Virtual School Meanderings

May 21, 2013

National Review: School Dollars Should Follow Success, Not Just Enrollment

A neo-liberal perspective on school funding and blended learning…

Lexington Institute

National Review:  May 20, 2013
 Incentivize Actual Learning

School Dollars Should Follow Success, Not Just Enrollment

By Sean Kennedy and Don Soifer

The decision of the Louisiana supreme court to strike down as unconstitutional the funding mechanism of the state’s school-voucher program is a major blow to school-choice supporters, but the biggest problem they face is not the courts. It’s a funding system that pays schools for failure.

The court’s decision rested on the voucher program’s diversion of funds that are supposed to be allotted to public schools on a per-pupil basis. It ruled that while the voucher program itself is legal, the funds for it cannot come from that specific allotment, which is earmarked for public schools only. The state can continue the voucher program if it finds the money elsewhere in the state budget.

Links
More on EducationLink to this Article

Lexington Institute

Contact Us

Click here to join the Lexington Institute’s mailing list.

Louisiana, like most states, funds schools according to enrollment. Federal grants for schools with high-needs populations supplement state funding on the same basis: the more students, the more funding. Despite the widely reported recent progress made by schools in the Louisiana Recovery School District, which comprises most public schools in New Orleans, the policy has utterly failed. Allocations per pupil, adjusted for inflation, have quadrupled over the past 50 years, but outcomes haven’t improved: Scores are flat, and the achievement gaps between racial and economic groups persist. Today, only about a quarter of Louisiana’s fourth-graders are proficient in math, reading, writing, or science, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Instead of being paid for putting warm bodies in seats, schools should be rewarded for student learning. Dollars should follow success.

In Louisiana, per-pupil funding is mandated by the state constitution, which requires amounts to be set according to a formula approved by the legislature. The amounts vary by parish and city school district, depending on local tax revenues, but are allocated per student.

Under this model, the worst schools and the most effective schools in the state receive the same dollar amount per student. Even worse, many state and federal grants send supplemental dollars to the lowest-performing schools. If the schools and students succeed, the funding dries up.

Arizona’s legislature is considering a commonsense change to incentivize success: Pay schools to perform well. The Arizona plan would give school districts “per pupil achievement payments” that reward high scores on the state’s A-F report card. The plan requires that schools be given flexibility in deciding how to spend the state’s allotments, to address specific student needs instead of just paying teachers more under union contracts.

At the same time, measures are needed to hold principals accountable for outcomes. When California’s chronically underperforming Oakland Unified School District implemented principal-autonomy and principal-accountability measures to great success over the past decade, the gap between Oakland’s high-poverty, low-performing schools and its wealthy, successful schools closed dramatically, and student test scores across all race and income categories jumped. It turned out that principals, when given autonomy and held accountable, knew a lot better than did central-office bureaucrats how to spend dollars most effectively.

But changes to improve schools’ environments for learning should go further still. Louisiana should start rewarding schools with more funds when their students demonstrate measurable progress. Loosening seat-time requirements for students would allow them to learn at their own pace, and would allow teachers to target interventions to maximize their effectiveness.

Powerful new instructional models, such as blended learning — which personalizes student learning by allowing targeted remediation and acceleration — are challenging the notion that all students learn best when they are taught the same thing in the same way at the same time. Schools that practice blended learning teach toward subject mastery — students can learn at their own pace, and teachers using data to identify what students know and what they don’t know can respond accordingly.

The nation’s top blended-learning schools, such as those in California’s Rocketship Education and Arizona’s Carpe Diem charter schools, are now among the highest-performing schools in their home states. These schools are establishing new blended-learning campuses in Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Nashville, and Washington, D.C. This model, which specializes in shrinking the achievement gaps affecting poor and minority students, has been adopted by New Orleans’s FirstLine Schools and could be extremely effective across Louisiana.

Formulas for public-school funding fail to reward schools for successfully tailoring learning to every student’s needs. If students can master a year of math in six months with targeted interventions and extra resources, education dollars should follow those students when they are ready to advance. With 74 percent of Louisiana’s fourth-graders unable to achieve basic proficiency in reading, a funding scheme that rewarded a school that improved reading proficiency would incentivize and push adoption of best practices.

The voucher decision, based on a misguided devotion to funding equity, should force school-choice supporters to rethink how all schools are funded. If schools are paid to perform, even private schools will be eligible for vouchers if they demonstrate excellence.

Just as shoppers would not spend their money at a grocery store with the worst selection and highest prices, taxpayers should expect their education dollars to be spent in ways that reward quality and excellence. School budgets should promote actual learning.

The Lexington Institute – 1600 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 900, Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 703.522.5828 – Fax: 703.522.5837

Blended Learning, Teacher Evaluation, and Parent Involvement: Download Spotlights From Education Week

From Saturday’s inbox…

Blended Learning, Teacher Evaluation, and Parent Involvement: Download Spotlights From Education Week — For mobile version click here.

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook
New Spotlights From Education Week

Education Week Spotlights contain essential news and commentary on the big issues. These Spotlights provide the information you need to understand the most talked-about topics.

Download New Spotlights for Free:

Blended Learning and Adaptive Instruction: Take a look at blended learning and adaptive instruction models, mixing face-to-face instruction with online learning.
Teacher Evaluation: Explore the multiple measures being used to evaluate teacher performance and see why researchers urge caution in using ‘value added’ evaluations.
Parent and Community Involvement: Make parent groups a part of the district decisionmaking process and increase community engagement with your school.

Other Spotlights Available for Free Download:

Looking for other topics? Check out Education Week‘s full series of Spotlights.

Each Spotlight is delivered in an easy-to-read, easy-to-use digital format, with numerous in-depth articles in one convenient PDF file.

Share these free Spotlight downloads on Facebook and Twitter.


This message was intended for mkbarbour@gmail.com. You are receiving this e-mail because you are currently registered on edweek.org or teachermagazine.org.

Editorial Projects in Education, Inc., 6935 Arlington Road, Suite 100, Bethesda, MD 20814. EPE is the publisher of Education Week, Digital Directions, Teacher Professional Development Sourcebook, edweek.org, teachermagazine.org, DigitalDirections.org and TopSchoolJobs.org. Copyright © 2013 Editorial Projects in Education.

May 10, 2013

Lexington Institute: School Tech Plan Unlikely to Help Blended Learning

From Thursday’s inbox…

Lexington<br /><br />
Institute” src=”http://lexington.server278.com/images/www/banner_lexington.jpg” width=”600″ height=”82″ border=”0″ /></a></p>
<table width= Thursday, May 09, 2013

School Tech Plan Unlikely to Help Blended Learning

By Sean Kennedy

Over the past decade, the United States has spent upwards of $100 billion on K-12 classroom technology to no discernible effect. The reason is clear: most education technology in use in K-12 classrooms is not integrated into core instruction, and thus offers limited educational value.

This is largely the story with Congressman George Miller’s (D-CA) “Transforming Education Through Technology Act of 2013” (TETTA), which aims to improve the use of technology in K-12 schools. The attractively-named proposal seeks to make “learning more student-centered [and] … lower costs and increase efficiency and productivity” for K-12 students. Through a series of competitive grants to states, school districts and schools themselves, the legislation hopes to spur innovation and improve the collection of data.

Links
More on EducationLink to this Article

Lexington Institute

Contact Us

Click here to join the Lexington Institute’s mailing list.

Education technology certainly has the potential to transform education when it is fully integrated into an instructional model designed to maximize its effectiveness. A good example is the timely data feedback loops that characterize high quality blended learning. These data feedback loops allow teachers to digitally differentiate or individualize student learning paths, using real-time and actionable student data via online tools and assessments. Educational technology tools can both deliver content and assess student progress on that content. That data aids teachers who can then deliver both remediation and enrichment as needed to each pupil.A primary concern with Miller’s TETTA is that the plan defines a range of allowable uses for the ‘digital learning’ grant dollard far too broadly. Eleven separate categories are defined that encompass everything from “mobile and wireless technologies” to the practice of “hybrid or blended learning.”

This broad definition of allowable use could actually be counterproductive for the growth of blended learning, by allowing schools and districts to acquire computer hardware and software without discernible metrics for outcomes. Schools are already at risk of falling into what Carrie Douglass of the Cities for Entrepreneurship in Education (CEE) Trust calls the ‘tech-rich trap’ where schools are “transferring traditional practices to a new medium as a paper essay becomes a word document…Instead, they need to change their instructional practices.”

Miller’s plan describes substantial research showing that effective data usage improves learning outcomes and drives achievement. When effectively implemented, data-driven strategies help to close the achievement gaps and enhance both the breadth and depth of student learning.

The experience of the nation’s top blended learning charter schools, like California’s Rocketship or Arizona’s and Indiana’s Carpe Diem, is indicative of the transformational potential of blended learning’s feedback loops. In 2004, prior to the implementation of a blended learning program, only about 45% of Carpe Diem’s students scored proficient or advanced on state assessments. After full implementation, Carpe Diem consistently ranks as a top school statewide with well over 90% of the student body scoring proficient or advanced in both reading and math on state exams.

In lieu of subsidizing the purchase of more Smartboards and iPads, whose instructional benefits are largely undefined, a better plan would provide targeted support for high-quality blended learning programs. These should be data-driven instructional plans that use technology to collect and analyze student data more quickly and integrate it regularly into instruction. Such a program would improve the quality of teaching, since real-time and actionable data allows teachers to focus on the specific needs of their students in a timely and accurate fashion.


The Lexington Institute – 1600 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 900, Arlington, VA 22209
Phone:
703.522.5828 – Fax: 703.522.5837

April 18, 2013

Webinar: Case Study – Blended Learning Boosts Student Achievement, Stretches Tight Budget

From yesterday’s inbox…

K12 for Schools and Districts
purple strip

Case Study: Blended Learning Boosts Student Achievement, Stretches Tight Budget

Join Us for a Webinar on Thursday, April 18, 2:00 PM EDT

You are invited to attend our webinar featuring Innovation Leader/Assistant Superintendent Kim McClelland and Falcon Virtual Academy principal David Knoche, on Thursday, April 18, 2013, at 2:00 PM EDT. During this webinar, you will learn how Falcon Virtual Academy dramatically increased the level of student engagement and academic outcomes. Through the successful implementation of blended learning, Falcon is individualizing learning for each student.

Kim McClelland and David Knoche will discuss the challenges that District 49 was facing and how the implementation of blended learning led to student and district success. They will take you on a virtual tour of the facility and explain how the online curriculum is engaging students in new and innovative ways.

Falcon Virtual Academy:

Falcon Virtual AcademyFalcon Virtual Academy, a brand new, state-of-the–art facility designed to engage a wide variety of student populations, recently opened in Colorado Springs, CO. A classic example how blended learning offers both the technology to allow students to learn at their own pace as well as the face-to-face instruction that students are accustomed to, Falcon Virtual has demonstrated success, with an 89.5% graduation rate and a dropout rate of less than 2%. At the core of Falcon Virtual is the award-winning K¹² online curriculum, which incorporates extensive research and usability testing to effectively present instruction online.

Join us on April 18th to learn how blended learning can boost student achievement.

Register now for our webinar.

REGISTER TODAY!
DATE:
Thursday April 18, 2013TIME:
2:00 PM EDT

Presenters:
Kim McClelland, Falcon Virtual Academy
Innovation Leader/Assistant Superintendent

David Knocke, Falcon Virtual Academy
Principal

Register

Copyright © 2013 K12 Inc. All rights reserved. K¹² is a registered trademark of K12 Inc. The K¹² logo and other marks
referenced herein are trademarks of K12 Inc., and other marks are owned by third parties.

April 16, 2013

Evaluating Tech and Curricula for Effective Blended Learning

Also from yesterday’s inbox, some news from the neo-liberals…

Please add us to your address book to ensure our emails reach your inbox.
Content Provided by:

Blended Learning & Your SchoolJoin Tom Vander Ark as he guides you through the steps to setting up blended learning in your school. Learn what questions to ask when evaluating technology and curriculum solutions and the pitfalls to avoid when developing blended learning for the elementary grades.

Guest:

Tom Vander Ark, CEO, GettingSmart.com

This webinar will be moderated by Tim Hudson, Ph. D., director of curriculum design, DreamBox Learning.

Register now for this free live webinar.

Webinar Date: Thursday, April 25, 2 to 3 p.m. ET

Can’t attend? All Education Week webinars are archived and accessible “on demand” for up to four months after the original live-streaming date.


This message was intended for [mkbarbour@gmail.com]. You are receiving this e-mail because you are currently registered on edweek.org or teachermagazine.org.

Editorial Projects in Education, Inc., 6935 Arlington Road, Suite 100, Bethesda, MD 20814. EPE is the publisher of Education Week, Digital Directions, Teacher Professional Development Sourcebook, edweek.org, teachermagazine.org, DigitalDirections.org, and TopSchoolJobs.org. Copyright © 2013 Editorial Projects in Education.

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,052 other followers