Three Education Topics that Must Be Addressed

The great American tradition of national political conventions has been the major focus of the last few weeks. While the outcome of the conventions (nomination of a presidential candidate) was never in doubt, the conventions do provide some insight as to the agenda for the candidates if elected. While both parties certainly focused on key issues, I found that the education topic did not receive as much attention as I would have hoped for from either party. Regardless of the outcome of the presidential election, I feel that there are several key issues that must be addressed if this nation is to ensure a bright future for our children.

First and foremost, we must address poverty in this nation. The U.S. has the highest poverty rate for children among the industrialized nations. Poverty is the strongest predictor of educational outcomes. In his book Measure of a Nation, Howard Steven Friedman makes a strong case about the connection between poverty and education. Of the Americans who are classified as low-income who do not gain a college degree, 46 percent remain in the lowest economic quintile, while only 16 percent who did gain a college degree remain in the lowest quintile.

As I visit schools and districts across Kentucky, I am struck by the large gap between those districts who have high percentages of childhood poverty and those that have stronger socioeconomic indicators. The free and reduced-price meal percentage varies from 2 percent to 100 percent across Kentucky schools. In general, schools with large percentages of students in poverty spend less per pupil, which in turn means less funding to meet the needs of children.

Another key concern that must be addressed is the provision of high-quality preschool programs to children, especially those in poverty. Currently, parents who earn less than $15,000 per year enroll their children in preschool programs at a rate 20 percent lower than the national average. The children who need the most help in closing the achievement gap do not have access to the very programs that will pay significant benefits to them and society in the long run.

Finally, we must address the costs of higher education. The growing gap between those who can afford higher education and those who cannot is one of the most dangerous trends in our nation. The umbrella that will shelter our children from the economic storm is higher education, whether in the form of a one-year technical degree, two-year associate degree or four-year degree.

Neither party nor presidential candidate has all the answers to the challenges facing our nation. However, I hope educators will look closely at how the candidates address these key education issues. While there are many other hot buttons such as innovation, school choice, vouchers, teacher preparation, teacher evaluation, accountability waivers and more, I believe the three issues I have highlighted are the keys to helping more children be prepared for success in their future.

Education Reform: What is a Chief to Do?

This week I had the opportunity to welcome participants to the International Symposium on Education Reform (ISER) that was hosted by Lars Bjork, Ph.D. and the University of Kentucky. It was great to see representatives from across the globe coming to Kentucky to discuss education reform. I offered a “chief’s” perspective on education reform. I divide the education reform issue into basically two camps – the reformers and the defenders.

Education reformers across the U.S. seem to have a few commonalities. The key tenet of the reformers is that public schools are failing as evidenced by national and international ranks in testing. The reformers claim that in order to “fix” public schools, we must have greater emphasis on assessment and accountability; choice options (charters and vouchers); improving teacher and principal evaluation systems; improving teacher preparation programs; addressing contract issues such as LIFO (last in, first out), tenure, pension and health care; data-driven decision making; and standardized teaching and learning.

The defenders blame poverty and changing demographics for the low performance of our public schools on national and international assessments. They say our top-performing schools are as good as any in the world, and most of these top-performing U.S. schools have very low poverty rates. In order to “fix” our public schools, they look to Finland for the answer. Finland focuses on elevating teaching as a profession and does not have annual standardized tests; teachers focus on assessment to improve instruction and learning; teacher preparation was reformed; teachers are seen as action researchers; and the social welfare system helps alleviate problems around poverty and demographics.

As a chief state school officer, my job is to balance the reformers and the defenders as we seek to help more students graduate college- and career-ready. The key strategies I use are to honor the terrific work that our educators have done in Kentucky for the last 20 years. Focus the conversation on the challenges of increased poverty and changing demographics, do not blame any group. Encourage collaboration and professional dialogue with all stakeholders about the education changes necessary to help more students succeed. Build relations with all stakeholder groups so there is some level of trust and mutual respect. And finally, communicating through as many channels as possible.

These are indeed difficult times in our nation as the need to improve education and improve the economy are inextricably linked; however, I know that Kentucky educators and key policy makers will continue to lead the way in making the right decisions about education reform as we ensure a brighter future for children.

Poverty: Helping to Succeed vs. Believing in Success

Last week I was struck by the title of a blog entry that I saw on my Twitter account – “The Poverty Myth Persists.” That blog can be found at http://educationnext.org/the-poverty-myth-persists/. What really caught my interest were the first few lines of the blog.

Every time I see a “poverty and education” story I think of the famous line from the New Testament in which Jesus says, “The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want.”

So, with education. Want a convenient scapegoat for our problems? Poverty. It’s there, it’s handy.

The author, Peter Meyer, makes the case that quite often, educators and politicians blame poverty as the reason why schools in large urban and rural settings are failing to educate children. The achievement gap between students who don’t receive free and reduced-price meals and those who do receive free and reduced-price meals has widened in the last decade. Historically, education has always been seen as the path to the “American Dream.” Education is the great equalizer. However, our ability to provide an education to children in poverty is going in the wrong direction.

As Commissioner of Education, I believe there are two reasons for our inability to close achievement gaps based on poverty. It is either we do not know HOW to help children in poverty achieve at high levels or we do not BELIEVE that children in poverty can achieve at high levels.

If we do not know how, then that is something we can work hard to address. We can engage parents and communities in developing social capital that will help the community to value education and support educators. We can provide professional development to help teachers and administrators understand the challenges of homelessness and poverty. We can provide professional development on how to be more culturally responsive to the needs of students. We can provide resources needed to help children reach success. We know the HOW, and there are many examples of schools all across the nation and world that are helping children in poverty achieve at high levels. If educators make excuses for poverty and do not BELIEVE that children in poverty can achieve at high levels, then there is really nothing we can do other than coach these educators into other professions.

While I do not always agree with the positions of the Fordham Institute or the author of the blog, I thought the blog and articles cited were very thought-provoking. I also was reminded of the wonderful work that organizations like our own Prichard Committee, the Education Trust and the Children’s Defense Fund do in showing the HOW of helping children in poverty achieve to high levels.

The final sentence in the blog was perhaps the most thought-provoking – “Let’s resolve to quit blaming the poor for the poor education they receive.” Indeed, in Kentucky, let’s commit to never blame the poor, but commit to work with parents, communities, educators and government to collaborate on closing the achievement gaps and ensuring that education is the pathway to a brighter future for our children and the Commonwealth.

Impact of Poverty on Student Learning

Recently, I reviewed a story about poverty and the impact on education outcomes in Texas. Michael Marder, who is a professor of physics at the University of Texas at Austin, also is co-director of the UTeach program that encourages university grads to become math and science teachers.

In the article, Marder discusses his research around student learning outcomes and the correlations with poverty and ethnicity. Interested readers can connect to an excellent video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SPV_sIGncvQ.

Marder’s research shows the strong correlation of poverty to low student achievement and also shows how schools are failing to educate many children of color. Marder clearly states that we have not been able to take a solution to the poverty challenge to scale. He also points out that, while there are a few charter schools that are “beating the odds,” most charter schools in Texas are not achieving strong results.

Marder used the “Boeing” story to illustrate his key point. After World War II, the British tried to regain transportation supremacy through air travel with the de Havilland aircraft. After numerous crashes, the British were unable to develop a theory that would improve the aircraft; however, a young engineer with Boeing came up with a new way of thinking that allowed Boeing and the U.S. to take supremacy in air travel. The British theory had been “flaw free” and had failed. The Boeing theory was a “flaw tolerant” design of aircraft, and it succeeded.

Marder makes the point that “poverty is causing our public school system to crash and burn and fail many children.” He says that if we do not figure out how to address poverty, then we will lose our technical supremacy – as many reports have also documented (Gathering Storm, Incarceration and Social Inequity, a Center for American Progress report and more). Marder says that our current theory of only addressing teacher quality and accountability through standardized tests has not been proven to address failures on a sustained basis. He says we need a new “Boeing” theory.

During my recent visit to China, it was apparent the country is struggling with the same issues – poverty in rural and urban settings, poor performance of schools and failure of schools/society to meet the needs of a diverse group of children. The Chinese have developed five- and 10-year plans that have strategies of strong schools helping weaker schools and strong leaders and teachers helping weaker leaders and teachers. Also, there is a strong push to meet needs of individual learners and use higher level skills of problem solving, creativity and innovation.

Looking at our current national and state reform strategies, I do believe that we also are addressing a systemic approach to improving student learning outcomes. We are not focusing solely on standardized test results and accountability. We have a strong push for a more balanced approach to accountability, strong teachers and leaders, strong instructional support systems, and early childhood.

Marder has posed the concern about our public policy theories of action. The key for policy leaders is to not use poverty as the excuse, but to look for the “Boeing” theory of action that will meet the needs of our children and the future of our Commonwealth.

There are two issues that arise when we discuss poverty and impact on student learning. Either we do not believe children of poverty can learn to high levels, or we do not know how to help children of poverty achieve at high levels. It is difficult to say that we do not know how; however, that response can be addressed. If we do not believe that children of poverty can learn at high levels as well as any child, then we have a more difficult issue.