have struggled to catch up to the quality of dramas being produced by cable. And the show catapulted into our consciousness the incredible talent of one James Gandolfini, an incredible character actor who's gone too soon.

Recently, as the show's anniversary approached, there was time for the cast to reflect on the greatness of the show. Like many, I'm sure they had long considered the possibility for a Sopranos movie to give us another taste of that world that had so captivated us. But like the abrupt ending of the show, the death of James Gandolfini put an end to that hope. Thus, fans are left to appreciate the body of work that was left, and to reflect on a truly iconic piece of American culture.

Critics Harshly Slam David Brooks' Marijuana Column - But He's Not Entirely Wrong

Since posting his response to the "legalization" of recreational and commercial marijuana in Colorado (and coming soon in Washington) New York Times columnist David Brooks has been widely criticized - even chastised - by other commentators from Slate to more Slate to The Nation to Esquire. However, despite the critics' desire to portray his comments as aloof and misguided, Brooks' basic premise is not wrong, and his criticism of legalized cannabis is being distorted.

Brooks' basic argument - smoking weed is not generally a good thing and shouldn't be promoted or condoned - is a fairly accurate and innocuous statement, and one that is being greatly misinterpreted. For example, people have criticized Brooks for wanting to perpetuate the arrest and incarceration of millions for an arguably minor criminal offense, one that disproportionately affects minorities and the poor. Yet, David Brooks has not endorsed such problematic legal penalties and, in fact, has been on record as opposing such problems in our criminal justice system. Opposing legalization isn't the same as supporting the current legal ramifications for it. And neither Brooks, nor Ruth Marcus, argued for continued criminalization or harsh legal penalties for possession, use, or sales. Certainly, decriminalization of cannabis possession was a necessary change, and such an approach has functioned pretty effectively elsewhere in the world.

Additionally, comparisons between alcohol and marijuana are obtuse and knee-jerk reactions that at best obfuscate the issue and are inherently logically flawed. Arguing that one drug should be legal because another is already legal does not make a lot of sense. Simply put, having one potentially dangerous substance legal does not mean we should have two. If that were the case, proponents should be arguing for legalization of all illicit substances - and no one is doing that. And the comparison is not apt because the substances are not similarly used. Alcohol is not only an established industry and indelible part of the societal fabric, but it can be (and is) enjoyed without the requisite purpose of all other illicit drugs, which is to "get messed up." Certainly, the use and abuse of alcohol can have catastrophic consequences and shouldn't be praised or elevated either. America truly does have a drinking and substance abuse problem. And that is the point made by Brooks and Marcus - substance abuse is a problem.

Ultimately, I don't strongly oppose what Colorado and Washington and Uruguay have done, and I think it will be folded into the fabric of society pretty smoothly in the next decade or so. But there will be a lot of collateral damage that should not be celebrated. In general, doing drugs is simply not a good thing. That was the only point Brooks was making. And his critics have their panties in a bunch simply because they think he's an arrogant, elitist snob. Which is probably more or less true. But it doesn't make him wrong. Critics like to take shots at Brooks' philosophy, and he often makes himself an easy target for criticism as a sort of nerdy, wonkish, elitist. But the attacks on Brooks' marijuana column are off-base.

Science Teacher Challenges Super-Size Me - Loses Weight at McDs

Morgan Spurlock helped set the standard for the new age of documentary filmmaking in the late 1990s when he "nearly killed himself" with a diet based solely on McDonalds' food while documenting the entire experiment in the film Super-Size Me.  While many critics - and the food industry itself - challenged Spurlock's methods and conclusions, science teacher John Cisna took it one step further.



Now, the discussion must shift a bit to the choices we make at the food counter and supermarket.

Mike Rowe - Fewer College Degrees, More Employed Skilled Workers

According to labor statistics, there are currently as many as 3-4 million unfilled jobs in the United States, many of which pay upper middle class salaries … and they don't require a bachelor's degree. In fact, as few as 12% of them require four years of college (and the associated tens of thousands of dollars in debt). Yet, parents and counselors and teachers and principals are still sending millions of students on to four-year colleges with the belief that those degrees are necessary for them to get a job … or get a "good job."  As I've noted many times before:

Mike Rowe disagrees.

