Commentary and Opinion

Commentary and opinion

Commentary and OpinionCoronavirus / COVID-19CustomizationEducation ChoiceEducation EquityFeaturedMicroschoolsParental ChoiceSchool ChoiceTechnology and InnovationVirtual Education

Micro-schools, rigorous distance learning never gonna give your innovative spirit up

Matthew Ladner
Matthew Ladner

Science writer Matthew Ridley has described the innovation process as one of trial and error in which individuals combine pre-existing techniques and/or technologies.

One example: Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing were around for many years before innovators figured out how to put them together to revolutionize the energy market.

Another example: Rick Astley’s “Never Gonna Give You Up” and Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” were around for decades before some unknown innovator combined them to create the greatest song in the English language.

Likewise, a new policy brief posted to the Arizona Charter Schools Association website suggests that combining project-based micro-schools with rigorous live distance learning can create a new path, to scale, for high-demand schools and can unleash new opportunities for teachers while addressing equity concerns with pandemic pods.

A Phoenix radio host interviewed a 44-year (!) classroom veteran teacher last year. The teacher observed that the main problem with education today isn’t a lack of funding, which he said has “always been tough.” The real problem, he said, is that “the joy of teaching has been strangled out of the profession.”

This can and must change, and combining small education communities with rigorous distance learning just might do the trick.

If you’ve ever visited a project-based learning micro-school, you quickly see the joy so sorely lacking in most education settings. With Sal Khan, founder of a free educational video library that allows blending learning, as your scout-troop/school leader, you’re watching an excited group of kids engaging in 3-D print design. An education guide leads students through some daily academic work on computers, but then the students tackle group projects.

I watched students engaged in 3-D print design at a Prenda micro-school on the Apache Nation in San Carlos Arizona. These kids were not just learning, they were learning and loving it. These types of schools have great potential because they do not require educators to raise funds for multi-million facilities.

 This style of education, which took an early hold prior to the pandemic, has been thrust into the limelight now through the advent of pandemic pods. Educators can address equity concerns, such as a low-income family’s ability to pay teachers and gain access to computers, with enlightened public policy.

 Success Academy of New York developed another innovation to pair with micro-schools. Success Academy changed the roles of instructional staff for distance learning, with teachers variously tackling the roles of lecturers and small group facilitator/student problem solvers.

 The most skilled math instructor in the network gave a live internet broadcast lecture via the internet. Students divided into small groups to interact with teachers to discuss the material and work out issues. Teachers then graded and monitored student achievement and scheduled individual online tutoring sessions with struggling students.

 The Success Academy distance learning model is itself potentially revolutionary. In theory, the network could offer this version of itself to both enrollment lottery winners and enrollment lottery losers. Many parents on the waitlist might very much prefer this option over a spot in a district that numbers rather than names schools.

 Education, however, is very much a social enterprise for many, as most of us want and need access to instructors and classmates. We need community. The Arizona Center for Student Opportunity brief referenced above calls for educators to combine Prenda-style micro-schools with Success Academy-style distance learning programs.

 This proposal could take a variety of forms. Education service providers could reach agreements with pandemic pod providers to “adopt” them into their distance learning programs. Alternatively, high-demand schools could gauge interest in creating pods among their current students and their waitlisted families.

 Equity-related concerns connected to pandemic pods could be addressed through funding students. Private choice programs focusing on disadvantaged student populations, such as Florida’s scholarship programs, could be used to help low-income students and those with disabilities afford micro-schools. Alternatively, public school distance-learning statues could defer costs.

 In Arizona, Prenda operates schools through district, charter and private choice mechanisms. All Prenda students take the state’s AZMerit exam, and students whose education is funded through district and charter mechanisms have their results factored into school ratings.

 In partnering with a Success Academy-style distance learning provider, the “mothership” would provide the live lecture, while the small group facilitation function would be conducted by in-person by guides. Different flavors of micro-schools can be created through affiliation with different mothership institutions. Teachers can run the show rather than being part of all-too-often hugely indifferent bureaucracies. All we need are some trailblazing educators and enlightened policy.

 To paraphrase the Gen-X bard:

 “With the schools out, it’s less dangerous! Here we are now, liberate us! Don’t feel stupid or contagious! Here we are now, educate us!”

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionCoronavirus / COVID-19CustomizationEducation ChoiceEducation EquityFeaturedParent VoicesParental ChoiceSchool ChoiceSpecial Needs Education

Education choice for all families is crucial as schools consider reopening plans

Keith Jacobs
Keith Jacobs

Education choice advocate Keith Jacobs and his son, Deuce, 13.

As a parent of a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder, I know that the decision about re-opening public schools during the COVID-19 pandemic  could have a tremendous impact on the social-emotional health of my son, Deuce, 13, who thrives on structure.

The switch to online learning in the spring was particularly challenging. Even though my wife and I are educators, that still was not enough to supplant the intense interventions he received with face-to-face instruction in his public school building. 

He became frustrated trying to navigate through the online platform while also completing quizzes and virtual labs all while being separated from the social connection and in-person support of his teachers.

Deuce independently completed assignments at his own pace. However, remote learning presented unique obstacles because he relies on over a dozen specific accommodations delivered through his Individualized Education Plan (IEP), most of which were either non-existent or difficult to replicate on the online platform.

Like many parents, the home became our workspace, in addition to being a school, restaurant, and gym. This forced us to balance the demands of our daily work while trying to maintain an instructional environment for our children. What worked for our youngest son, Christopher, 10, didn’t always work for Deuce.

The challenge for Deuce became monumental. I was forced to contact the teachers and administration on several occasions pleading for alternative assessments and assignments. I reiterated how difficult it was to comply with the demands of work while providing accommodations for my child outlined in his IEP.

I had to work with his Exceptional Student Education (ESE) case manager and speech therapist on providing additional technology assistance and modified lessons during their virtual sessions.

It was clear our situation would become even more daunting when we discovered that his accommodation “Text to Speech” was not present on the district’s online platform. Receiving this accommodation in the school building allowed him to have directions, questions, and answers read to him so that he could process the information more effectively. 

Without the presence of this function, I was constantly asked to fulfill this role so that he could complete his assignment often after multiple attempts of completion on his own and visible frustration prior to asking for the accommodation. 

I witnessed the despair in his eyes as he struggled with knowing he can do the work but receiving below-average assessments. His zeal and commitment toward learning, which were rewarded with a 3.75 grade point average, had been replaced by confusion and apathy.

Deuce suddenly found himself struggling to complete assignments, while I tried to prevent him from becoming fixated on these assignments for hours.

As often happens with children with autism, over-sensitivity to sensory stimuli made it even harder to concentrate in the home. Doors opening, phones ringing, conference calls and other distractions were a cacophonous barrier to learning. 

As districts wrestle with when, or even if, to re-open public schools, they must consider all their stakeholders, including students who depend on in-person learning. Are we properly balancing health concerns with students’ social-emotional health from learning in an online platform?

These examples demonstrate why choice in education is so pertinent to families.  In the last quarter of the previous school year, every child was forced to switch to distance learning with no consideration that some students just will not be successful in the model.

Even with households like mine, one child can thrive through distance learning while the other could potentially suffer in silence.

The school district’s decision in March was built out of necessity. With schools reopening in just a few weeks, these decisions need to be made with the understanding that there is no one solution to educate all students.   

Parents need options.

4 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionEducation ChoiceEducation EquityFamily Empowerment ScholarshipFeaturedFlorida Tax Credit ScholarshipGardiner ScholarshipMcKay ScholarshipParent EmpowermentParental ChoicePrivate School ScholarshipsSchool Choice

Jeff Driskel: Education choice reduces inequality

Special to redefinED
Special to redefinED

Editor’s note: This commentary appeared earlier today in the Gainesville Sun.

As the nation grapples with racial inequality, many Americans are seeking ways they can make a positive difference. As a professional athlete, I know the importance of having a level playing field. The rules must apply equally so everyone has an opportunity to succeed.

That’s why I support education choice. Education can be one of the great equalizers in society, and equalizing opportunities is fundamental to finding the learning environment that works best for each child.

 I was fortunate to live in an area with many excellent public schools. I graduated from Oviedo’s Hagerty High School, which over the last nine years has received an A grade from the state for its academic performance.

 But what about students who don’t have access to quality schools because of where they live? Or even those assigned to “good” schools who nevertheless aren’t succeeding for whatever reason and need something different? Where do they go?

 This disparity in opportunity disproportionately impacts Black and Hispanic students, as evidenced by the achievement gap with their white classmates in national test scores, graduation rates, college enrollment and degrees attained. In the game of life, they’re starting inside their own 5-yard line, and having to advance against a fearsome defense – the systemic disadvantages many of our children face.

 I’m a quarterback, so I naturally believe in being aggressive and going on the offensive. On the field, you need as many options as possible to succeed in any situation. Similarly, education choice attacks inequality by providing parents with multiple ways to find the setting that best meets their children’s needs.

 For 20 years, Florida has been a national leader in expanding education opportunities. Forty-eight percent of Florida’s 3.4 million Pre-K to grade 12 students attend something other than zoned neighborhood schools. That’s up from 10% a generation ago. They include over 309,000 students who choose to attend a charter school.

 Over 120,000 lower-income students – two-thirds of whom are Black or Hispanic — attend a private school of their choice on the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship or the Family Empowerment Scholarship. Special needs students can receive either the McKay Scholarship (more than 30,000) or the Gardiner Scholarship (nearly 14,000) to attend a school of their choice or to help pay for homeschooling expenses. Another 11,000 students receive virtual instruction full time.

 As choice has grown in Florida, the state has seen its academic performance improve. It currently ranks third in the nation in the percentage of graduating seniors who’ve passed Advanced Placement exams; fourth in K-12 achievement as ranked by Education Week; and No. 1, No. 1, No. 3 and No. 8 on the four core tests of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, when adjusted for demographics. All represent progress from a generation ago.

 A 2019 study by the Urban Institute found that the low-income students who received the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship were up to 20% more likely than public school students to earn bachelor’s degrees. But choice doesn’t benefit only those who attend private schools. A study released earlier this year by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that in areas where students had more access to private-school choice, students in public schools — especially low-income ones — had higher standardized test scores, lower absenteeism and fewer suspensions.

 It’s not a matter of public vs. private, brick-and-mortar vs. online. It’s all of those, and more. Every child deserves the best opportunity to learn, whatever form it takes. That’s the most basic step in righting wrongs in society.

 Jeff Driskel, a 2011 graduate of Hagerty High School in Oviedo, played quarterback for the University of Florida for four years before finishing his college eligibility at Louisiana Tech. In 2016 he was drafted by the NFL’s San Francisco 49ers and currently plays for the Denver Broncos.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionCommon GroundCoronavirus / COVID-19Education and Public PolicyEducation ChoiceEducation EquityEducation Savings AccountsFeaturedSchool Choice

The evolving public education market

Doug Tuthill
Doug Tuthill

An education savings account ensures that Anna Ragusa of North Carolina can continue to receive needed therapies during social distancing.

Public education has historically been a poorly managed, underperforming market. The pandemic is driving changes that could, over time, lead to market improvements that will benefit families, students, educators and the public.

In effective and efficient markets, consumers control their purchasing power, monopolies do not exist, the barriers to entry and exit are appropriate (i.e., not too high or too  low), information needed to make good decisions is available to suppliers and customers, and the public good is well served.

