Linda Fandel, Special Assistant for Education to Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, wrote:
Gov. Terry Branstad and Lt. Governor Kim Reynolds will make draft recommendations for how to give all Iowa students a world-class education by Oct. 1.
The draft recommendations will focus on the three key areas addressed at the Iowa Education Summit in late July: (1) getting a great teacher in every classroom, a great principal in every building, and providing the support they need to do their jobs well; (2) raising academic standards and putting in place strong matching assessments; and (3) innovation that boosts learning.
‘Great’ in the sense of quality (i.e., “really good” or perhaps “better than what we have now”) or ‘great’ in the sense of ‘exceptional’ (rare, unique)? Because the former is much more achievable than the latter. ‘Exceptional’ is exceptional for a reason; this is not Lake Wobegon (where every educator is above average). In every profession, there will be a continuum and there’s a natural curve under which only a certain percentage can ever be deemed to be ‘great.’ Unless we are going to have fewer educators overall (allowing us to dip less deep into the available talent pool), we are going to have a hard time meeting this goal without focusing heavily on talent recruitment, preservice and inservice training, and talent induction/support/retention. Education traditionally has a very poor record of doing these things because they’re quite difficult, time-consuming, and expensive.
I’ll also note that many current educators are going to be offended that the Governor doesn’t think they’re already ‘great.’ Deming noted that nearly all of the problems that we have with individuals is due to the systems in which they’re embedded. We’re going to have to decide if we are just going to focus on educators (and maybe colleges of education), which will be perceived by many as blaming and shaming, or we also going to recognize (and emphasize) the far greater (and thorny) problem of the systems in which they’re embedded. I hope the latter. Question: how do we know we don’t already have ‘great’ educators who are simply trapped in dysfunctional systems?
We’re also going to have to decide just how much we care that our state ranking has declined on national tests that emphasize low-level factual recall and procedural knowledge. Personally, I’m much less concerned by this than I am the fact that the overwhelming majority of Iowa schools – even our supposedly best ones – still aren’t adequately focusing on the higher-order thinking skills, technological competencies, intra- and interpersonal competencies, and other skill sets that will make our graduates truly ‘globally competitive.’
Final thought: If our proposed reforms don’t dramatically change what kids do on a day-to-day basis in the classroom, they’re going to be political theater rather than substantive change initiatives. So we need to think and talk robustly about what we want our kids to be DOING, not just what we want them to be learning. In other words, the HOW is just as important as the WHAT.
Please come join the conversation and take the opportunity to chime in BEFORE the blueprint comes out. The Iowa Department of Education is a little slow when it comes to approving comments but yours should show up eventually!
Image credit: Iowa Department of Education
This is absolutely brilliant and very well written. Please send this to every state department and the U.S. Department of Education as well. The only comment that I might add is that we do not need to start our academic scholarship at age 4. Readiness skills might begin at that age, but formal reading and math instruction should begin when the child is mature enough to handle it, at about age 7. This is one reason that Denmark and Finland do not wrestle with test scores the way that the U.S. does.
100% agree. Iowa has great teachers! Systems are in part dysfunctional due to policy and regulations. Great food for thought.
i would push even further saying the what and how are currently perpetuating our situation. (situation being, everyone – student/parent/teacher/admin/employer/employee – frustrated/stressed, feeling their hands are tied)
i’m thinking we are spending too much time/money/people with on improving the what and the how.
the why changes everything. i don’t think we’ll see change till we seriously question prescribed learning.
None of us are happy with our current reality. We don’t like being last or even average. It’s not the Iowa way. And our kids deserve better.
The key areas to be addressed by the anticipated “blueprint” for world-class education are tough to argue with. Like baseball and apple-pie.
But political theater or a “blueprint” for change does little to rekindle a commitment to the real business of schools. Learning outcomes improve when teachers have enough time to design and deliver powerful instructional experiences that engage students and from which they learn important things. Adequate time spent engaged in powerful learning experiences results in student learning.
My fear is that the October 1 recommendations will address neither. And our mission will still lack direction. As the Cheshire Cat said to Alice, “if you don’t know where you are going, it doesn’t matter which way you go”. I hope I’m wrong.
1)…a great teacher in every classroom, a great principal in every building. Iowa has no shortage of good teachers and principals. We even have a lot of really good ones and a few great ones. But they all work in a system that holds time and instruction as constants. Let’s make sure our plan addresses the barriers to great teaching instead of just telling teachers and training programs to improve.
2)…raising academic standards and…matching assessments. See #1. Raising the bar doesn’t teach a student anything, nor does the assessment, if the issues of time and instruction are not addressed. The overused metaphor of “weighing the pig doesn’t make it fatter” seems to apply, but I won’t mention it.
3)…innovation that boosts learning. I’m not even sure what this means. Technology? Pay for Performance? Charter schools? If innovations are directed toward increasing student’s exposure (time) to powerful instructional experiences, I’m all for it. If not, they are a waste of time and resources.
I appreciate that the Governor is interested in maintaining the momentum started during the summit. Iowa needs to rethink many of our basic assumptions about schools and education. This is our chance to get it right…let’s make sure we are asking the right questions.
My name is Tricia Spafford. I am a student at the University of South Alabama in EDM 310 with Dr. Strange.
I agree with you about the educational system’s lack of focus on higher order thinking and technological competencies. The system is only holding back students when these areas are not addressed properly. Focus must be placed on what students are learning as well as HOW they are accomplishing the tasks. The process of learning is just as important as the product it produces. The process can and should change through technology. It sure does in the real world! Let our “product” be the best it can be with the best “process” just like in every other area of life!