Mike Rowe, who gained fame on the Discovery Channel as the host of Dirty Jobs and Deadliest Catch, has spent the past few years developing a PR campaign for "Work." That is, he is promoting skilled labor as the necessary emphasis for our education system. Rowe makes the rounds to as many talk shows and forums as he possibly can, talking about the need for skilled labors. He has many partners in this task, such as Caterpillar who has an invested interested in skilled laborers. And Mike would like to connect young people in search of a future with companies like Caterpillar, where heavy equipment repair mechanics can make a $100,000 a year. So, Mike is promoting many great "schools you've never heard of" like Midwestern Technical Institute, where students can learn about and learn the trades that are currently lacking in the labor market.











So, it's time to stop all the nonsense about how everyone needs to go to college, and start promoting the type of learning that will lead people to careers. And, if you have never seen Mike's TED Talk about his PR Campaign for work, you have to see this. It's one of the smartest segments I've ever heard.

Lights, Camera, Teach! Questioning The Value of the Feel-Good Teacher Movie

Don't watch Stand and Deliver. Don't quote Dead Poet's Society. Don't reference Michelle Pfeiffer in Dangerous Minds. Is it time to be done with the inspirational, feel-good teacher movies? Or is at least time to stop watching them with any hope that they will provide the answers on how to "fix schools"? That's the recommendation from middle school teacher Joshua Mackin for a New Year's Resolution in 2014: "Stop Watching Feel-Good Teacher Movies."

There are obviously many problems with using Hollywood's portrayal of anything as a guide or blueprint for how things should be. Certainly, "fixing public education" is a task far more complicated than any story can begin to crack in ninety minutes. And, between the necessary over-simplification and the requisite "Hollywood Ending," the teacher movies may do more harm than good. As Mackin points out in a succinct and well-argued criticism,  inspirational teacher films do not offer a realistic portrait of what it’s like to be a teacher or a student in an underserved school.  One of the biggest problems is that the movies require a happy ending. This simply dishonors the daily and on-going struggle in the public schools. The movies also revel in stereotypes, and mistakenly portray urban school teachers as superheroes. The reality is far more "boring" at times.

Certainly, the movie industry has all the best intentions of portraying the educational successes - some might call miracles - of people like Jaime Escalante and Ron Clark and Joe Clark.  And the more fictionalized stories behind Robin Williams "Mr. Keating" or Richard Dreyfuss' "Mr. Holland" are certainly wonderful narratives that can inspire as they entertain. However, they risk becoming cliche and doing more harm than good, especially when they fall into the trap of being a WTSM - White Teacher Savior Movie. We've all enjoyed the stories of teachers and students defying the odds, and we all have that favorite teacher who made a difference for us. And there is nothing wrong with honoring them and the ideas they represent.  However, we do have to be careful with the conclusions drawn from a movie's representation of real world struggles.

For more perspective on the portrayal of teachers, consider checking out books like:

The Hollywood Curriculum: Teachers in the Movies - by Mary Dalton

Carry on Teacher: Representations of Teaching in Screen Culture - by Susan Ellismore

Hollywood Goes to High School - Robert Bulman

Don't Become a Teacher

In every year I've taught, I've heard some of my best and brightest aspire to be teachers. The idealistic side of me is so excited for this possibility, and I understand that it is their great educational experience and love of learning that led them to their decision. And my first instinct is to praise, congratulate, and encourage them. My second thought, however, is more melancholy, and my instinct resting just below the excitement is to counsel them away from the profession. For, in far too many places, teaching has become a thankless task. This week Valerie Strauss' Answer Sheet offers a "letter of resignation" of sorts from a seemingly passionate, skilled, and veteran teacher who simply can't do it anymore. In response to Valerie's request for stories, she writes, "I would love to teach, but …"

