Tag: equity

Update on the National CBE Summit November 8th

November 3, 2017 by

Have you started reading the paper Quality and Equity by Design: Charting the Course for the Next Phase of Competency-Based Education? If not, or if you have and found it to be a lot to absorb (because it is), jump on the webinar Charting the Course for the Next Phase of K-12 Competency-Based Education on November 8, 2017, 2-3 PM ET with Susan Patrick, Nina Lopez, and myself. We’ll be walking you through the ideas from the National Summit on K-12 Competency-Based Education. Register here.

This is a major, major, major shift for the field. We are moving from the super fun stage of every new idea helps us move forward to how do we get this right. It’s hard to give up the first stage and buckle down and hold ourselves accountable about equity, about being honest that our super cool ideas that we’ve worked so hard on may not actually be helping students to learn as much as we want, and about stretching our imagination to forge a new set of policies.

Please join us and other education leaders for an hour to reflect, share your efforts and ideas, and think about the role you want to take in advancing competency-based education.

Readiness for College, Career and Life: The Purpose of K-12 Public Education Today

November 2, 2017 by

This is the second post in the blog series on the report, Quality and Equity by Design: Charting the Course for the Next Phase of Competency-Based Education. See the first blog here.

Effective system design starts with a clarity of purpose, or said another way, what are the results we want to get from our system of public education? The current design of our K-12 public education system delivers the following results: After decades of policy reforms and targeted improvement strategies, the on-time graduation rate has inched up to 82%, with states ranging from 61% to 91%. Yet, Alaska Natives, students with disabilities, Native American, African-American, and Latino students continue to graduate at much lower rates: 55, 64, 70, 73 and 76%, respectively. Among those students who do graduate high school, nearly 25% of them, from all socioeconomic groups, require remedial courses in college, costing them and their families $1.5 billion a year. Graduates who enter the world of work directly after high school fare no better, with 62% of employers by one account indicating that “high schools aren’t doing enough to prepare their graduates to meet the expectations of the workplace.” Students are not fully prepared for civic engagement to ensure a functioning democracy (only 30% of today’s young people believe it is “essential” to live in a country that is governed democratically). These results are evidence that students are not getting what they need, and the implications ripple through their lives, their families, communities and our economy. In subsequent blogs in this series, we will explore why the traditional system is designed to produce these results. First, let’s consider what results we want instead.

So, what is the purpose of public education today and what are the results we want it to deliver? The purpose of public education has evolved significantly since the first public school, Boston Latin School, was established in the 17th century to educate white males in, among other things, “religion, Latin and classical literature.” Today, states and districts define the purpose of education in variety of different ways. Increasingly that purpose is stated as “college and career readiness,” or a variation thereof. But what does it really mean to be college and career ready? Although the terminology and details may vary, almost all states and districts continue to use a combination of time-based academic credits, state graduation exams and state accountability exams to measure learning. For the majority of states, these elements prioritize content knowledge rather than skills, with a focus upon a narrow set of areas — math and English language arts. (more…)

Making Sense of the Learning Sciences

October 24, 2017 by

I’ve been spending a year reading about the cognitive learning sciences and also about John Hattie’s work to review the effect of different strategies. Even with Bror Saxberg’s coaching (for which I’m deeply grateful), it’s been slow going for me, as I started with a pretty blank slate. I was also simply stuck. I was learning and my familiarity with the high level findings was growing, but I couldn’t figure out how to apply it. I was simply having difficulty making meaning for my work at CompetencyWorks because so much of the power of the cognitive learning sciences impacts practices of the teacher at a much more granular level than I encounter on my three- to five-hour school visits.

I had two breakthroughs recently, and now connections are being easily made. First, when reading Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, I realized that his exploration of different systems of thinking, with System 1 operating automatically and involuntarily and System 2 operating with deliberation and reasoning, opens a door for us to challenge the bias that we bring into our work and our relationships. It opens the door for us to be more cognizant of the types of bias and how they impact the learning lives of children in our schools. Perhaps we can use the learning sciences to cleanse ourselves and our schools of bias.

Second, as we think about the competency-based cultures, structures, and pedagogical philosophy (one of which is that teaching should be grounded in the learning sciences), it’s important for us to test out how districts and schools are supporting teachers to use the cognitive learning sciences as well as those that influence engagement and motivation. In other words, what are the structures and reinforcements that make it easy for teachers to use the learning sciences, and are there ways in which districts and schools are creating obstacles that we should address?

To get started, I’ll turn to the Deans for Impact Science of Learning, by far the easiest summary out there. Let’s look at one of the three principles under How Do Students Understand New Ideas?

Cognitive Principle: Cognitive development does not progress through a fixed sequence of age-related stages. The mastery of new concepts happens in fits and starts.

Practical Implications for the Classroom: Content should not be kept from students because it is “developmentally inappropriate.” The term implies there is a biologically inevitable course of development, and that this course is predictable by age. To answer the question “is the student ready?” it’s best to consider “has the student mastered the prerequisites?” (more…)

Quality and Equity by Design

October 20, 2017 by

Today, iNACOL and CompetencyWorks released the paper Quality and Equity by Design: Charting the Course for the Next Phase of Competency-Based Education. This paper is the culminating product and set of ideas from the National Summit on K-12 Competency-Based Education. In this paper, four key issues – equity, quality, meeting students where they are, and policy – are explored and guidance is offered on how to engage more deeply in each. There is also a set of recommended actions for the field as a whole to consider. This paper will be followed by a revised paper on each of the key issues based on the feedback and insights from the Summit participants. (You can find the four draft papers on each of the key issues here.)

In writing this paper, I became more and more appreciative that each of the four key issues is actually a lens into the issues challenging our field. By looking at elements of competency-based education through the different lenses, it becomes possible to have much more depth of understanding. It is as if the paper brings a multi-dimensional understanding to bear. Certainly, the overlap between quality and equity is profound and requires more thought and study as we go forward. It’s important to consider the ideas and frameworks in this paper as ways to open discussion. I am sure there will be other convenings, papers, and resources that will help to further our work together.

My recommendation is to read the paper in bite-sized pieces – one issue area at a time. Then come back and read the next, reflecting on the capacity and strategies used by your organization, district, and school. We welcome contributions to CompetencyWorks that highlight your understanding and efforts related to these key issues and we doubly welcome challenges to these ideas. It is only by strengthening our capacity to be critical friends to each other that we can truly find our way to implementing high quality, equitable competency-based systems in schools across our nation.

For those of you who are interested, a webinar, Charting the Course for the Next Phase of K-12 Competency-Based Education, is scheduled for November 8, 2017, 2-3 PM ET. Register here. Susan Patrick, Nina Lopez, and I will share highlights from the National Summit on K-12 Competency-Based Education, walk through the four key issues, and review the recommendations for what is most important to move competency education forward.

What’s New in K-12 Competency-Based Education?

October 18, 2017 by

What's new! star graphicNew Books in Competency Education

Grant Opportunities

The Nellie Mae Education Foundation released three new requests for proposals:

Social Emotional Learning

Equity

Food for Thought

(more…)

Catalyzing Equity Through Culturally Responsive Education and Competency-Based Education

October 17, 2017 by

Right now race has enormous cultural, social, and economic power. It can shape our families and communities, career trajectories, life experiences and opportunities, and even whether we live past thirty or not. So our job in the field of education is to identify each and every place where race is making a difference in children’s lives because of either systemic policies and patterns or because of implicit and explicit bias. It starts with ensuring that our schools have a culture of belonging. As Joy Nolan from the Mastery Collaborative emphasizes, Every student should walk into school feeling like their school is for them, designed for them, serving them, and for people “like them.”

The team at Mastery Collaborative in NYC have identified that the practices of culturally responsive education go hand-in-hand with the mastery-based learning practices. They have created a very simple resource (see below or click here) to allow educators or, better yet, teams of educators (it is very hard to identify implicit bias if it is just a conversation between you and yourself – you need trusted colleagues to help you see where you might have blinders or filters that are creating trouble) to think about their facilitation, curriculum, and grading practices.

Mastery Collaborative Resources on Culturally Responsive Education

Infusing CRE into Mastery Practices

How Can Mastery Learning be More Culturally Responsive (video)

The more I learn about culturally responsive education, the more I think it is important that the leaders in the world of personalized learning do the crosswalk as well. There are so many practices that are valuable in culturally responsive education that are either the same or similar enough to make personalized learning become a catalyst for racial equity. But that won’t happen unless there is the intention of doing so. Without intention to change, we end up perpetuating inequality.

Do you have tools, resources, or strategies that are helping you and your school to strengthen your culture and practices so that you are truly an equitable school where every student is going to succeed regardless of race? Or a story about how competency-based education and its focus on continuous improvement is helping your school or district improve educational services and outcomes for historically underserved students? Please share.  As a community, I am confident that we can not only commit to equity. We can make a difference in children’s lives for the better.

– – –

Infusing CRE/Mastery practices into our work with young learners

Exploration

  • Please check indicators you feel are your strengths. ✔
  • Use a question mark where you want more information. ?
  • Draw a star to show a possible focus/growth area for you. *

I can point to evidence that shows that . . .

  • All students in my/our classroom feel they are welcomed, they belong here, and
    that their learning has value. facilitation

(more…)

Why School Quality Measurement is an Equity Issue

October 3, 2017 by

Photo by Allison Shelley/The Verbatim Agency for American Education: Images of Teachers and Students in Action

This post originally appeared at the Center for Collaborative Education on August 16, 2017.

Many reform-minded educators rally around the equity flag, determined to banish forever achievement gaps and opportunity gaps alike. It is a noble goal and one that I share.

Viewing the work of the Massachusetts Consortium for Innovative Education Assessment (MCIEA) through an equity lens, I am ever mindful of the ways school quality measurement has historically been used to reinforce structural inequality. To take just one example, real estate companies catering to the demand for information on “good schools” rely on the standardized tests used by districts and states as a proxy for school quality. Not only do these tests represent relatively little of what families say they care about when choosing schools – for example, caring teachers, critical thinking curricula, and access to the arts among other things – but standardized tests are also highly correlated with race and class. In this sense, the colorblind language of “good schools” is in fact racially coded. Higher test scores do not signal good schools so much as they signal white schools or rich schools, and such misinformation only exacerbates already alarming rates of school and residential segregation.

Noting that publicly available test scores were “[t]he most influential indicator of school quality today,” researchers Mark Knoester and Wayne Au pointed out that test scores serve multiple purposes, only some of which are explicit:

The official reason testing is carried out in schools is because tests are used to evaluate, and supposedly, to improve schools. But we must also understand that testing is supported politically because it serves other purposes as well: Given its racist history and contemporary racist outcomes, high-stakes, standardized testing converts segregation, and its white supremacist impulses, into an ‘objective science.’ Testing allows parents and others to avoid the stigma of saying out loud that they favor segregation as they choose schools with a whiter and richer population for their own children. (2017, p. 11)

To truly contribute to education equity, then, we must find ways to connect our work to the cause of desegregation and the promotion of racially and economically integrated schools. No other education intervention has proven as durable or promising for improving educational equity. (more…)

What’s New in K-12 Competency Education?

September 20, 2017 by

What's new! star graphicBrian Stack and Jonathan Vander Els are publishing a book on September 27, 2017 titled: Breaking with Tradition: The Shift to Competency-Based Learning in PLCs at Work. Learn more and preorder here.

California’s Lindsay Unified School District

  • Lindsey Unified released a new video on their “learning communities” and how they are transforming public education to support a healthy, empowered and sustainable community.
  • Lindsay released a new podcast, Lindsay Live, which will provide insights into what it takes to succeed in the performance based system.

News

  • New Hampshire’s Performance Assessment of Competency Education (PACE) program is showing early improvements in the Smarter Balanced assessments over the past two years, with significant improvements for students with disabilities, when compared with non-PACE districts. Read more about this early evidence of student achievement gains in this blog and in this article.
  • In competency-based systems, athletic directors are rethinking what eligibility for sports looks like.
  • The New York Times covered competency-based education in New York City.

On Race and Equity

Colorado’s District 51

Policy Updates

(more…)

4 Ways We Can Fund Personalized Learning to Create More Equitable Schools

September 19, 2017 by

Photo by Allison Shelley/The Verbatim Agency for American Education: Images of Teachers and Students in Action

This post originally appeared at Education Post on September 12, 2017.

Budget shortfalls in states are framing a new angle on educational equity conversations. It is no longer simply about what is right, but what is fiscally necessary for a state to grow and thrive.

Studies from Erik Hanushek and the National Bureau of Economic Research show, state economies live and die by the extent to which they drive educational success for all their learners.

Fiscal responsibility at the state level is vital for the academic success of all children, but especially for students of color, students from low-income families, students with disabilities, English-language learners, students living in foster care and students currently without a permanent residence.

These and other student groups who have been underserved, seemingly as tradition in public education, are more likely to attend what Johns Hopkins University researcher Robert Balfanz calls “dropout factories”—schools in which less than 60 percent of students graduate on time.

For example, the national, on-time graduation rate for students with disabilities and English-language learners is currently under 65 percent. Given the widespread use of Balfanz’s “dropout factory” definition, this means that we could be on the verge of classifying our national education system as a dropout factory for the aforementioned student groups.

HERE’S WHERE PERSONALIZED LEARNING COMES IN

(more…)

WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera