What Schools Could Be – if politicians and reformers and profiteers didn’t get in the middle…schools could be student-driven, teacher-constructed.

What if colleges didn’t set high school curriculum and legislators didn’t set required classes? What if the experts were given free rein to reinvent schools?

This is the premise of Dintersmith’s book…all from the point-of-view of the outsider…someone who’s got more money and time than most of us, and the means to travel and learn. He traveled to every state in the nation, and visited exemplary schools. He saw innovations in action, and he watched…

He is enamored with tech and STEM, and occasionally STEAM. He loves him some cool whiz-bang stuff. I tried to find myself in some of his enthusiasm and I seldom did. He mentioned literacy once, and literature once, I think. One school in North Carolina organized itself into fields of study:

o   Biology, Health, Public Administration

o   Executive Leadership, Entrepreneurship

o   Technology, Advanced Manufacturing

o   Math, Engineering, Technology, Science

o   School of Arts and Technology.

I looked at his examples, and I could not find myself in this organization…And that made me sad.

I appreciated his disdain for tests and test scores…he reminded his readers that American schools teach that which is easy to test and to measure, not what’s important to learn. I was cheering him along in these sections of the book…He’s quick to point out that high school curriculum leads to admissions tests for colleges, not for any life-long passions for learning and doing, and we both mourn that. “College-ready content in our schools has grown like Kudzu, with AP courses leading the way.” He wonders why our K12 experience is only to get us ready for the tests to get into college…and he seriously questions the burdens many of us carry for our college experiences…he says 2.8 million adults aged 60 or older are still paying off their college loans. Does anyone need a college degree that badly? Truly?

So, it’s time for something new…something daring. Something counter-intuitive. Like trusting students with their own learning. Letting their passions lead learning. Trusting creativity. Finding internships and mentorships, apprenticeships, job-shadowing. Finding passion in learning, not just filling in the blanks.

As someone outside of education, he can be outrageous…he asks WHY we need calculus? Especially when our cell phones have the technology to solve calculus problems faster than we can.

As someone outside of education, he can rake leaders over the coals: Kansas’s Brownback, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker. Michelle Rhee…he is not impressed with drill-and-test, or cut your way to prosperity schemes. Not a fan of AP courses or tests. He wants real investments in education…but man, does he love him some fancy technology.

In his visit to OK, he visits what he calls, Creative Oklahoma, stateofcreatifity.com…a friend pointed out that’s the A+ Schools model that incorporates the arts into all disciplines…

The book is worth the price if you care about education and really DO want to help students learn to be passionate, confident adults. The examples of innovations from around the country should inspire some deep conversations about what schools could be…should be…can be. Are, in enlightened pockets.

My favorite quote came from his visit to a school in Hawaii, where the leaders constantly ask themselves, their faculty, and their students: “What does quality look like in your discipline?” What if that was the mission of every district, every school, every department in our country? What if that drove our work in the classroom? Our students’ work? What does quality look like?

BUT, I did not see myself in many of his cool schools with all their technology. It makes me sad to think that schools NOW are not reaching the needs and interests of our students, and I’m equally sad imagining a future where schools ignore other groups of students…

I bought copies of this book for my two state legislators. They’re more expensive than the legal limit to be considered as gifts. So, like works of art in local museums, they will be on permanent loan. Truly, policy makers could learn as much in this book as educators.

“Systems are hard to change. The model is entrenched.”

TFA “ recruit[s] people who excelled in conventional school and want the same for their students…unquestioned commitment to academic hoop-jumping.”

“If state legislators think test scores are so important, they should release their own.”

“Test scores tell us little, charter schools are a mixed bag, and college is a crap shoot. Doing obsolete things better will hardly carry us over the water.”

“Our education system locks in cycles of privilege and poverty/”

“Education should prepare children for life, but we have it backward. We prepare children’s lives for school.”

“NCLB took away teachers’ confidence.”

"THEY WILL TELL US" Another Interim. More Questions

Thursday’s Interim Study was collecting information about the virtual charters in our state. This growth is interesting  development in #oklaed. We have a combination of charters sponsored by K12 virtual charters, sponsored by the state virtual charter board, and even at least one university in the state. All are ultimately run by a for-profit organization. 

I still remember the first time I was made aware of virtual schools, computer-driven…soon after her election to State Superintendent of Public (oh, how she hated that!) Schools, Janet Barresi visited a K12 school…she came back to Oklahoma and waxed poetic about how efficient they were – with their teacher student ratio of 1:300 (OK, maybe I’m exaggerating…slightly).

Now, OK has four Virtual Charters:

• ·         EPIC, with two sponsors, Oklahoma and Rose State University, run by Epic Youth Services, LLC
• ·         Oklahoma Virtual Charter Academy, run (‘powered’) by the Superindentist’s beloved K12
• ·         Insight School of Oklahoma, also run (uh, ‘powered’) by K12
• ·         Oklahoma Connections Academy, run by Connection LLC – or Pearson! Mega Ed Corporation

So, it appears that for-profit charter schools are alive and well in #oklaed…all our virtual charters are being run for profit. What could possibly go wrong?

While these schools are classified as public schools, like other charters in our state, they are driven for profit, for the bucks, and their growth shows there is a lucrative market in our state.  They are partially funded by state school money…receiving the state aid, but not the local money…and they are hungry for more. I’ll explain below.

Emily Wendler, reporter for KOSU, the local NPR station, has written two pieces about charters…good and not so good. I recommend them both.

My reporting here may have holes, because the speakers moved so fast through slides with lots of charts and graphs…just as I had my phone up to snap a shot, we were off to the next slide. Senators at the study got spiral-bound books with all the information. Old grannies in the audience were trying to listen and take notes, and sometimes that didn’t work.

There is a state virtual schools board, with members appointed by the Governor, Senate Pro Tem, and Speaker of the House…the purpose of the Board is to bring accountability to this industry. And make no mistake, it is an industry. I believe each school also has a local board, appointed in some way.

The Interim, called by Chair Stanislawski, was to look at performance data. And we got into the weeds almost immediately.

EPIC Charter, our largest virtual charter in the state, has information about why families leave the public school setting for virtuals…some reflect negatively on schools: bullying, overcrowding, limited resources, and ‘problems’ with schools. Safety is an issue. There are also positive reasons for the transfer: more parental involvement, the ability to accelerate instruction, or receive intensive remediation, and individual needs that were not addressed in the public schools.

Parents identified benefits: safety, engagement, quality of the academics. And they identified challenges: social interaction, academic struggles, lifestyle adjustments.

My heart will always be with public schools, so I look at that list through the lens of the recent strangulation of schools…resources…overcrowded classes…teacher shortage…individual attention that every child deserves. My question from the start was, “How much of this need for an ‘alternative setting’ have we manufactured by starving our schools, and what would happen if we were fully funded?”

Virtual charters in OK are public schools—run by for-profit corporations. But like other charters, they receive only a portion of the state allotment. They do not receive local funding, or ad valorem funds, and they are not able to bond, or piggy-back on public school bond elections.  Because of the high mobility of student enrollment, virtual charters typically get large ‘mid-term adjustments’ in state funding. Virtual charters also have no brick-and-mortar upkeep, transportation costs, or child nutrition costs.

Virtuals have a double management organization…a local board (not elected as public districts have), and a for-profit management organization. It was not said in the meeting, but I have heard others say the board’s work is transparent and subject to all the same accountability as public schools. The management organization is not as transparent, and it may be difficult to identify accountability issues.

Students at virtuals are tested, just like all other charters and public schools. They must bring students to regional centers to test with the same safeguards as other schools. And scores are reported to the state.

But here’s where it got sticky, and the meeting got testy.  All (or nearly all) students in a school must be tested by state law. But for evaluation purposes, only certain student scores are counted in this evaluation…students who are identified as Full Academic Year…enrolled within the first 20 days of the school year, and not absent for 10 consecutive days up to the testing window.

EPIC folks were sharing their test data, showing that for most grades their students outperform public students…Two Senators, Smalley and Pemberton, asked pointed questions about the number of FAY students at public and virtual. A spokesperson from EPIC said he didn’t have the exact number, but it was close to the public school rate.

OSDE folks in the back were able to access the information, and it told a drastically different story. In public schools, 93% of students are considered FAY, and their scores are combined for reporting purposes. Virtual charters? The number was nowhere near that…so the spokesperson was woefully misinformed. 31% of virtual charter students are considered FAY, and their scores ‘count’ in the total. I understand that the 31% of virtual students whose scores ‘count’ are not necessarily the highest-scoring, best students…but, a comparison of 93% of one population and 31% of another cannot be accepted as a fair measure.

The Senators present, all members of the Senate Education Committee, seemed ready with their questions.

We moved on to graduation rates…also a source of great differences. EPIC Charter’s graduation rate is computed at 36%. Again, that number does not tell the whole story because of the way that number is computed. To be counted in this number, a student must be a member of a four-year cohort…beginning high school with his peers, and graduating on time four years later. This number leaves little room for family catastrophes, health issues, developmental differences, discipline. The state must count the students who entered high school and graduated four years later.

This number would be lower for a population as mobile as virtual charters. And I wanted to ask how many students entered a virtual as a freshman, but went back to a brick-and-mortar sometime during those four years. Or transferred TO a virtual, or took a year off, or, or. Or.

We understand the variables are too many to count. But that is the bar we are all judged by. Speakers spun the data in so many different directions, I , frankly, lost the thread. And Senator Stanislawski was quick to jump in and tell the group that graduations numbers are meaningless to virtual charters. Throwing shade much?

Attendance for charters has always been a big question. In public high schools, students must attend all classes all day. They’re counted absent or present for every class. If they miss 10 consecutive days in any class, they automatically lose credit in that class, and if it’s a core course, they’ll have to take the semester over.

For charters, the requirements are different…I think it used to be a requirement that students ‘log on’ each day to be counted as present. One log-in any time during the day. Speakers shared that now students must complete 40 instructional activities in a nine-weeks to be considered ‘present’.  In Norman Schools, high school students would take 6 classes, and teachers were required to log two grades each week. 18 as a minimum for the quarter. Times 6 classes…

Another way virtual charter students can be considered present is to complete instructional activities (I assume that means at least one activity) for 90% of the school days.

There was an exchange between the CEO of EPIC and Senators over funding. No charter in #oklaed receives local money. I can see with virtuals it would be hard to apportion local property taxes to schools that serve students from all over the state. Didn’t stop them from pushing again.  Dr. Chaney is not happy that virtual charters do not receive the same amount of funding as brick-and-mortar public schools…his voice shook as he talked about ‘return on investment,’ with a chart and an emotional line: “Are virtual students worth less?” Since we have no view of his for-profit management, we must ask him, and no one did, “How much are you paying yourself, where is the accountability for public funds the state HAS given you to educate these students? Are funds being invested in students or in your for-profit management?”

This is when Chairman Stanislawski said “They (public schools) will tell us (virtual charters)…” I was highly troubled by his aligning himself with virtuals, against public schools…the public schools he’s responsible for overseeing and shepherding…crafting and advancing legislation to protect and strengthen. I know he’s deeply involved in the virtual charter world, but he seemed, in that one line, to make his loyalty clear.

At that point, I might have written a bad word in my notes….not sure.

Interims are previews of possible legislation…so, I’m predicting we’ll be seeing bills to change the funding formula for virtuals…and even loosen regulations. Last Session there was a bill to allow charters to share in public school bonding capacity, and I expect we’ll see that again. And judging from the informed questions from other Senators, I wouldn’t be surprised to see legislation requiring more accountability and transparency.

I have friends who work for virtual charters…they pay infinitely better, and offer bonuses. I do not blame them for choosing to make a living in the profession they love. I have friends who are using the flexibility of virtual charter to educate their children. I do not begrudge them that choice for their children.  For some students this is the best setting for them.  And there is funding available for families to help with extra-curricular activities. One cheer team advertised that they are now a vendor and accept those funds.

But there are issues with virtuals that must be addressed: lack of transparency, recruiting bonuses, mobility, attendance, graduation…

In a perfect world brick-and-mortar public schools would be fully funded, with an accomplished teacher certified in the subject in every classroom, with all the resources and texts and technology needed to educate our children.  There would be public school options – blended learning, emphasis on arts, music, humanities, STEM and STEAM. Flexible hours for students. When those conditions are not met, and other alternatives are offered, it’s no wonder we’ve set up this conflict. In a perfect world, face-to-face classes, virtual classes, would be available to all our students…and we’d make all our decisions based on what’s best for this child now?

We are not there yet.

And, Senator S, you tried to ‘razzle-dazzle’ us. Didn’t work.

Studying Bullying

Legislative Interim Studies are so very interesting to attend…the atmosphere is laid-back, everyone’s a bit more casual; and, in advocacy, you can sit and watch and listen. Then you can predict what possible legislation might come from the Studies…what the big ideas will be.

Today I attended my state Senator, Rob Standridge’s Interim Study on Bullying in the Classroom.  Speakers came from across the state, and represented private organizations, universities, virtual charters, private schools. Students spoke as their own best advocates. Steve Hahn, of the Parent Child Center in Tulsa began the presentations with specific questions and recommendations. He had worked with the legislature in the past on anti-bullying legislation, and curates the website PreventBullyingTulsa.org.

A representative of A New Leaf in Broken Arrow brought three clients, adults with disabilities, who told their stories of overcoming childhood bullying. Their sponsor spoke about the need for inclusion in schools, including in the lunchrooms. He also spoke about crowded classrooms making it harder for teachers to be aware of covert bullying. One client told the story of how Special Olympics gave her the confidence to become her own advocate. I’ve worked with high school students as we volunteered at Special Olympics Oklahoma, so I know first-hand how barriers and stereotypes can be smashed when disabled and non-disabled students work together.

 Trinity private school in OKC was represented. Trinity works specifically with students with disabilities, and typically these students have suffered some kind of bullying. As I browsed the site, I found their tuitions and fees, but no mention of vouchers that could be used. I’m certain the Lindsay Nicole Henry Scholarships are offered to families to offset the costs. The speaker extolled their social skills curriculum, Love and Logic, which is part of every class.

The superintendent from EPIC Charter School, students, parents and educators spoke eloquently about what drives some students out of the public schools into online charters. The stories were heartbreaking, and hard to hear. I don’t want to make excuses for us in the public schools…I want us to be more proactive about recognizing and stopping bullying of all kinds.

Trish Hughes, a professor from OSU shared her research as well. She was asked for her top recommendation for schools working to prevent bullying. She enthusiastically suggested character education for all students. She specifically spoke of Great Expectations, and told the story of visiting a Great Ex school and witnessing the positive, accepting climate. She made the point that an entire school needed to buy into the program for it to be successful. I have not gone through this training, but I work with National Board Certified Teachers, and candidates. They often tell me this training is the most profound work they’ve participated in, for making an immediate difference in the climate of their classrooms.

Parents and students told harrowing stories of systematic bullying in schools, and inadequate responses, or disrespectful responses, or NO responses from public school teachers and administrators. One high school student created a presentation as part of a 4-H project. Students and parents were clear…they did not feel supported by the public schools. That made me so ashamed. 40 years I worked. 40 years I tried. But these students and parents were not supported the way they deserved.

I’ve written about bullying and how I always felt recognizing and responding to bullying was my greatest failing in the classroom. I hosted an #oklaed chat, and compiled the resources we talked about.  I craved more information and read every book I could get my hands on. But…I never felt I protected my most vulnerable students the way I should have. To think they could have been talking about me, and that my response was not supportive breaks my heart.

So, I approach every discussion about bullying from that hollow space of, “did I do enough? Did I fail to notice? Did I communicate my expectations? Were kids bullied in my classroom under my nose?”

Listening to the parents and students share their stories of school responses reminded me there are some phrases that MUST MUST MUST be removed from teachers’ lexicon. When a student reports bullying, I want my teacher friends to never say:

• ·         Just ignore them
• ·         Tell them to stop
• ·         Just walk away
• ·         Play somewhere else
• ·         Play with someone else
• ·         We can’t do anything
• ·         It’s his/her word against yours
• ·         No one else witnessed it, so we can’t do anything
• ·         Boys will be boys

Any time professional educators use phrases like this, they abdicate their professionalism, their authority. They reinforce the bully’s power and the bullied student’s helplessness. Can we just stop? Yesterday?

That brings me to a disturbing stat from this morning…when asked, 90% of school personnel said they responded to students’ reports of bullying. But, when students were asked, only 5% FIVE PERCENT, said their teachers were responsive. Is it because some teachers think they’ve done their job with, “Well, just walk away”?

Steve Hahn, from Family Child Center, showed a moving video of a dad who lost his 11-year old son to depression over being bullied beyond endurance. In response to his story, high school students created Stand for the Silent, an online community whose mission is to bring awareness to bullying and the devastation of families it causes. Perhaps it’s time to let the young people lead. I would hope schools would tap into this resource.

The Senators who attended heard from experts…both professionals who’ve studied, and families who have suffered. I’m going to report what I heard, and how I sifted through my own lens of classroom teacher and brought my own terminology to what I heard.

I heard the speakers recommend more inclusion of students who are different…disabled, on the autism spectrum, kids who learn differently. Inclusion, especially at the secondary level, could be a great project for a service club or student council. One speaker admitted this kind of project would need teacher supervision and sponsorship; but teachers are already under such stress and pressure during the school day, it would be one more responsibility. Maybe using the resources from Stand for the Silent would be useful.

One speaker talked about class sizes, and how larger classes in reality means less individual attention, and more bullying…A student said teachers needed to know her…but in large classes, it’s so much harder.

A teacher said that bullying does not start in the schools…it starts at home and is brought into the schools. EPIC has an emotional video sharing the hurtful things students were called by other students, and it’s clear that some of those words and attitudes were modeled by the adults in their lives and brought into the schools. True, but it affects the lives of our students in our classes, in our schools.

Speakers mentioned cyberbullying, but no concrete suggestions were given. I think this is a new area where schools, communities, parents, and maybe law enforcement could work in partnership…It’s the way much of the evilness is spread nowadays ,but I know it’s so hard to get a grip on solutions. We must…but how? Speakers had no ideas.

So, speakers did mention some steps schools and teachers could take: social inclusion of students, lowered class sizes, building trust so students feel safe reporting, social skills curriculum, even having a working definition of bullying…one we systematically teach to students and families.

What they did not mention, but I extrapolated from their reports: teacher shortage combined with larger class sizes are giving bullies the advantage. I wonder if the high number of alternative-and-emergency certified teachers without formal teacher-preparation training is making the issue worse. Building relationships is still the most important work in the classroom…it can break down the climate of fear, giving bullied students the strength to come to their teacher; it can tell everyone bullying does not happen in this classroom.

I think the issue of ACEs – Adverse Childhood Experiences – was alluded to, but not by name. One mother told of her son being diagnosed with PTSD after years of being bullied at school. ACEs affect all our students, but I’m betting the bullies and the bullied experience more. I’m grateful that our state is acknowledging and addressing this issue with educators with trainings planned this fall on Trauma-Informed Instruction.

Would a community school, with wrap-around services, help students and families find new ways to interact? I think it’s worth a look. Edgemere Elementary School in OKC would be the perfect place to start. Such schools could have social services, extra counselors, family counselors, parent education classes, health care facilities, all as part of the physical school. When someone makes the mistake of asking me what school reform I would support, they get an earful about community, wrap-around schools.

School districts are hiring more counselors whose job description includes being student advocates, crisis managers. These counselors could work with teachers, students, and parents, to address all the issues that come along with bullying. Norman and Noble have done just this in response to the need for more student support.

All this takes money. All this takes commitment. All this takes the courage to stop doing what we’ve always done, and do something more.

I was heartened by my Senator saying that even though students and parents and administrators from EPIC Charter were allotted a large chunk of time, he was not saying he sees online charters as the only answer to bullying.

But, Chairman Stanislawski responded at the end in an emotional speech, talking about his own daughter’s struggles with bullies in public schools, and his family’s decision to enroll her in a private school, at personal expense for the family. He ended with his hope that all parents would have the ‘right to choose where to send their students with state support.’ He just upped the ante on the conversation to include more vouchers…for any parent. Not one of the speakers had suggested vouchers as a solution.

I left the Study with a strange mix of feelings…rage, and yes, guilt, that students were abused right under the noses of educators who should be protecting them. Pride, as young people bravely stood up and told their stories…and gave us ‘the rest of the story,’ overcoming adversity. Hope at some ideas that could help us become proactive. And, frankly, defeated, that it appeared the Chair’s idea is to take funding public schools desperately need and divert it to more choice, instead of addressing the needs of public schools.

I fear more voucher bills are in our future. But how does that help the vast majority of students in our public schools, many of whom are afraid to go to school? These students are OURS, ours to educate and protect. We need support and tools and resources, and that all costs money. Will new vouchers strip even more money from public schools in their efforts to address bullying?

Maybe the answer is to trust the kids...as then stand for the silent