ML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
s how to hold firm to the
ambitious recommendations in the draft plan, even in the face of
considerable political pressure to water them down. The focus of the
Student Learning Working Group education policies was on learners and
learning.
Note: Postings on today's topic that appeared on the Web site by 8:00 PM
Pacific time are included in this summary.
What is the school environment needed for a quality education? Does
this apply equally to K-12 and postsecondary education? Is the statement
in the draft Master Plan sufficient?
- The Plan describes a quality education environment in terms of
qualified and inspiring teachers; a rigorous curriculum; participation
in California's public universities; current textbooks, technology and
instructional materials; learning support services; quality
administrators; an educational culture that is inviting, safe, and
places a high value on student achievement and teaching excellence; and
a safe, well-maintained physical plant.
- Panelist Vasconcellos encouraged discussants to bear in mind that
children arrive in this world "wired for learning". Participants
underscored their belief that, rather than stuff children's heads with
information, we need to develop their skills to seek out and critically
evaluate information.
- Many participants debated the issue of quality education: to value the
amount of knowledge a student possesses or the student's ability to
think through and resolve problems.
- Participants expressed opinions about multiple intelligences and
learning styles, students' ability to construct knowledge from their own
experiences, students' innate instinct for learning, the importance of
family involvement, academic success of home-schooled children.
- Concerns about the costs of school reform and "un-funded mandates"
were noted.
- Other topics discussed in some detail were: the need for qualified,
certified teachers; hiring standards; professional development; testing;
effective use tested teaching strategies; needs of culturally and
linguistically diverse students; student-counselor ratio; special needs
students; class size; the school calendar (length of school day and
year); shared parent-child learning; alternative learning;
mandatory/optional kindergarten; full-day kindergarten; kindergarten
readiness; role models and mentors who possess positive human factor
characteristics; science curriculum; norm-referenced tests.
- Panelist James noted that setting the standards and defining the
quality for K-12 education is the shared province of the K-12 system and
higher education.
- The need to review the research and then plan education programs based
real information and needs at each of the child's development levels was
expressed.
- Important aspects of a positive learning environment relate to school
culture (e.g., positive teacher/student relationships, absence of fear).
Proposed: schools should help students keep their options open by
maintaining common programs and expectations for all. Do you agree or
disagree? Should there be an "opt out" provision? How can the "rigorous
and challenging" curriculum in the draft Plan simultaneously meet the
needs of both students who plan to enter the workforce directly and
students who plan to enroll in a college or university? How can
vocational/career preparation best be integrated into a challenging curriculum?
- Although most students have two options at high school
graduation--work or college--for some this is not a genuine choice
because of unfortunate course choices. To keep options open, the Plan
says schools must offer programs that provide students an opportunity to
qualify for admission to California's public postsecondary institutions
and, simultaneously, to qualify for a job in the workforce.
- The plan calls for developing "Opportunity to Learn Standards" that
specify what government agencies must provide for all schools:
educational essentials (i.e., qualified teachers, curriculum aligned
with the state's standards, enough texts and materials, clean and safe
learning environments etc.).
- The master plan also restructures the accountability system to make
the adults answerable to children and communities. The independently
elected state superintendent would become the accountability watchdog,
providing the public with the information it needs to hold adults accountable.
- Participants discussed the benefits and pitfalls of a "single
curriculum". Panelist Oakes remarked that the question was about not
limiting students' choices or chances after high school. Some expressed
concern about how a "rigorous and challenging", "single curriculum"
would leave out the needs of students who are not entering college or
university immediately after high school. These students attempting to
enter the "workforce" learn quickly that better jobs demand skills not
taught in high school or in higher education, thus they are left to
compete for unskilled jobs.
- One participant noted that it is idealistic to assume that one
curriculum will serve everyone. We don't want a public education system
that keeps students who desire advanced content from having access to
it.
- Participants raised other subjects for consideration: teacher
shortages, compensation costs, options to "opt out" and "opt back in",
self-paced and individualized programs, need for counselors, different
learning modalities, student-driven orientation, adult education, ending
the status quo, education in the juvenile detention system and
correctional system, learning support at key transition points in the
education process.
- Participants indicated an interest in options and funding for both
college prep courses and technical and vocational courses.
- It is important that K-12 curriculum be set in conjunction with post
secondary education, but not by it.
How can an assessment system help target resources to the students
who need them most? Will the recommendations in the Plan help to meet
California's expectations for student achievement?
- The draft Plan asserts that the state should monitor all levels of the
educational system (student, education personnel, school, district,
state education agencies, legislature, and governor), using indicators
that measure the effectiveness of each level (PreK-16) in meeting its
responsibilities. This should enable the public to "hold policymakers
and governing bodies accountable for providing the commitment, policy
mechanisms, resources, and conditions necessary to a high-quality system
of education, as well as to hold schools, educators, and students
accountable for the outcomes that result."
- Information is needed about all schools, not just those that are
low-performing. We need to address assessments that target areas for
remediation and learning
- The assessment system must be truly diagnostic, rather than judgmental.
- We need to find various ways to measure students, teachers, and
administrators. Accountability implies something is going to happen if
they don't meet the goal.
- We need to teach kids to think, not take tests. Accountability for
this should be measured in a multiple of ways, not just by a test.
While this summary contains the highlights from participants' comments,
far more comprehensive information may be found in the individual
postings.
Background summaries, daily topics, questions and background information
are available from the
Agenda
page.
Wednesday, June 5th will focus on Emerging Modes.
I welcome your comments on the summaries.
Sally Hedman
Reporter