None of these features exist in public education today. About 90 percent of public education services are controlled by a single supplier – government. This market domination constitutes a monopoly. Almost all purchasing power is controlled by government.

When families have no control over their public education dollars, new suppliers are discouraged from entering the market. That’s because most families cannot afford to pay both school district taxes and the cost of education services from non-government suppliers. This barrier to entry is why there has been so little supplier diversity and innovation in K-12 education over the last 170 years. Giving families control over their education dollars would unleash demand and create a market that would attract more suppliers.

While the availability of information in public education has gotten better over the last 25 years, families and schools still lack the quality and quantity of information they need to make good decisions. These market flaws are causing taxpayers to get a poor return on their investments in public education.

Some of these market deficiencies are starting to be addressed as families respond to the pandemic by asserting more control over their children’s education. Affluent families are using their own funds to create and access alternative schooling models, including micro-schools, homeschooling cooperatives and pandemic pods. And a few governors are using federal stimulus dollars to fund scholarships so low-income families may have these same opportunities.

 If this trend continues and more families gain greater control over their public education dollars, the barriers to entry for new, more diverse suppliers will be lowered and the creativity and innovation we are starting to see will increase. Using Education Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) to give families more flexibility over how they spend their public education funds will also open the market to providers such as tutors, counselors and therapists.

 In healthy markets, more desirable supply attracts more consumers, which then attracts even more desirable supply, which then attracts even more consumers. This type of virtuous market cycle is emerging in a few communities and could start to erode the government’s monopoly on supply and further the development of a healthy public education market.

 The unbundling of education services will also accelerate the improvement of a better public education market. Government has historically used its monopoly to force parents to access all their education services from a single provider (e.g., the neighborhood public school). While the unbundling of these services has been occurring slowly over the last three decades as families increasingly use programs such as virtual schools and dual enrollment, the pandemic is encouraging suppliers to accelerate this unbundling.

 Some private schools are offering childcare services for families who want to access a virtual instructional program but need out-of-home childcare. Some school districts are providing breakfast and lunch programs for low-income families who are homeschooling. And some community organizations are providing extracurricular activities, such as theatre and sports programs, that are no longer available at some neighborhood schools.

 We have almost two centuries of data showing that a dysfunctional public education market is not capable of delivering systemwide excellence and equity. The work required to develop the infrastructure necessary to support an effective and efficient public education market is daunting. But this horrific pandemic has provided us an historic opportunity we should not let pass.

0 comment
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionCoronavirus / COVID-19CustomizationEducation ChoiceEducation EquityFeaturedPodcastPublic School ChoiceSchool ChoiceTechnology and InnovationVirtual Education

podcastED: SUFS president Doug Tuthill interviews Pasco County Principal of the Year

redefinED staff
redefinED staff

On this episode, Tuthill speaks with JoAnne Glenn, one of the nation’s top online learning leaders. In addition to being Pasco’s 2020 Principal of the Year, Glenn earned one of three Digital Principal of the Year awards from the National Association of Secondary School Principals. She is one of the founders of Pasco eSchool, which offers full- and part-time K-12 digital instruction. Over the past 12 years, the school’s mastery-based model has become a model for digital learning.

 Tuthill and Glenn discuss Pasco eSchool’s advantage during the COVID-19 pandemic and how the platform will allow for flexibility of blended learning when school resumes in a few weeks. They also discuss issues of inequity and the “digital divide,” noting there are areas of Pasco County still lacking access to high speed internet.

 “When families are looking outside the school district for their core instruction, it does not mean we don’t have things they may like, we just have to figure out ways to make that available.”

