Lost round 1, are we ready for round 2 . . .

I knew I had read it earlier, but this News Tribune article reinforces what I read about our state’s chances for a Race to the Top grant. According to the governor we won’t be in the first round and we must see action by the 2010 legislature to position ourselves for round two. The comments following the article are also very interesting.

Will our legislature, given all the economic issues they face, give this initiative any real consideration? Will they, as the article suggests is needed, stand up to powerful constituent groups meaning WEA. If they do, will it result in change that positions the state for a proposal with some chance of being accepted and funded?

Though I don’t agree with the parameters or process established by this administration, it will be a shame if we do not see any of this revenue support young people and teachers in our state. We should not feel threatened by charters, we should be open to exploring new and creative ways to support teachers, we must find aditional ways to measure progress, we must understand that collaboration will be the only road to successful change that sustains over time, and above all we must find adaptive solutions to the growing list of demands that we face with dwindling resources.

The Education Department knows best . . .

Add this to the interesting information on Race to the Top. I found this link to the article on Eduwonk and urge you to read the post.

In the article the President makes the following statement about state’s that have laws against linking student data to teacher evaluation.

"You cannot ignore facts," Obama said. "That is why any state that makes it unlawful to link student progress to teacher evaluations will have to change its ways."

This followed a similar statement in this New York Times article last week from the Education Secretary.

“Believe it or not,” Mr. Duncan said, “several states, including New York, Wisconsin and California, have laws that create a firewall between students and teacher data. I think that’s simply ridiculous. We need to know what is and is not working and why.”

These appear to be fighting words aimed squarely at teacher unions and specifically at those states that support the union’s beliefs as they relate to this linking. I find it unproductive to take this stand at this time. I agree with the comment from thehurt that the federal government is using funding as a vehicle to influence education decisions at the state and local level. We have always felt this as it relates to special services and Title 1; this opportunity only intensifies the pressure.

It will be difficult for states not to go after this funding opportunity given the current and short term status of public school funding. As Schwarzenegger says in the LA Times article:

"We will seek any reforms or changes to the law deemed necessary, including changes to our data system laws, to ensure California is eligible to compete" for federal funds, Schwarzenegger said in a statement. This seems like a pretty big piece to bite off given the time frame to qualify for these grants. Especially in a state with the problems they have reaching consensus on most issues.

It will not be easy, however, for all states to get the support necessary to submit successful proposals. If the unions don’t support the state’s proposals I find it difficult to believe that the feds would fund it. On the other hand, maybe they are looking at this initiative being the vehicle that results in removing significant impediments to things like charter schools. The unions are certainly perceived as an impediment by many to what some call comprehensive reform. As Scott shared in his comment to my last post, the NEA president is cautiously optimistic that common ground can be found. Good luck, the issues are too fundamental to the union’s core beliefs and there is too little time. I don't see it happening.

I don’t think this one time infusion of money will, on its own, fundamentally change public education. Forcing us to align with the administration’s answers to the public school’s problems as they define them is not the answer. Putting up road blocks in the form of conditions to be met before applying is not the answer. Treating all states and school districts the same is not the answer. Providing us with options and allowing us to demonstrate that we are engaged in comprehensive reform initiatives would have been a more productive approach to take. Allowing us an opportunity to influence their thinking would be a better approach. Coming at us like they have all the answers will not support change that will increase achievement that sustains over time.

We will place ourselves in situations that we believe will support our Classroom 10 work and the vision behind this initiative. I don’t think tying this achievement to teacher evaluation is a necessary component of this work in our school system. If the federal government wants to support an initiative that will have a positive and sustained influence on students being prepared for post high school learning and work they can look to us for guidance. They could support us with funding to create a Classroom 10 certification program where we could support teachers over time to develop the knowledge and skills to create and implement Classroom 10 learning environments. Something like the national certification program only more closely aligned with our system beliefs that would include the salary enhancement upon completion. Now that would be something to get excited about.

It will be interesting to watch this unfold. If New York and California are precluded from even applying because of their laws will there be political pressure placed on the department to change parameters? Thus far, it looks like no, this administrations has its mind made up. Who will get all this money? It looks to me like many states will not meet the requirements and end up with applications that Duncan deems a moon shot. Where will Washington end up in this race?

Our state's proposal - a chance?

I don't know if you have been following the Race to the Top federal grants process, but it is big news and has the promise to bring millions of dollars into our state and local school districts. Our district is involved in at least two collaborative efforts, one with PEI and one with SOL to secure funding to support our curriculum development and Classroom 10 goals. Here is a Washington Post article from last Friday providing information about the goals of the program.

It is a short article by Secretary Duncan with these words about the goals.

The Race to the Top program marks a new federal partnership in education reform with states, districts and unions to accelerate change and boost achievement. Yet the program is also a competition through which states can increase or decrease their odds of winning federal support. For example, states that limit alternative routes to certification for teachers and principals, or cap the number of charter schools, will be at a competitive disadvantage. And states that explicitly prohibit linking data on achievement or student growth to principal and teacher evaluations will be ineligible for reform dollars until they change their laws.

Once again we see the agenda; promoting charter schools and linking student achievement directly to teacher and, somewhat new, principal evaluation. The first round will be for state proposals. There will be another round for districts or collaborative efforts, but as this short paragraph shows the focus is on much of what we heard from this administration during the campaign and to date; charters and achievement data driving evaluations. I wonder how far our state will get demonstrating alignment with these goals? I can't see WEA jumping on board a proposal with these as major components, do you?

In this Seattle Times article the President shares four goals for this $5 billion.

Broadly speaking, the president wants states to do four things he considers to be reforms - toughen academic standards, find better ways to recruit and keep effective teachers, track student performance and have a plan of action to turn around failing schools.

Toughen academic standards can be reworded to mean adopt the new "voluntary" national standards. Track student performance can be reworded to link student achievement to teacher evaluation. Having a plan of action can be reworded to mean do what the charter schools are doing, in other words just look to the KIPP schools for guidance. Our Governor says she is aligned with the federal goals and committed to competing for these grants. I can't find the article, but I read in the Times that our state might not make the timeline for the first round of grants. Think it may have something to do with the major players agreeing on goals?

One last picture from New York, this one with our hosts, Peter Senge and Jamie Cloud. The other three ladies are from our state's delegation.

Draft standards released . . .

A lot has been happening on the voluntary national standards front. I think this is potentially a big deal for us. We have aligned our work with state standards and we are embedding Classroom 10 learning into our units with a focus on our Outcomes and Indicators, habits of mind, and thinking skills. I am concerned what a potential new set of standards will do to this work and the capacity for us to once again adjust to new learning outcomes. We have done this already many times with the multiple revisions to or state standards.

On this post from the Core Knowledge blog there is a link to a draft of the proposed standards. I have not yet reviewed them and will not have the opportunity for at least another week as I prepare for our Board and Administrator retreats that start next Friday. Here are also two other posts from the same blog that continue the debate. They are here and here. The draft standards were officially released today.

I would be interested in your thinking about this possibility now that you can see the draft. As a teacher, how would you respond to a national set of standards in reading and mathematics? As an administrator, what do you see as the positive and negative possibilities of this potential requirement?

Guest Blog - a student perspective on the sustainability/systems thinking conference

What follows is Cort Hammond sharing his thoughts about the conference and what he learned. Cort is the President of the high school's Environmental Club. The idea behind the design comes from Mr. Tucker.

Five Days of Learning

My passion is for the environment. Last school year, I started the Green Team at Tahoma Senior High; we worked to improve on the small recycling program at our school. 20 of my peers shared my goal. With that support, we managed to get recycling bins in every classroom by mid fall of 2008. By late winter of 2009 we were also collecting bottle caps which have to be recycled separately. My principal, Mr. Duty, called me to his office one day and asked me if I wanted to go to New York for the Society for Organizational Learning (SOL) conference. The realization of just how amazing this opportunity was only set in once I got home. The next day, I returned to Mr. Duty’s office and affirmed how eager and glad I was to participate.

On July 12th, we got up at 4:30, went to the airport and 5 hours later we landed at JFK airport; though tired, all of us were in good spirits. Mr. Duty joked about how he got things free in Duty Free shops and Mr. Tucker was quick to say Duty Free is what he calls his summers. We all chuckled and were happy that the teachers were so laid back. On arrival at the Garrison Institute, I was already awed by the beauty of the landscape and of the building. Even at this point, we were not sure exactly what we would be doing at the SOL Conference; we knew that the subject was sustainability and had prepared by reading Hot, Flat, and Crowded and The Necessary Revolution. While I did not enjoy the two books as much as a good novel, they were fascinating. The success stories that I learned about were an inspiration. Furthermore, I learned about systems thinking, an idea that was central to the conference. We walked in the door and went through the registration process. We walked down creaky hallways and opened our old fashioned door latch. The antiquated feel of the whole building was cool. We went to dinner and enjoyed the vegetarian meal of leak and potato soup. We didn’t meet anyone new as we were still getting to know each other. That evening we went on a walk through the forest surrounding the old monastery.

The next day, we got our first look at all of the students and teachers that had come together from across the U.S. We were introduced to Peter Senge, Jamie Cloud, and the numerous other individuals who made the conference possible. I thought it was pretty neat to be part of the first meeting of this kind (students and teachers). We got together and began the first timid and then interesting process of getting to know people from other sites and learning a little about them. That day we were introduced to systems thinking through a simplified simulation of supply and demand. In the simulation, there were four roles: the factory, the distributer, the wholesaler, and the retailer. Each stage of manufacture could not communicate with the others; it had to order whatever number of goods it thought appropriate according to demand. Even though demand stayed relatively constant, production shot up to climb out of a backlog (when orders exceeded inventory). Then suddenly there was no more demand as the massive surplus reached the consumer; everyone was left with a massive inventory. This demonstrated a system where none of the roles could work individually and still emerge successful. This was because the decision to order more to avoid a backlog caused the next stage in production to order even more. The result was sudden overproduction. I thought this game was quite fun to play and showed how the seemingly simple task of forwarding goods along the line to the consumer was more complex and how each stage of any system is influenced by the other. The analogy of an iceberg was particularly effective. The tip of the iceberg stands for the events (incurring a backlog). Then beneath the water, the complexities and connections of the system exist (the lack of communication and runaway production). This whole precept reminded me to try to look at every part of our school and beyond the school to have the greatest impact possible. After this, we had the opportunity of sharing our goals and visions. I was intrigued to hear about the environmental activities of other schools. One school had started a reusable bag program and another had installed a wind turbine. This whole part was exciting, because we were finally talking about specific actions. We concluded with a reflective exercise about our vision. That night for dinner I enjoyed a delicious tofu wrap.

The following day we formed learning circles. I had an excellent group that was full of experience, ideas and diverse backgrounds. Since my focus was on the environment, I was sure to ask all of my group members what their schools were doing that was environmentally oriented. One girl, Michelle, replied that they had nothing, and a teacher described their plastic bag reduction program. She told how their school had bought and sold reusable bags and encouraged students to stop using plastic bags. I was impressed with their program and it certainly reminded me of the first goal of environmentalism: to reduce. After that, we reconvened and talked about reinforcing loops. The most fascinating thing for me was Mr. Senge’s explanation of how the world is like a bath tub where the rate of

water flowing in is greater than the rate of water draining out. The rate at which Carbon Dioxide is put into the air is 8 billion tons per year, while the rate at which the earth absorbs CO2 is only 3 billion tons per year. Or bathtub is filling up and the longer the tap runs the hotter the water gets. This is the perfect explanation for why simply stopping to emit any more CO2 than at the present level is not sufficient. Global Weirding (a term for climate change) is happening and this is why. At lunch, we talked with Mr. Senge to see what ideas he had for the Environmental Club and the Global Academy class. He offered to connect us with Starbucks or Costco to work with them on sustainability projects and suggested that we work with Puget Sound Energy and local corporations. I was glad to hear his advice; next year, I hope we can write letters to local and state-wide businesses, asking for cooperation. An excellent place to start could be with our local Safeway, with the aim of reducing plastic bag consumption. Also, there are plans to build a Fred Meyers next to a Safeway; it would be nice if it was LEED certified. Inspired by our discussion with Mr. Senge, I added to my action plan for next year’s Green Team (for action plan, see below). That afternoon we went into the city. This experience was just as educational; never in my life have I seen such a spectacle of waste, consumerism, and excess as in Times Square. One billboard touted its “green” solar panels, but this one billboard was cancelled out by the hundreds of others around it that were constantly running. This sickening sight is the type of thing that drives me to do what I can to help the environment. I also wondered why there was so much traffic when subways, bus routes, and train tracks crisscrossed the city; we certainly had no problem with transport. We ended the evening with a look at the UN headquarters, a powerful symbol of potential international cooperation; even at night.

On Wednesday, we started off by talking about the progress in our learning circles. Then we departed by bus to Stone Barns Farm. This is an agricultural project that focuses on being as environmentally friendly and sustainable as possible. One point of learning for me was how the farmers rotated the sheep and fowl to ensure that the pasture remained fertile and the soil was not depleted. Also, we were shown how clover was allowed to grow among the crops to provide nitrogen for the soil. In addition, they had an extensive composting system that was interesting to learn about since we hope to implement composting in our school. We went into the city again and returned to Times Square to observe more rampant consumerism in stores like the M&Ms Factory. Does society really need M&M erasers, pencils, and a thousand other collectables? We also got to see ground zero and, for the first time, I actually had a sense of the devastation and I felt my connection grow outside of simply being an American.

On Thursday, we discussed the previous day in our learning circles and had the opportunity to hear more about the other two fieldtrips. Those who went to the school of St. Augustine were introduced to the sustainability issues that the school is facing, including the need to preserve their aging building. They had bee hives on the property which provided honey for the school. The other destination was Fieldston School where they have a green roof that is composed of a garden and scientific tools. One of the teachers from St. Louis said that their roof was long overdue for a replacement and that they would like to build a green roof. It would be neat if we could have a green roof as well; however, it might be more practical to focus on renewable energy at our school. For dinner we were surprised to find meat on the menu and most people were overjoyed and acted like salvation had come at last.

On our last day, Friday the 17th, I ate several delicious blueberry scones for breakfast. Then we met in our learning circles one last time to reflect on the past week. I was most excited about the closing meeting among us Washingtonians. We took turns sharing our visions of how Tahoma needs to change. We talked about how the Environmental Club always needs to revisit why they’re passionate about their cause. For me, this is something important to be reminded of because I had gotten too wrapped up in my list of proposed actions. Still, I made sure to talk about the proposed action plan for this summer and emphasize the importance of Mr. Tucker’s (one of my teachers) idea that when school begins this fall, there should be visible change. These visible changes include recycle bins for the lunchroom and hallways, composting, a meter of the schools energy consumption and posters with the Blue and Gold make Green logo. Before we knew it, we were on our way to the airport and about 8 or 9 hours later we landed in Seattle. To save fuel, I carpooled with Mr. Duty and Mr. Tucker to share with my family the five days of learning and fun. My younger brother, Conor, typed out the last two paragraphs by dictation since I was sick.

New learning and continued amazement . . .

Cort, one of the students will be guest blogging this week about his experience in New York. Unfortunately, he became ill on our return so it will be awhile before we hear from him. I am eager to hear what he has to say because he is one of the critical leaders in the Environmental Club at the high school and his energy and commitment will be necessary as we move into the future.

On Thursday and Friday we had some time as a team to begin thinking about how to move this work into the future. The Global Academy team is committed to a focus on sustainability and to embedding the skills of system thinking into the units that they develop. Clare and Matt have also agreed to be advisors for the club. Terry will also play an important role and shared ideas that he believes can become a part of the school and the community. We have started the discussion to establish goals and have agreed to meeting at least quarterly to monitor our progress and to maintain focus and energy.

As I shared earlier, the Global Academy team had an opportunity to begin planning with Peter. They will be reading parts of his book, The Necessary Revolution and he has agreed to meet with them electronically over the year. There will not be any other high school students in the world with the opportunity this year to learn from one of the leading world experts on system thinking and sustainability business practices.

For me it was a learning and rewarding week. I learned much more about what a comprehensive sustainability curriculum must include. We have started this work aligned with our state’s standards so it will be interesting to see how what I have learned compares to the state’s guidelines and our implementation of these guidelines. I also for the first time have a better understanding of how system thinking can be embedded into our existing work and some guidance from the work done by the Cloud Institute over time. I learned a lot, but left knowing there is much more to learn.

I also have an e-mail from Peter wanting to connect on future planning for the SOL Education Partnership and the work we are doing. It always amazes me when he takes the time to share his thinking and actually asks for our thoughts and support. He will be out of the country next week working with government and business representatives on world sustainability issues. This work, after he volunteered to work a week with students and staff from public and private schools in our country to promote the need for and support changes that influence our work and the role of students in this work. Who would have thought that Tahoma would become an important part of this work?

Gardens on a roof?

We visited the city last night and got back too late for an old man like me to blog so I’ll share a little before I go to this morning’s session. Terry and I started the day with a visit to a middle school in the Bronx, Fieldston School, with two roof top gardens and the others visited a sustainable farm, Stone Barns.

I have read about, but never seen a roof top garden until this visit. I learned a great deal about them as well as the potential for them to have a significant impact on New York’s sewage runoff problem if it were to become a common practice. At Fieldston, one of the roofs is not accessible to students for safety reasons and is the site for a study through Columbia University to learn about the properties of these gardens and to monitor data over time. The second garden is also the site for a Columbia study focused on multiple ground covers and is available to students and teachers for learning. A research assistant and teachers shared with us their work and how they use the roof in their sustainability curriculum.

What was very interesting for me was not only the information about the purpose for these roofs and the potential that they have to influence the atmosphere of New York City, but also the controversy that surrounds them. Though there is still little data over time, there is initial data that demonstrates the capacity of these roofs to influence runoff and building temperature that should promote their use. Here, however, the mayor does not support them as a viable alternative. He and staff instead are promoting white roof cover. This, I believe, is symptomatic of what the sustainability movement must confront. Many are skeptical seeing it as the new “hippie” thing to do. Time will tell if the “science” of this initiative to focus on our earth can overcome the skepticism that many have about the need and the possible solutions. At some time it will become a topic of discussion in our community.

The visit to the city was my first and was wonderful. There is so much to see and we had so little time to see it in. The kids were great; wanting to make sure that I saw Times Square and leading me to all the right subways. We only had one minor glitch when we took an express that went beyond our destination. Michael got us right back on track. We had a great dinner at of all places, a Chinese restaurant. It looked a little different than China, but the food was great and the company couldn’t have been better.