Duncan pushes e-textbooks

The Obama administration wants an e-textbook in every student’s hand by 2017, writes USA Today.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski and Education Secretary Arne Duncan wants states to use textbook funding for digital learning materials and tablet computers. They’ll jawbone companies to lower prices to schools.

Administration officials say Web-connected instructional materials help students learn more efficiently and give teachers real-time information on how well kids understand material. “We spend $7 billion a year on textbooks, and for many students around the country, they’re out of date,” Genachowski says. In five years, he predicts, “we could be spending less as a society on textbooks and getting more for it.”

While up-front costs for tablet computers are high — new iPads start at $499 — he says moving from paper to digital “saves a ton of money” in the long run. “We absolutely want to push the process.”

Core Knowledge blogger Robert Pondiscio said the enthusiasm around educational technology is “magical thinking.”

“I wish there was even 10% as much thought as to what is going to come through these devices as in getting them into kids’ hands,” he says. “It’s not a magic bullet. We need to worry about what is on these tablets while they’re sitting in kids’ laps.”

Karen Cator, the U.S. Department of Education’s technology director, says tablet computers will extend the school day and engage students.

In my school days, I’d go home, finish my homework and read for three hours or so. OK, I was not normal, even among my studious friends. But I don’t think that gee-whiz devices will engage kids who don’t read well. Not for long, anyhow.

On a visit to my mother this week, I picked up a 1945 book on teaching remedial reading that must be left over from her master’s program in education back in the ’50s. (It advocates delaying phonics till second grade, after students have memorized a bunch of sight words.) Among the strategies for motivating struggling readers, the author suggested letting them use a typewriter to write the new words they’ve learned. Kids will be excited by the technology, the professor wrote.

I’m sure that e-books are the wave of the future, but schools should be careful not to spend before they’ve figured out how new learning materials will improve learning.  Do students need an iPad? A Kindle or Nook equivalent? Some new, cheaper device not yet available? Yes, publishers will lower prices to compete for market share, but schools need to make sure they’re not locked into one company’s products or blocked from using free open-source materials.

Stop Sallie Mae’s unemployment penalty

Stop Sallie Mae’s unemployment penalty demands a Change petition.

Federal financial aid is geared to full-time, degree-seeking students, complained Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s audience at Tallahassee Community College. Colleges can’t train 2 million skilled workers without aid for people seeking short-term job training or part-timers who need literacy or English classes to qualify for a job.

Duncan: Pay great teachers $150,000

A “great teacher” should make up to $150,000 a year, said Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show.

“I think young teachers — we should double salaries. A starting teacher should make $60-$65,000 [a year]. A great teacher should be able to make $130, $140-$150,000 [a year]. Pick a number. We have beaten down educators. We have to elevate the profession. We have to strengthen the profession. We have to reward excellence. Great teachers, great principals make a huge difference in our nation’s children. We have to invest in them and yes, need to reward excellence, particularly when great teachers are taking on tough assignments and inner-city schools in rural or remote areas, areas that of critical need like math and science — we have to get much more creative than we have in the past.”

Duncan wants higher base pay and performance pay.

“We” doesn’t include the U.S. Education Department, by the way.  State and local taxpayers foot the bill for teacher salaries.

48% of schools missed progress goals

Forty-eight percent of public schools failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress, according to the Center on Education Policy.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who predicted 82 percent of schools would miss AYP, also failed to reach his target.

Class time isn’t shorter in U.S.

U.S. schoolchildren spend as much time in school as kids in high-scoring countries, concludes a report by the National School Boards Association’s Center for Public Education.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan wants a longer school day and year, notes the Washington Times.

“Right now, children in India … they’re going to school 30, 35 days more than our students,” he said at an education forum in September, explaining one reason he thinks the American education system is falling behind those of global competitors.

“Anybody who thinks we need less time, not more, is part of the problem,” Mr. Duncan said.

Students in India spend more days in school, but fewer hours in class, totaling 800 “instructional hours” at the elementary level. Forty-two states require more class hours, the report found. Texas requres 1,260 hours a year for elementary students.

High-scoring South Korea requires 703 hours for elementary students, though many parents pay for after-school lessons. Hungarian students score at nearly the U.S. level despite requiring only 601 hours.

U.S. high school students average 1,000 hours in class each year.

In Poland, high school students need 595 hours in the classroom, the lowest of all the countries in the study, yet they top U.S. students on the math and science portions of the PISA exams, the most widely used measuring sticks for international comparisons.

Finland, Norway, Australia and other nations also show higher levels of student achievement while requiring less instruction.

Of course, it’s not just the time spent at school, but how it’s used.

 

Federal aid fuels exploding college costs

Education Secretary Arne Duncan is dead wrong on how to control college costs, argues Cato‘s Neal McCluskey.

To a system blackout-drunk on taxpayer money, the Obama administration would deliver even more booze while only whispering about tough love.

A libertarian, McCluskey is the author of How Much Ivory Does This Tower Need?  I love the title.

 

Can college costs be controlled?

Rising college costs are on the agenda: Education Secretary Arne Duncan called for college leaders to “think more creatively and with much greater urgency” about controlling costs.  A House committee hearing focused on controlling college costs. But how?

“Non-traditional” students should “occupy” colleges that ignore their needs, writes a professor.

A good school leaves a few behind

Despite years of high scores without really trying, Oyster River Middle School is trying test prep to meet No Child Left Behind targets, writes Michael Winerip in the New York Times. The school in a prosperous New Hampshire town “needs improvement” because some special ed students aren’t proficient on the state exam, he writes.

In September the school announced a new motto, “Fill the Box.” Students have been told that their best chance for a high score on the state English test is to use all the blank space allotted for the essay. “You have to write as much as you can,” says Jay Richard, the principal. “People have studied these things.”

Actually, writing well works too.

The school also makes sure students get a good night’s sleep and eat “brain food” before the state tests.

In hopes of raising reading scores, Principal Richard, a former special education teacher, has decided to pull special ed students from mainstream classes at times for individual instruction.

Will this be better or just different?

“I believe we can do better,” Mr. Richard said. “We have to. This is the law.”

OK, the principal thinks it’s better. Surely, that’s a good thing.

Under Arne Duncan’s waivers, schools wouldn’t need to focus as much on low-achieving subgroups, Winerip writes. Isn’t that a bad thing? Apparently not.

Winerip’s story shows why No Child Left Behind was necessary, responds Eduwonk. It’s easy to ignore special ed students (the school’s low-income students may be lagging too),  if nobody’s looking.  “What about the poor students or special education students there? Don’t they matter?”

 

Harkin-Enzi advances

The bipartisan Harkin-Enzi bill to rewrite No Child Left Behind (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) made it out of committee with all the Democrats and three Republicans on board.

Credit Arne Duncan’s waivers for motivating the senators to take action, writes Mike Petrilli on Flypaper. The Dems seem willing to vote for anything, he writes. The Republicans, notably Sen. Lamar Alexander, a former U.S. Education secretary, will have lots of clout.

“Civil rights groups and lefty reformers are getting rolled,” he concludes. Federally enforced accountability has lost political support. 

Petrilli thinks Harkin-Enzi is better than NCLB. Like Alexander Russo, I’m not so sure the states will hold schools accountable for educating all students. Duncan said the bill should include accountability, but didn’t fight for it — at least not in public — notes Russo. 

. . .  are they just hoping that this all falls apart on the Senate floor and in the House so that they can do the waiver thing?   

Meanwhile, President Obama’s plan to fund teachers’ (and public safety officers’) jobs died in the Senate when two Democrats and Independent Joe Lieberman sided with Republicans.

Harkin-Enzi: Threat or menace?

No bill at all is better than the revised version of the Harkin-Enzi bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (aka No Child Left Behind), writes Kevin Carey on The Quick and the Ed. The draft version would have required states to “implement some kind of legitimate multiple-measure process for evaluating teacher effectiveness” and ensure that low-income and minority students aren’t “disproportionately taught by ineffective teachers, as identified by the evaluation system.”  That’s gone now, in response to demands by school boards, principals and teachers, notes Anne Hyslop.

The Harkin-Enzi bill to  is a “hodgepodge of half-baked ideas” that should be rejected by progressives and conservatives, writes Mike Petrilli on Flypaper. But he likes the revised version better than the original, calling the equitable distribution of teachers rule “a Fairyland provision.”

(Republicans should) scrap the bill and start over — with Senator Alexander’s proposal as the jumping-off point. It’s a much stronger bill, closer in many ways to the Administration’s own Blueprint, and much more serious about re-calibrating the federal role in education.

While Rick Hess also prefers Sen. Lamar Alexander’s ESEA bills, he sees Harkin-Enzi as a workable bipartisan proposal that limits burdensome federal regulations.  Here’s his opinion on the revisions.

Alexander has endorsed the revised version of Harkin-Enzi, notes Politics K-12.  The National Education Association likes it.  But Education Secretary Arne Duncan wants to require teacher evaluation.

It’s not all bad, writes RiShawn Biddle on Dropout Nation. But it’s mostly bad. Harkin-Enzi, Alexander and Duncan’s waivers all give up on education reform, he argues.

There’s little enthusiasm for Harkin-Enzi in National Journal’s debate. It weakens accountability too much for the reformers and not enough for the No Child haters.

I predict stalemate.