It is with a heavy, frustrated heart that I announce the end of my personal career in education, disappointed and resigned because I believe in learning. I was brought up to believe that education meant exploring new things, experimenting, and broadening horizons … However, as the whipping boy for society’s ills, I could do none of these things. I was lambasted by parents as being ineffective because their child had a B or a C. “They are not allowed to fail.” “If they have D’s or F’s, there is something that you are not doing for them.” What am I not doing for them? I suppose I was not giving them the answers, I was not physically picking up their hands to write for them, I was not following them home each night to make sure they did their work on time, I was not excusing their lack of discipline, I was not going back in time and raising them from birth, but I could do none of these things. I was called down to the principal’s office many more times before I was broken, before I ended up assigning stupid assignments for large amounts of credit, ones I knew I could get students to do. Even then, I still had students failing, purely through their own refusal to put any sort of effort into anything, and I had lowered the bar so much that it took hardly anything to pass. I would love to teach, but I will not spend another day under the expectations that I prepare every student for the increasing numbers of meaningless tests that take advantage of children for the sake of profit. I refuse to subject students to every ridiculous standardized test that the state and/or district thinks is important. I refuse to have my higher-level and deep thinking lessons disrupted by meaningless assessments (like the Global Scholars test) that do little more than increase stress among children and teachers, waste instructional time and resources, and attempt to guide young adolescents into narrow choices. “Data is not information, information is not knowledge, knowledge is not understanding, and understanding is not wisdom.” It is time that we fall on our sword. In our rabid pursuit of data and blame, we have sacrificed wisdom and abandoned its fruits. We cannot broaden our students’ horizons by placing them and their teachers into narrow boxes, unless we then plan to bury them.

Stories like these - and they are not uncommon - distress me to no end. And they would seem to validate my concerns about encouraging students to pursue teaching.  Of course, the issue is so complicated because, as most in education know, there are far too many unsatisfactory teachers out there producing little of the incredibly hard work and results that are mentioned by this teacher.  There is no easy answer to the problems that plague education - and I am certain that many of our current reforms are misguided attempts which will only worsen the situation. But I am not without hope.

So, with guarded optimism, I will still encourage my best and brightest to "Become a Teacher."

Stop Wearing High Heel Shoes in 2014

If I could recommend one New Year's Resolution for all women in 2014, it would be to end the torturous act of wearing high-heeled shoes. My students have long known - and laughed about - this rant of mine. In fact, I've been known to argue that women will truly take over the world once they shave their heads, throw away their make-up, and ditch the high heels. My example to students is any high school dance (Homecoming, Prom, etc) or any formal party (such as New Year's Eve balls). Inevitably, we will see women walking around and dancing in stocking feet, probably holding their shoes in their hands. Why? "Because they hurt my feet." The obvious question is why the women bought them in the first place. The answer, of course, is "because they are so cute."

Baffled, I am.

The sad reality is that "High Heels May Look Good, But They Are Killing Your [Health]." There is so much research and medical history in opposition to the wearing of high heeled shoes, and they are certainly a form of clothing that objectifies and even subjugates women. The damage done by these implements of high fashion is endless.

Therefore, lots of bad things happen. Shall we count the ways? Among the more common problems podiatrists say they see in women are calluses and, more painfully, corns, hard nuggets of keratin buildup caused by pressure on the skin. With high heels, corns develop up under the balls of the foot where the weight of your body presses down, and they feel like small rocks underfoot when you walk.  Liebow also sees capsulitis, a painful inflammation of the joints where the toes attach to the foot, and neuromas, or pinched nerves, where pointy high heels squeeze the toes. And when the heel is frequently in a high-heel shoe, it can cause the Achilles tendon (which connects the calf muscle to the heel bone) to tighten. When you kick off your shoes and the heel comes down to the floor at the end of the day, the extra stretching of the tendon can lead to a condition called Achilles tendinitis. Wearing high heels can also cause inflammation of the connective tissue at the bottom of the foot, the plantar fascia. That can result in severe heel pain and the need for aggressive treatments such as oral anti-inflammatories, oral steroids, cortisone injections, walking boots and crutches.

(Giuseppe Aresu, The Associated Press)

And, the history of high heels doesn't bode well for women's rights. High heels were, no doubt, invented by a man, and they were designed to promote women's feet as objects of desire. I know, I know, that sounds creepy. But is it not true? Granted, high heels were at one time also worn by men.  And the boost in stature is no doubt grounded in insecurity about height. But the male gender must be in some ways moving past that, as no contemporary man would subject himself to such torture, as pictured above - cowboy boots notwithstanding, which I've never worn but heard great things about.  In reality, no man would buy shoes that he then has to carry around because they hurt his feet. And, I've always understood that men who wore them for professional purposes suffered, too. If I'm not mistaken, rock star Prince has undergone hip replacement surgery which was necessitated by years of performing in high heeled boots. So, that seems reason enough to ditch the heels.

Now, we may have to talk about the necktie.

