England revives 'real' school sports

England’s new Tory-led coalition government wants to bring back competitive school sports, reports the Daily Mail.

“Sport – whether you win or lose – teaches young people great lessons for life. It encourages teamwork, dedication and striving to be the best that you can be,” said Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt.

. . . Schools will be expected to host in-house Olympic-style sports days so that children of all abilities have the opportunity to compete and join teams.

Most students don’t compete in sports, even within schools.

In one directive to schools during the last Labour government, schools were encouraged to replace competitive races with “problem-solving” exercises for their sports days.

Teams were also encouraged to perform tasks in rotation rather than compete directly with each other.

England is hosting the 2012 Olympics, which the government hopes will spur interest in sports. National Lottery money will fund the sports initiative.

Competition comes back

Competition — the old-fashioned kind with winners and losers — is making a come back, writes June Kronholz on Education Next.  Despite educators’ qualms, smart kids are signing up for bees, bowls and academic olympiads.

The Scripps National Spelling Bee is using harder and harder words –  Laodicean, Maecenas, menhir, apodyterium, herniorrhaphy in 2009 — because more and more competitors are working harder and harder.

Today’s teachers generally cringe at everything about that development. All those hours spent on one narrow academic focus! All that rote learning! All that stressful competition! And if some children shine on that national stage, what about the self-esteem of every other child whose luster is publicly shown to be not as bright?

Still, the National Spelling Bee and the National Geographic Bee are booming; so is MATHCOUNTS, sponsored by the National Society of Professional Engineers and technology companies.  Then there’s “the National Science Bowl sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, a Bible Bowl, grammar bowls, and an International Brain Bee, where finalists identify the parts and functions of the brain—using human brains.”

Bee contestants tend to be high achievers in everything, Kronholz writes.

They challenge themselves with the toughest courses their schools offer, and still make time for sports, Key Club, Boy Scouts, piano, or the school robotics team. Some claim Rolodex memories; others attribute their success to hard—really hard—work.

But educators dislike competition because they fear many students will see themselves as losers and quit trying.

Susan Brookhart, a former education professor turned consultant on testing and motivation, says competition is good only for the winners.  Competition “creates this idea among students that there are winners and losers, and ‘puts them in their place’ in that universe,” Brookhart added.

That thinking has reshaped teaching over the past two decades. Classroom work is more collaborative and team-based, especially in math and science, where girls in particular are said to have benefited. Tracking and ability grouping have fallen into disfavor, easing the slower-learner stigma. Portfolio assessments are gaining ground. Report cards set out individualized goals.

During the self-esteem movement of the 1990s, “schools dropped honor rolls, the class valedictorian, and assemblies that recognized academic stars, but not, of course, assemblies that recognized football or basketball or golf stars. . . . Everyone got a ‘good job’ sticker, good job or not.”

For top students, there’s little public recognition. The best students usually can find gifted-and-talented programs and accelerated classes, Kronholz writes. But some want more challenge — and a chance to impress elite universities. They love to win, but they’re not crushed by defeat. Competing is “fun,” contestants tell Kronholz.

'Have it your way,' would-be dropouts

Worried about a high dropout rate, Pinellas, Florida schools are emulating Burger King. If traditional school doesn’t work for you, “have it your way.” School leaders haven’t figured out what the options will look like, but they’re very aware of charter school competition, reports the St. Petersburg Times:

Pinellas has three charter schools geared toward at-risk high school students, with two more on the way.

. . . At the new Mavericks High in Largo, students who boost their academic performance and attendance will eventually get to spend more time in a game room playing John Madden football and Tiger Woods golf.

Another charter school, the Florida High School for Accelerated Learning, is scheduled to open next fall in Kenneth City. Its approach is big on flexible scheduling, a self-set pace and technology.

“We think we can do some of the things that they’re doing, and just as well or better,” Chief Academic Officer Cathy Fleeger told the Times.

Schools pay to advertise

Tired of losing students to charter schools, private schools and suburban alternatives, urban districts are hiring marketing consultants and running ads, reports the Wall Street Journal.

Administrators say they are working hard to improve academics — but it can’t hurt to burnish their image as well. 

The are recording radio ads, filming TV infomercials and buying address lists for direct-mail campaigns. Other efforts, by both districts and individual schools, call for catering Mexican dinners for potential students, making sales pitches at churches and hiring branding experts to redesign logos.

“Schools are really getting that they can’t just expect students to show up any more,” said Lisa Relou, who directs marketing efforts for the Denver Public Schools. “They have to go out and recruit.”

Some charter schools also run ads to recruit students — including boasting of higher graduation rates than district-run schools. But KIPP decided that recruitment ads make a school sound “desperate.”
Advertising can backfire if the public decides a district is wasting money on image that could have been spent on substance.

St. Louis district blackballs charters

St. Louis Public Schools is trying to sell unneeded schools — but charter schools need not apply.  The school board has banned sales of buildings to liquor stores, landfills, distilleries, sex shops and charter schools, reports the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Now, as the school board debates closing as many as 29 more buildings in the shrinking city district, and as new charter schools search desperately for space, a swell of anger is rising up against that restriction.

Legislators have readied resolutions in Jefferson City asking the district to remove the ban. Pro-charter and school-choice groups have sent around press releases. Residents worry about the empty buildings that will rot their neighborhoods.

Why ban charters? They’re the competition, says school board member Rick Sullivan.

Via Eduwonk.

Stimulating minds

Spending $1 trillion for highways, bridges and school repairs won’t stimulate the economy in the long run, argues New York Times columnist Tom Friedman. We need to stimulate learning, creating “more Google-ready jobs and Windows-ready and knowledge-ready workers.”

How?

Barack Obama is talking about preparing for global competition by  “investing in the science, research and technology that will lead to new medical breakthroughs, new discoveries and entire new industries.”

But, again, how?

Friedman proposes:

. . . give everyone who is academically eligible and willing a quick $5,000 to go back to school. . . .

.  . .  eliminate federal income taxes on all public schoolteachers so more talented people would choose these careers. I’d also double the salaries of all highly qualified math and science teachers, staple green cards to the diplomas of foreign students who graduate from any U.S. university in math or science — instead of subsidizing their educations and then sending them home — and offer full scholarships to needy students who want to go to a public university or community college for the next four years.

Academically eligible students — and quite a few who aren’t eligible — already go to college in the U.S.  Where we lose potential scientists and innovators is in the K-12 system. There’s no quick fix for that, though it would make sense to pay more to competent math and science teachers — and to other teachers with high-demand skills, such as special ed specialists. Exempting all public teachers from income taxes is a bad idea: We’re all in this together.

I back allowing foreign math and science graduates to stay in the U.S.

It’s also important to ensure that community colleges have the funds to offer  classes to laid-off workers who need to improve their skills.

Eduwonk has more on compensating teachers.