 EPISODE DETAILS:

What the Pasco County School District is likely to look like in five years

Lessons learned in the spring and Pasco’s reopening models

Pasco’s “franchise” relationship with Florida Virtual School – using its content and platform with district teachers

How Pasco can unbundle its services and offer flexibility to families within the district and beyond

 LINKS MENTIONED:

Pasco eSchool leader named top national ‘digital principal’

Pasco eSchool leader named county Principal of the Year

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionFeaturedUnionism

SEC lays a multimillion dollar fine in Florida teacher-fleecing case

Matthew Ladner
Matthew Ladner

In Salvador Dali’s 1931 painting The Persistence of Memory, the artist mastered what he called “the unusual paralyzing tricks of eye-fooling.” His goal was “to systematize confusion and thus to help discredit completely the world of reality.”

The great surrealist painter Salvador Dali is known to have signed forged paintings. “The only fake Dali,” the painter allegedly said, “is one for which I do not get paid.”

Keep that situation in mind as you continue to read.

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced last week a $40 million civil settlement with a financial adviser partnered with the Florida Education Association that it says violated the rules in promoting retirement investments to Florida teachers. The FEA, a statewide federation of teacher and education workers’ labor unions, boats 137,000 members, making it the largest union in the state

The Wall Street Journal explained:

The SEC’s investigation found Valic paid the salaries of three employees at the entity linked to the Florida union. At meetings and seminars where teachers sought investment advice, the three touted Valic products, presenting themselves as workers for the union entity and not disclosing they were also paid by Valic, the SEC said.

The Journal reported in December that the union entity was known as Creative Benefits for Educators. As recently as October 2019, teachers’ unions in central Florida were advising members to take retirement questions to Mary L. Thomas, a consultant at the union-owned firm—and a longtime Valic sales representative, according to regulatory records.

After the Journal asked about her dual role, the Creative Benefits website went dark last fall. At the time, a spokesman for Creative Benefits said that it no longer employed Ms. Thomas and two other consultants.

Teachers who bought Valic’s Portfolio Director, an annuity popular in teachers’ retirement plans, paid fees of up to 2.3% of assets annually. Valic earned $29 million from its annuity products sold during the 13 years it dealt with Creative Benefits. As part of the settlement with the SEC, Valic agreed to charge lower fees to teachers who signed up to have their money managed by the company, under a “wrap-fee” program.

Is it okay to defraud teachers as long as the union gets paid? Rather than melting away, this memory should persist with Florida educators.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionEducation and Public PolicyEducation ChoiceEducation EquityFeaturedParental ChoicePodcastSchool Choice

PodcastED: SUFS president Doug Tuthill interviews civil rights icon H.K. Matthews

redefinED staff
redefinED staff

In this episode, Tuthill speaks with the Rev. Hawthorne Konrad (H.K.) Matthews, who was active during the civil rights movement in the Pensacola area and was arrested 35 times for his political activities. Leader of both the local NAACP and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Matthews was savagely beaten along with Congressman John Lewis, who died last week at the age of 80, and hundreds of others on March 7, 1965, on the Edmund Pettis Bridge in Selma, Alabama.

“Lewis suffered a fractured skull,” Matthews remembered in an interview last week with the Sinclair Broadcast Group. “I was in the middle of the group, thank God. I only received secondary blows.”

Rev. Matthews discusses his relationship with Lewis and the leadership void he fears will ensue with Lewis’ death. He also discusses his time as an outspoken advocate for education choice and as founder of “freedom schools” across northern Florida and the southern United States, an experience that caused him to see the education choice movement as the natural extension of the Civil Rights era.

“I always knew we needed to have freedom of choice, which is why marched and did a lot of things … If you have a choice, the results of that choice belong to you. You have ownership of it.”

EPISODE DETAILS:

  • John Lewis as Rev. Matthews knew him
  • Reflections on being “indiscriminately beaten” in Selma on Bloody Sunday
  • Riots at Escambia High School when protesting the school’s Confederate symbols
  • Why he is optimistic about the future of education choice during the COVID-19 pandemic

LINKS MENTIONED:

RedefinED: Back to the future on a school choice odyssey

 

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail
Commentary and OpinionCustomizationEducation and Public PolicyEducation ChoiceEducation LegislationEducation Savings AccountsFeaturedSchool Choice

Is it time for Blueprint 2030?