Top Education Reform Stories in 2013

Valerie Strauss - whose Answer Sheet blog in the Washington Post is a top source for education news - takes the end of the year to reflect on the top stories in education reform in 2013.  With Common Core finally raising the controversial debates that should have preceded adoption and implementation, the year of 2013 provided the spark that will drive education talk for years to come. From new "standards" to "standardized testing" to teacher evaluations based on assessment standards, 2013 has set the standard for the education debate to come.  Some of the debate will be driven by former teachers like David Greene who are speaking out in retirement about what they believe is going wrong - and right - in the profession.

“Teaching is a performing art as much as a science,” he said. “It takes talent. And personality. The match of your personality and skill set determines what kind of teacher you are. What works for one teacher may not work for another. You can’t expect everyone to do it the same way. And yet…” Like many teachers, Greene is mystified by the reforms currently favored by U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan and New York’s educational leadership.In general terms, he thinks there’s plenty to like about the Common Core standards and even efforts to improve teacher evaluations.In fact, he argues in his conversational but impassioned book for many of the same things favored by reformers: greater depth in instruction; lessons that engage students; focused reading that leads to tight writing; and regular assessment of students. But Greene believes that reformers are betraying their cause by overloading the school day with too many new goals, over-emphasizing tests and trying to grade teachers with formulas and test scores. The result, he said, will be a uniformity that sucks the life out of teaching and learning.

Greene's book - Doing the Right Thing: A Teacher Speaks - is intended to spark the debate about what effective teaching and relevant effective reform is all about.

Education Commentary Proves Lucrative for Edu-vocates like Rick Hess in Era of Reform

As a teacher, I have always been a bit of an education geek. Beyond just teaching English or working in school administration, I enjoy reading and writing about the issues of the day. However, the recent news out of Douglas County, Colorado indicates I may be in the wrong part of the education field if I want to rake in the dough for writing about education.  A judge in Denver has ruled that the Douglas County School District "violated the Fair Campaign Act when it contracted for and distributed a paper that espoused" the reforms implemented by the school board. While the reforms - and the inherent controversy - around Douglas County Schools are not news, I was quite surprised to learn that education researcher and writer Frederick "Rick" Hess of the American Enterprise Institute was paid $30,000 for the paper in question.  Hess's article "The Most Interesting School District in America" was published in various places and distributed by the district.

Here in Colorado’s third-largest school district, with 65,000 students — an enrollment larger than Washington, D.C.’s and as large as Detroit’s — the superintendent and board are pursuing perhaps the nation’s boldest attempt at suburban school reform. The Douglas County School District is trying to do something truly new. An all-Republican school board has created the nation’s first suburban school-voucher program, introduced market-based pay, allowed its teachers’ union contract to expire, and developed a regimen of home-crafted standards and assessments in lieu of the Common Core (which superintendent Liz Celania-Fagen dismisses as the “Common Floor”). Former Reagan secretary of education William Bennett has opined that Douglas County is “trying to do all the good reforms at once.”

Unwilling to settle for just adding merit raises atop the old industrial pay scale, Douglas County has adopted a market-based pay system. After hiring a former human-resources manager from GE to lead its effort to rethink teacher pay, Douglas County has established five broad pay bands based on the supply and demand for various teaching roles. This allows the districts to pay more for hard-to-find teachers, such as a special-education audiologist, and less for teachers in easier-to-fill roles. For the first time in memory, superintendent Celania-Fagen reports, the district had more quality applicants for special education than they had positions available. Douglas County has shown, with little media fanfare, that it is possible to pay teachers what the market requires instead of being tied to a rigid, union-imposed, one-size-fits-all pay scale.

Certainly, the Era of Reform has become a lucrative new aspect to the field of public education. With the rise of Common Core reforms and new education legislation that links teacher pay with student performance, education consultants are earning big money. This is certainly true for new College Board  president David Coleman who stands to earn more than a half-million dollars in base salary for his new position. Of course, that's no more than the head of the National Education Association (NEA) who earns north of $500K as well - and that comes out of teacher's dues which should support collective bargaining for, among other things, a respectable salary.  And back in Douglas County, it's not surprising that big money is going to consultants and researchers. The district allegedly paid former Education Secretary William Bennet as much as $80,000 for speeches touting the districts reforms.

Apparently, this blogging for ad revenue is the low end of education writing.

Anyone need an education consultant who will work for cheap?