You can’t make this stuff up: Maine’s Governor LePage is appointing himself education commissioner. Guess it’s good that John King doesn’t work for Le Page. President Obama is formally nominating him to be secretary. Republicans are saying the water is great, come on in! We’ll see.
Elsewhere in personnel news a huge get for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: Bob Hughes. Thoughtful and committed guy.
Do big philanthropists like charter schools because they hate unions? Richard Whitmire:
Here was a Silicon Valley startup star, the former CEO of a publicly traded company, being told to sit tight and log more seat time. Neither Danner, nor Jobs, could imagine achieving success by rewarding software engineers based on seat time.
Danner often pointed to union contracts he thought made schools unworkable. “Look, the union contract in San Jose Unified is 452 pages long,” he told me. “We’re a startup. The whole point of a startup is to be flexible. The job changes every day.”
And that’s the real point about these guys: They’re not so much anti-union as they are pro-startup. Tech CEOs live in a world where a single talented software guy binging through a weekend can solve a problem that has stymied platoons of software experts for months. You pay that guy the same?
Here’s how they view schools: They hire from a lower-level talent pool (based on college SAT scores), reward based on seat time and lay off based on seniority. That just drives them crazy. It’s more about wasting talent than loathing unions.
Rural area salary scales are often low, so parents and working students have trouble paying college bills. College-eligible rural students face a financial dilemma: pay for long commutes to college, or pay rent in cities distant from their homes. Many find they can’t handle these costs long enough to graduate, and become discouraged, especially if they fail courses or must do remedial work that doesn’t bring college credit.
Despite these challenges, many rural schools are finding ways of improving students’ readiness for college. Rural schools are sharing teachers who have rare skills with nearby districts, and using online learning resources. Others are forming close partnerships with community and 4-year colleges and enrolling seniors in both high school and college classes. Such measures force K-12 educators out of their comfort zones but they have real promise for children who might otherwise be afraid to pursue college entry or enroll but are unready for college work.
Also from Hill here’s a measured take on vouchers.
Solid advice on safe, comfortable (and tasty) backcountry travel from someone who knows.
“You can’t make this stuff up: Maine’s Governor LePage is appointing himself education commissioner. Guess it’s good that John King doesn’t work for Le Page.” This is what happens in the age of education disruption. Everyone thinks thay are experts in education with very little experience and then they flame out. Yes, Barbic, Huffman Rhee et. al.
“Here’s how they view schools: They hire from a lower-level talent pool (based on college SAT scores), reward based on seat time and lay off based on seniority. That just drives them crazy. It’s more about wasting talent than loathing unions.”
So, let me get this straight? Silicon Valley philanthropists want to use their model for hiring and retaining teachers. For starting pay of from 34K in Mississippi to 69K in Mass. these philanthropists think they can lure and retain the best college graduates with student loans to pay. My son wanted to be a teacher and I strongly discouraged it. Right out of college with not graduated education classed to take he began at Skechers shoes at 75K. How on earth to these philanthropists think they can attract the best and brightest without a 6 figure starting pay to work in high crime neighborhoods? I thought they were the smartest guys in the world.
I would add to RW’s points: philanthropists are investing in EFFECTIVE charters primarily because they get “a great return.” In Austin, for example, once current KIPP and IDEA expnsion is completed in a couple of years, these two small charter systems will generate more college completers than the entire Austin school district. That’s why philanthropists are extremely excited to invest in them.
I agree, they will select the best students and call themselves geniuses.
Their views on public schools sound like someone looking from their home on Mars. Children are not software.
Why not do what Arlington COunty Public Schools do and cap class size at 20 and have two college educated adults in the classroom.
Mr. Kress, I see why you are pushing charters now, rather than the public schools you were involved with. Previously the schools you extolled could not select their students. Charters do select their students. To refresh your memory go to this link below and remind yourself how you and Paige inflated the data to justify the “Texas Miracle” that was really a bust.
http://www.disdblog.com/2012/07/30/slouching-toward-bethlehem-part-1/
These charters in Austin select purely by lottery. I’d repeat the fact 100 times, but you’re going to spread what you want to spread regardless.
It’s too darn bad there’s no room for the two out of three parents who want in to a charter but can’t go because there’s no room. The philanthropists we’re talking about are determined to solve that problem.
The Texas gains from 1993 to 2009 were phenomenal, but that’s a matter for another day and another forum.
Lotteries are a form of self selection. Many of my students had parents who never took an interest in their childrens education. I am glad for the parents and kids how enter and win the lottery, but this sytems avoids dealing the the students who need good schools the most. Furthermore, the Texas miracle was long ago proven to be a myth. Just as there were no weapons of mass destruction, there were no phenomenal gains in Texas.
When the adults get their act together, the traditional schools will and should get better. In the meantime, thankfully, there’s an outlet in the public system for parents of disadvantaged kids to get better in these high perforning charters. And, happily, there will be more places for them as the years pass, especially if the traditional schools do not improve.
I can’t resist on Texas. While the reading gains were more modest, here’s NAEP data for 8th grade math: 17% of Texas blacks were basic or above in 1990. By 2011, that number was 71%. 29% of Hispanics were basic or above in 1990. In 2011, that number was 76%. I’d call that FRIGGIN’ PHENOMENAL, yes.
i totally agree with u i have some tips check them All Education Univercity
“And that’s the real point about these guys: They’re not so much anti-union as they are pro-startup. Tech CEOs live in a world where a single talented software guy binging through a weekend can solve a problem that has stymied platoons of software experts for months. You pay that guy the same?”
This reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between different “industries” and activities. There are certain endeavors, where a few “star” performers can disproportionately drive outcomes (e.g., profits, innovations). One or two star investment bankers, for instance. A couple genius scientists. In certain other industries, the overall success of the organization depends on the average level of performance of employees and the amount of variation in performance (less is better)…. Teaching is more like the latter. The impact of a superstar teacher, no matter how good, can only scale so much…
I’m all for education learning from other sectors, but hubris and lack of understanding of many Silicon Valley types can be very frustrating. They often don’t know what they don’t know, and don’t realize that their experiences aren’t always applicable in very different contexts.