Doug Tuthill
Doug Tuthill

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law in 1999 the A+ Plan for education calling for greater school and teacher accountability eight years after his predecessor signed the Education Reform and Accountability Act.

In 1991, the Florida Legislature passed, and Gov. Lawton Chiles signed, Blueprint 2000: The Education Reform and Accountability Act. The purpose of Blueprint 2000 was to restructure how Florida’s public education system was managed.

In the late 1980s, Florida was a national leader in experimenting with teacher empowerment and site-based decision making (SBDM). The SBDM movement sought to transfer more decision-making power to schools in exchange for these schools being held more accountable for results. Blueprint 2000 was designed to create a state policy infrastructure that would institutionalize SBDM across all of Florida’s public schools.

Legislative and executive branch leaders, all of whom were Democrats, thought Florida’s public schools were underperforming because they were being micromanaged. Blueprint 2000 was going to change that.

I was one of four teacher union representatives on the state commission appointed in 1991 to develop the Blueprint 2000 implementation plan. In collaboration with the Florida Department of Education and thousands of educators, parents, business leaders, and other citizens, we created new state curriculum standards, a new state assessment system called the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), established School Advisory Councils (SACs) at every public school, and required schools to implement annual School Improvement Plans (SIPs). We failed to reach consensus on how best to hold public schools accountable for results, a failure Jeb Bush fixed when he became governor in 1998.

Next spring will be Blueprint 2000’s 30-year anniversary. Florida’s public education system has made great improvements using the education reform and accountability infrastructure that sprang from Blueprint 2000. But that infrastructure has aged. Florida’s public education system needs a new blueprint. It is time for Blueprint 2030.

The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing educators and parents to innovate at a pace never before seen in public education. In the period of a month last spring, every district, private, and charter school campus closed and every student became a homeschool student. When school begins this fall, families will choose from a variety of instructional models, including on-campus, virtual, hybrid (i.e., a combination of on-campus and virtual) and homeschooling. In coming years, families will have access to even more choices.  

State government has waived a variety of state laws and regulations to allow schools and families to adjust to this new normal. But these waivers are temporary solutions. Our state leaders need to start developing a new public education infrastructure, and Blueprint 2000 provides an approach they could consider emulating.

Similar to what the Florida Legislature did in 1991, the 2021 legislature could pass legislation establishing a commission to develop recommendations for creating a new public education infrastructure. This new infrastructure should be designed to support a more diverse and flexible public education system, one capable of meeting the unique needs of each student.  

The largest task for this commission would be improving Florida’s antiquated public education funding system. This funding system is hostile to systemic innovation and the flexibility needed to meet each student’s needs.

The state has created flexible spending accounts for some students with unique abilities/special needs. About 16,000 families will use this spending flexibility this fall to customize their child’s education. Providing all families with access to flexible public education funds is necessary if all children are to benefit from a customized education program.

We also need to reinvent our state assessment and assessment data systems.  As students increasingly receive publicly-funded instruction from multiple providers (tutors, virtual school, college via dual enrollment and assigned neighborhood school) we will need to assess the progress students are making with each provider, aggregate their achievement data, and properly share students’ data with those providers.

We also will need to institutionalize better processes for helping families and students pick the most appropriate providers. Well over 10,000 providers are eligible to serve the 16,000 unique abilities/special needs students using flexible spending accounts, often called Education Scholarship Accounts (ESAs). Deciding which of these 10,000 providers is the best fit for a specific learning need is a daunting task.

A Blueprint 2030 commission will have a huge job helping state government, school districts, schools and other education providers create the infrastructure necessary to support an effective and efficient post-pandemic public education system. We are never going back to the pre-pandemic education system.

Planning for the future should begin soon.

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedinEmail