Ken Robinson: How to escape education's death valley /

Awsome Video Post coming soon

Using Technology to Create an Alternative Education

       Education today is evolving at a very rapid pace. Some students and educators are gracefully making the transition and falling right into place with the new additions technology has provided. Yet some students and educators are ruggedly grasping on to the new concepts and innovations that technology has to provide. Ken Robertson uses the rain phenomenon that occurred in Death Valley as an analogy to describe his philosophy of the education system. He states that the education system is a human system that can only operate under conditions in which students can thrive and if those conditions don't nurture their thriving potential then student will lay dormant. He also makes the compelling statement that the whole purpose of education is to help students learn, that without learning there is no education. Many students that are entering and existing traditional school environments lay dormant and are not being stimulated to engage in learning. By traditional school I mean the student goes to a physical building and sits in a classroom in order to learn. 

        Based on the known facts of dropout rates, test scores, and title1 funding for schools with predominantly disadvantage students, I argue that these students should be presented with some form of alternative education that would better suit their learning needs. Ken Robertson’s Ted talk prompted me to research what other options are available to students who are not thriving in their current educational environments? 

Focusing on using technology to be the change and provide individualized avenues to attain the necessary academic skills to be college and career ready, I found five (5) online learning schools just in my local area. I used http://www.k12.com to discover the opportunities available. 

California Virtual Academies has11 different online schools: CAVA@Fresno, CAVA@Jamestown, CAVA@Kings, CAVA@Los Angeles, CAVA@Maricopa, CAVA@Maricopa High School, CAVA@San Diego, CAVA@San Joaquin, CAVA@San Mateo, CAVA@Sonoma, and CAVA@Sutter. 

“The network of the 11 California Virtual Academies schools is a tuition-free online public school that uses the K¹² curriculum, which is accessed via an online school as well as through more traditional methods. Materials are delivered right to the family's doorstep—including books, CDs, and even bags of rocks and dirt (for science experimentation, of course). We also partner parents and students with a state-credentialed teacher to assign and review lessons and assessments and to guide and support students and learning coaches through the program. Teachers, parents, and students meet on a regular basis in person and online. Student-to-student interaction is emphasized too, so the network of the 11 California Virtual Academy schools students in each of the 11 schools are always well educated and well socialized.” 

This is a perfect example of an alternative educational option that could be used to water the leaning seeds in students.

How are Common Core State Standards, Smarter balanced Assessment (Sbac), and Title 1 funding connected to technology?

The Common Core State Standards were developed to be a leveling checkpoint system that’s designed to ensure that students are being taught skills that would prepare them for college courses or to enter into the workforce. According to the California of the Department of Education the “standards describe what students should know and be able to do in each subject in each grade. In California, the State Board of Education decides on the standards for all students, from kindergarten through high school. The California Department of Education helps schools make sure that all students are meeting the standards. Since 2010, a number of states across the nation have adopted the same standards for English and math. These standards are called the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Having the same standards helps all students get a good education, even if they change schools or move to a different state. Teachers, parents, and education experts designed the CCSS to prepare students for success in college and the workplace.” Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/tl/whatareccss.asp

“The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced) is a state-led consortium working to develop next-generation assessments that accurately measure student progress toward college- and career-readiness. Smarter Balanced is one of two multistate consortia awarded funding from the U.S. Department of Education in 2010 to develop an assessment system aligned to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) by the 2014-15 school year.”

I retrieved this quote directly from the website http://www.smarterbalanced.org. This gives a brief explanation of what the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Sbac) entails. This assessment was designed to determine whether students are learning these Common Core State Standards and are gaining momentum toward being one step closer to becoming college and career ready at the end of their grade level. The alignment with the Common Core Standards are what creates the high stakes for this test because the results from these assessments are used to establish if schools meet the requirements for Title 1 funding. Below is an explanation describing Title 1 funding;

What Is Title I?

"Title I" is the federal program that provides funding to local school districts to improve the academic achievement of disadvantaged students. It is part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act first passed in 1965. That Act is reauthorized by Congress from time to time, and often given a new name. It is currently known as the No Child Left Behind Act. Section A of Title I provides grants to states to distribute directly to school districts. This is by far the largest source of federal money for local schools. School districts do not have to apply for Title I funding as they would have to for a competitive grant. If a school district qualifies for Title I funding, it is entitled to the money. However, the district must submit to the state education agency a plan for how it will use the funds to improve academic achievement among disadvantaged students. http://www.formulafairness.com/title1

Technology is the glue that connects these three elements together. The Common Core State Standards currently only focus on English and Math retention and does not have any guidelines that promote learning basic technological skills at any grade level. This is a major downside to the CCSS because to produce college and career ready students for the 21st century even the simplest tech skills need to be learned. Also in order for students to be assessed through the Smarter Balanced Assessment, students are required to know how to perform basic functions on a computer such as; how to hold the mouse appropriately, use a mouse to drag and drop, or use a mouse to highlight text. These are just a few skills that are expected of children when they are testing. Now if the school has no set curriculum to teach these skills why are the students expected to know them. The assessment scores of the students who lack basic knowledge of these skills will be misrepresented as lack of proficiency of the CCSS and be calculated in the percentages that are reported to state officials. Title1 funding will be made available to these schools with these low test scores to promote academic advancement, however the focus of the funding is being directed in the wrong areas. No funds will be allocated to improve the area that is causing the disadvantage, which is the lack of computer skills.  How can students with no or limited exposure to computers be required to use computers to on a Standardized Assessment?

Geoffrey Canada: Our failing schools. Enough is enough!

21st Century Learning

 ·          What sort of challenges do you believe lies ahead in any district which proposes changing the entire teacher evaluation process based on student need for a change of learning skills? How would it feel to you to participate in this kind of process?

First and foremost I really like this question because it challenges my value for teachers, as well as, my value for students and with any change there is bound to be some push-back and controversy from both parties involved. The challenges that I believe lie ahead may be the struggle to determine the needs of the students and deciding what type of teacher will suit those needs. Low-income schools are often known as “hard-to-staff” schools because they have a higher turnover rate for their teachers.  Finding more teachers will suit one need of the students, however to fit this need to what extent is the evaluation process going to be changed. For instance; would the teachers be required to have extra skills and experience to better serve the students or would teachers be required to have less skills and experience to serve more students at higher rates. I recently had a personal experience that addressed this challenge. I recently inquired about joining Teach for America. This organization or corporation I have determined, recruits newly college graduates to become contract teachers for two years at a low-income schools, after only 5 weeks of training. During this time of working in the classroom, the graduates can earn their teaching credentials. This concept sounds amazing, however in perpetuates the extended cycle of educational inequality with quantity. Teach for America and partnering schools changed the teacher evaluation process based on what they proposed to be the most important need. I disagree that more unprepared teachers are the answer, therefore I was not willing to participate. In connection to other aspects of teacher evaluation changes the biggest challenge I foresee are current teachers expressing contempt for this kind of process, which will create a negative work culture at minimum, yet still effective enough to impact student learning. Attached is a very interesting article discussing Teach for America.

·         “What can I do as a teacher and leader to more effectively bring 21st century learning to my students?”

Currently I’m not working as a classroom teacher and I’m not sure at which level do I want to lead the change in education. After reading about 21^st century learning, I agree that this framework would increase preparedness for students once they finish high school. Whether they go in the direction of college or the workforce, 21^st century learning will allow them to access to a more well-rounded skill set that matches the demands of present times. As an educator, those who aspire to promote learning, I’m interested in policy and the appropriation of the proper training for teacher and parents. This way the students are learning these skills in the two most effective learning environments in their young lives. I want to bring 21^st century skills to the conductors of these students’ support systems. This is important because before we can’t expect students on any level to learn, master, and then apply 21^st century skills until us as educators and facilitators first learn, master, and then apply such skills. Focusing on effectively reintroducing education in the 21^st century and providing a lens to teachers and parents to view the infrastructure as a continuous evolving entity that’s growing with our society, will be my contribution to the students.