Monthly Archives: April 2015

Reconciling Baltimore and the Desire for Diverse Schools

Leave a reply

baltimore

Over the past few years, socioeconomic integration has been gaining support as a key method of school improvement.

I’m very supportive of this vision, but I think it’s important to recognize its current limits.

Recently, I had a conversation with Chris Gibbons where he raised an important point on this issue. He noted that, in cities with deep concentrations of poverty, socioeconomic diverse schools will generally require students to attend schools outside of their neighborhoods.

Chris is right: there are not a lot of wealthy families that will bus their children into economically depressed neighborhoods.

Additionally, there may also be a limited supply of families who will voluntarily send their children to diverse schools, regardless of the location. This will make it difficult to achieve socioeconomic diversity at scale.

The events in Baltimore, for me, served as a stark reminder of the real limits of the integration strategy. Unfortunately, I do not think that large numbers of middle and upper income families will send their children to schools into the most economically depressed neighborhoods of the city, nor do I suspect that enough Baltimore families will voluntarily (by school choice or via enacting enrollment policies) integrate all the public schools in the city, regardless of school location.

Of course, I might be wrong. But the lack of integration in most urban cities offers at least some evidence that achieving integration at scale will be difficult to accomplish in the near term.

This is why I think we need to maintain a strong focus on opening excellent schools in neighborhoods with high poverty rates.

Even if the schools are not diverse, they can still be excellent.

Additionally, we should significantly expand choice so that, to the extent the government fails to provide excellent schools in any given neighborhood, families can still access the schools that they deserve.

Hopefully, over time, integration will increase.

But we can’t stop opening up great schools in high-poverty neighborhoods while we wait for this integration to occur.

As it happens, most leaders of diverse schools that I talk to agree with the above. The most vocal integrationists, however, insinuate that the effort to build more high-poverty schools is off the mark.

This, I think, is a mistake.

I don’t in any way mean to argue that excellent high-poverty schools will solve all of the complex issues that lead to severe social injustice. Rather, I just think that, done right, they can be a part of the solution.

Lastly, for a powerful read on Baltimore that touches on some of these themes, see Derrell Bradford’s essay.

Sentences to Ponder: MATCH Beyond; 8 billion; 1990 NFL draft; USA; Non-attachment; Solar

Leave a reply

ponder

1. MATCH Beyond

“The magic is in the mix. The degree is relatively low cost—tuition and fees will be $5,000 per year, which can be covered by the Pell Grant. College for America’s degree is both competency-based, which allows students to work at their own pace—critical for students from low-income households who need to balance their studies with part-time jobs and other obligations—and tailored to the job market.”

2. You have $8 billion. What do you do? 

“Its six full-time staffers have taken on the unenviable task of ranking every plausible way to make the world a much better place, and figuring out how much money to commit to the winners. It’s the biggest test yet of GiveWell’s heavily empirical approach to picking charities. If it works, it could change the face of philanthropy.”

3. The financial lives of 1990 NFL draft picks

“Webb owns Environmental Machines & Services, which operates and rebuilds the heavy machinery that cleans drinking water and the runoff produced by chemical and mining companies. Compared with the careers in coaching, broadcasting and sales that many former players pursue, it is an obscure occupation. But Webb was not a typical N.F.L. player. He had majored in industrial distribution, a mix of marketing and engineering, while at Texas A&M.”

4. Inequality in social outcomes

“What’s most shocking about these statistics is not how unhealthy they show Americans to be, compared with citizens of countries that spend much less on health care and have much less sophisticated medical technology. What is most perplexing is how stunningly fast the United States has lost ground.”

5. Non-attachment vs. detachment

“While many people suggest that detachment is the right approach to stress and anxiety, and others feel that it’s the path to enlightenment, it doesn’t work in my case. Now, I’m defining the phrase, so for some detachment might be an awesome way to deal with things, but for me it falls in the category of ‘indifference’ and ‘disengagement” which I apply to things I don’t care about, but doesn’t work for things I am engaged, interested, or involved in.”

6. Solar is inevitable?

“Will solar PV provide enough energy? Right now, you couldn’t power a city like New York fully on solar PV even if you covered every square inch of it with panels. The question is whether that will still be true in 30 or 50 years. What efficiencies and innovations might be unlocked when solar cells and energy storage become more efficient and ubiquitous?”

Is Big Good or is Big Bad? What Does this Mean for Education?

Leave a reply

big company

This from Arnold Kling:

The notion of large, efficient organization is an oxymoron. If you think that large corporations have overwhelming advantages, then you have explained why IBM still dominates the computer industry, while Microsoft and Apple never really got amounted to much of anything. I like to say that if you are afraid of large corporations then you have never worked for one.

I used to believe that big companies were clearly good because if they weren’t good they’d be out of business.

I’m starting to question this belief.

Another story is that big companies get big because they have a few good ideas (that make a ton of money) and then they spend the rest of their days wasting money until a start-up takes them over.

Or, at the very least, they spend the rest of their days acquiring start-ups to prevent from being taken over (see Facebook).

I’m sure others have studied this issue deeply, and I haven’t spent time with the research. So consider this just off the cuff musings. Clearly, some big companies have managed to stay relevant for a long time.

But, if there’s some truth to the idea, what does it mean for large charter networks?

What does it mean for large school districts?

Sentences to Ponder: College (pay if you pass), College (for the masses), College (for the barista)

1 Reply

ponder

1. College: pay if you pass the course

“In the new Global Freshman Academy, each credit will cost $200, but students will not have to pay until they pass the courses, which will be offered on the edX platform as MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses… ‘Leave your G.P.A., your SATs, your recommendations at home,’ said Anant Agarwal, the chief executive of edX. ‘If you have the will to learn, just bring your Internet connection and yourself, and you can get a year of college credit.'”

2. College: for the masses

“Yet the new research is a reminder that the country also underinvests in enrolling students in four-year colleges — and making sure they graduate. Millions of people with the ability to earn a bachelor’s degree are not doing so, and many would benefit greatly from it.”

3. College: for the barista

“The most revolutionary part of the program had nothing to do with tuition and got far less media attention. In their announcement, Starbucks and Arizona State also committed themselves to providing all enrolled employees with individualized guidance—the kind of thing affluent American parents and elite universities provide for their students as a matter of course. Starbucks students would each be assigned an enrollment counselor, a financial-aid adviser, an academic adviser, and a ‘success coach’—a veritable pit crew of helpers. Like a growing number of innovative colleges around the country, Starbucks and Arizona State were promising to prioritize the needs of real-life students over the traditions of academia.”

The Forest and the Trees: Performance Management Addition

Leave a reply

forest

Over at Valerie Strauss’ Washington Post Blog, William Doyle penned a piece arguing that “corporate reform” is an insult to corporations.

William’s intention, I believe, is to demonstrate that public schools would be better off without the reforms which he opposes, including: common core standards and assessments, multiple choice assessments, and test score based teacher evaluations.

___

As a counterpoint to these reform efforts, Williams details how Microsoft has stopped force ranking its employees.

His point is that corporations such as Microsoft are moving away from the type of human capital reforms that are being implemented in public education.

This argument seems to be missing the forest for the trees.

The “trees” here are how one corporation is overhauling its human capital system.

The “forest” is that the company is doing this because it exists in a competitive landscape. William quotes from an article:

The internal change mirrors the shift CEO Satya Nadella is working to effect externally, charming and collaborating with startups and venture-capital firms so that Microsoft doesn’t get left behind.

The point is this: there is no perfect evaluation system; whatever is the best system today will likely not be the best system in perpetuity; by having organizations compete against each for talent, the best systems will emerge.

__

Charter school districts, such as exists in New Orleans, require schools to compete for talent. How are they responding? You can read about that in this Slate piece. The piece also details the efforts of YES Prep:

The network announced earlier this month a series of initiatives to improve retention, including across-the-board pay raises. In addition, more seasoned teachers will have a personal budget to spend on professional development, and more input on how their job evaluations will work. The network has also cut back on school hours and mandatory after-school activities.

Doug Lemov also recently wrote about the connection between school choice and teacher wellbeing:

In short, more choice would likely lead to higher teacher satisfaction—who wants to spend their career at odds with the organization they work for or trying to hide from the training it offers?

__

William’s bio indicates that we was just selected as 2015-2016 Fulbright Scholar to study global education best practices, and that he previously he managed budgets totaling over $200 million for public U.S. media companies, including HBO.

I hope that William’s Fulbright experience will allow him to study education systems, such as New Orleans, that harness competitive principals for social aims.

The point is not that schools in these systems necessarily have the best human capital systems.

The idea is that, over time, they are more likely too than schools in traditional systems.

In a city where only one organization operates public schools, there is only way to evaluate talent, and there’s only one place for educators to work.

This is not a recipe for success.

Why is this Argument Against Charter Schools so Sticky?

3 Replies

sticky

One of the most common arguments I hear against expanding charter school goes something like this: “charter schools were meant to be laboratories of innovation, but now they’re taking over public schools.”

My response generally goes something like this: “if something is working for poor and minority students, why wouldn’t you want to expand it?”

My response aside, it’s worth considering why this argument against charter schools is so sticky.

Some guesses:

Status Quo Bias: People react negatively to major changes; this seems especially true for public schooling.

Union Support: If you view teachers unions as a major positive force in society, you might be ok with charters serving 10% of students (as a method for increasing innovation), but you might be worried that significantly increasing charter schools would take too big of a toll on union membership.

Inequity: If you believe that charters skim for the highest performing students, you might be worried that increasing charter market share would also increase inequitable practices (of course, if charters hit 100% market share, it would be impossible for them to skim).

Anything else I’m missing?

My guess is that, for your average person, status quo bias is the main rationale.

For people more familiar with education, union membership and inequity are also major reasons.

Moving forward, I may try to proactively raise this issue in my speeches and writings, as it is an argument that generally arises very early in discussion.

On Meditation: Increasing Wellbeing or Internalizing Existential Truths?

2 Replies

meditation

I recently read Sam Harris’s .

I found the book fascinating, both in terms of getting insight into the author’s journey, as well as its coverage of meditation.

At various points in my life, I’ve been drawn to Buddhism generally and meditation specifically.

After reading the book, I was left wondering about an issue that I continue to struggle with.

The question is this: should one approach meditation as a way to increase well being or as a way to internalize existential truths.

Research demonstrates (and my personal experience affirms) that meditation can increase mental wellbeing.

This in and of itself is a reason to meditate.

Another reason is this: meditation can be a way of coming to a realization that the self is an illusion, and that most suffering arises from mistaking this illusion to be real.

This, from what I understand, is a core tenet of Buddhism.

It is also aligns with my belief that most strong version of free will are incorrect.

Of course, these two reasons to meditate need not be mutually exclusive.

But, personally, I am unsure that the second reason to meditate is tied to an attainable goal.

I believe that we can increase our mental wellbeing.

But I’m unsure if we can ever consistently internalize the illusion of the self.

At moments, we may be able to perceive this truth, but it is hard to function in daily life with this truth at the forefront.

Legend has it that the Buddha (and others) have achieved this state.

But unlike other foundational religious beliefs (such as Jesus rising from the dead), there is no physical way to prove the state of someone’s internal mental existence.

With our current knowledge base, we may never know if it’s truly possible to extinguish the sense of self for a continuous period of time.

Personally, I’m skeptical that it is possible. I think that evolution either directly (the sense of self provides survival advantages) or indirectly (intelligence needed for survival produces sense of self as a side effect) forces us to maintain a sense of self.

Of course, I may be wrong about any of this: about meditation, about free will, about what’s mentally attainable.

I don’t know the answer.

But when I think about mediation, this is what I think about.