PIE: Partnership For Innovation in Education

The Queen City’s X Factor

Posted by P.I.E. | September 30, 2010

Daniel Hurley, Director of Leadership Cincinnati

At the 2009 Leadership Exchange, Sandra Pianalto, the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, reported the results of studies conducted by her staff about the factors that drive metropolitan success.  Those studies identified two factors that will separate successful and failing metro regions in the future. The first is a commitment to high quality education. The second is the embrace of a “culture of innovation.”

If those conclusions are correct, greater Cincinnati faces real challenges. Over the course of decades, we have developed a self image as a “conservative” community.  Because of the partisan political overtones of that term, I prefer the term “cautious.”  Examples of our cautiousness are legion, but what has been forgotten is that for over a century Cincinnati had a reputation as an aggressive urban competitor characterized by a spirit of innovation, risk taking and flexibility. By 1850, Cincinnati became the third largest manufacturing center in the nation. When we were cut off from our most important markets in the aftermath of the Civil War, the City government used public dollars to build the Cincinnati Southern Railroad, which remains the only municipally-owned railroad in the country.

When the boat building industry declined after 1870, the accumulated capital and skilled workforce was redeployed and transformed Cincinnati into the single most important machine tool center in the world. For over half a century Cincinnati Machine Tool (Milacron) emblazoned the word “Cincinnati” on hundreds of thousands of machines that were shipped around the world.

The change came in the period from 1880 to 1940 when new industries drew immigrants, with their fresh ideas and willingness to take risks, to places like Cleveland Chicago and Detroit.  At the same time Cincinnati embraced its homogeneity and settled into a comfortable pattern.

The good news is that innovation flourishes in many spots in contemporary Cincinnati—in the laboratories at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, in the research labs at the University of Cincinnati and at P&G, in the marketing studios of LPK, Landor and Dunnhumby and in dozens of medium sized and start up companies across the region. The challenge is to move that spirit of innovation and risk taking beyond the labs and studios into the public life of the region, including education and schooling.

The new report released by Agenda 360 and Vision 2010, “Our Region by the Numbers,” and the accompanying website makes it clear that when we compare ourselves to 11 other metropolitan regions, we are in a crisis. Either we learn to foster a culture of innovation—in our businesses, our public affairs and our classrooms—or we are destined to continue the long slide to non-competitiveness.

About the Author

Daniel Hurley is the Director of Leadership Cincinnati, a 34 year old program sponsored by the Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber of Commerce that is recognized as the premier leadership development program in the greater Cincinnati region. He is also a reporter for WKRC TV as well as host and executive producer for Local 12 Newsmakers.

The “I” Word: Education’s Sexiest Term

Posted by P.I.E. | September 28, 2010

Mary Welsh Schlueter, PIE Founder and Chief Executive

I glanced at the cover of the Harvard Business School Alumni Bulletin (September 2010, “Dean Nitin Nohria Sees Innovation as Future…”) and noticed the newest HBS Dean proclaiming the school must reclaim its innovation roots to successfully compete in the business and education sectors.  My answer:  Join the crowd.   It seems just about everyone thinks innovation will save their industry, attract customers, and educate children beyond America’s global competitors.

With President Obama, Cincinnati Bell CEO Jack Cassidy, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, and New York City Education Chancellor Joel Klein recently touting “innovation” as their savior to creating new opportunities, one might ask how the word – by its very utterance – will deliver such results.

The hard truth:  Innovation can’t save the world.   Thoughtful and strategic implementation of change-based initiatives offers greater opportunity AND favorable newsprint.   Simply, using the word “innovation” as a sound bite does little for anyone’s bottom line and jades the listening public.  Instead, providing concrete action, implementing known success strategies, and incenting behavioral change will emerge as the newest “sexy” among education and business stakeholders.

We had a glance of such action last week, as members of the Cincinnati Public Schools Board of Education visited several NYC charter schools and declared their need to see “what was different” about those schools.  Was it a good photo opportunity, or a true interest in pulling the urban school district into a more achievement-oriented mindset?  Time will tell.

Most educational innovators look for achievement goals paralleling the efforts of America’s global educational partners.  Right now, it’s no mistake kids from countries like Vietnam and India can recite the U.S. Bill of Rights quicker than American-born children.  Overseas, delivering educational excellence signals opportunity.  Why else would notable Ivy League educational institutions cite statistics with ever increasing admission numbers of foreign applicants?

Everyone wins when kids are taught at the highest levels of their capability:  regional businesses draw from local talent, citizens attain higher living standards, and tax revenues rise with increasing, value-added employment.

But don’t expect the “I” word to garner long-term credibility without seeing some history of its implementation and results.   Earn the “I” buzz by offering concrete and scalable solutions to educational achievement, and you’ll have just about everyone’s attention…. including mine.

Kids Before Politics

Posted by P.I.E. | September 24, 2010

Jeff Berding, Cincinnati City Council Member

I was proud to hear Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS) recently became the first large city school district in Ohio to achieve the state rating “effective.” This is good news.  But much more has to be accomplished to ensure every child receives a high-quality education. To continue making progress, CPS must focus on the one thing that matters most: improving student achievement.

A recent newspaper column written by dozens of business and community leaders insisted achievement goals begin with CPS and the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers (CFT) agreeing, as a part of their contract negotiations, that teacher effectiveness should guide staffing, professional development and compensation decisions.  As a City Council Member, I fully agree with such suggestions.   I believe student achievement should be the dominant factor in assessing teacher effectiveness.  In addition, providing schedule and curriculum flexibility for turnaround schools is essential to moving CPS forward.

These educational reforms – specific to Cincinnati — were identified in a report conducted by The New Teacher Project and were aligned with the Race to the Top $400 million federal funding grant program recently awarded to Ohio. CPS could have received almost $13 million of the available funds ($4.35B) if the CFT contract included key policy changes.  For example, Washington D.C. School District, Colorado and Tennessee require satisfying specific academic achievement rates, affecting 50% of a teacher’s total evaluation.

The contract should also include systems that reward and retain highly effective teachers while also helping struggling teachers to improve.  For those teachers unwilling or unable to improve, there must be a streamlined process for an efficient exit from the district. In my opinion, student achievement matters far more than teacher seniority.

CPS received the “effective” rating partly because of the Elementary Initiative which turned around the district’s 16 worst-performing elementary schools.  Thirteen of the 16 schools showed improvement this year, and seven moved up one or more categories.  This occurred because CPS added 2 weeks of school instruction and trained principals and teachers on data-driven programs measuring weekly and quarterly individualized progress of students. This year, because of contract restrictions, CPS had to abandon an early start to the school year. These unacceptable restrictions in the contract must be addressed to allow administrators, principals and teachers to create innovative programs aimed to increase student achievement.

CPS must continue to improve achievement for all students. This will require educational reform.  The final agreement between CPS and CFT must reflect “transformational change” –  anything less is unacceptable.   Please join me in demanding such accountability from Cincinnati Public Schools and the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers.

Editorial Notes: Maverick Berding

Posted by P.I.E. | September 23, 2010

Mary Welsh Schlueter, PIE Founder and Chief Executive

I first met Jeff Berding, Cincinnati City Council member, at a panel forum discussing ways elected officials can partner with education organizations and economic development agencies.   Everyone agreed more collaborative partnerships were necessary to heighten the benefits of a healthy education infrastructure.  However, other elected officials sitting at the table differed in goals and implementation.  Yes, everyone agreed education was “a good thing”, but authentic commitment was best exemplified by working the details.

Jeff is a “detail” kind of guy.  He studies what is working in neighboring cities, and suggests innovative options.  Of course, not everyone likes his independent thinking, but his first priority lies with serving Cincinnati’s residents and corporate citizens.  And Jeff has a young family, just like mine.  We both have a parental and civic responsibility to create the best learning and teaching environment for education stakeholders – especially children — across southwestern Oho.

During the 2009 election cycle, I witnessed Jeff at political forums and “meet the candidate” nights, declare repeatedly, “people before politics.”  He truly believes working together we can create better opportunities for Ohio’s school children.  If it takes a village to raise a child, it certainly requires the experiences of many school districts, educators, political leaders, and parents to effect education reform.  This too is evident in Jeff’s efforts as a City Council member.

In his upcoming P.I.E. article, Jeff examines the push-pull relationship between the teacher’s union, education administrators, business executives and government leaders concerned about Ohio’s education infrastructure.  There are no easy answers, but he demands accountability among the stakeholders with the greatest power to influence change.

Superman vs. Super Reform

Posted by P.I.E. | September 22, 2010

Bill Sims, President and CEO of the Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools

The title of the soon-to-be-released movie about education reform in America, Waiting for Superman, reminds us of the fierce urgency of educational reform. Of the top 30 developed countries in the world the United States ranks 25^th in math and 21^st in science.  That’s not a promising basis for American resurgence in a globally competitive twenty-first century.

Geoffrey Canada, pioneering reformer, educational innovator and founder of the Harlem Children’s zone famously says with characteristic candor, “Either kids are getting stupider every year or we are doing something wrong in our educational system.”  Well, kids aren’t getting stupider but our world has changed.

The popular German term “zeitgeist” has been defined as the “spirit of our times.”  The temptations and challenges of technology have accelerated the pace of change creating a chaotic contextual culture for learning.  Nations across the globe understand the urgency of educational systems that can cope with the educational challenges of such rapid change, and young people more than ever understand the urgency of a high-quality education.  They will demand from our educational systems the lessons and tools to compete.  Nineteenth and twentieth century educational methods and frameworks can’t cope with today’s zeitgeist.  In one sense, it’s that simple.

Charter schools are one manifestation of this fierce urgency of educational reform.  School choice has given many parents the ability to break away from situations where they have felt trapped in chronically poor performing schools. Further, charter schools tend to be smaller, more personalized, frequently set to particular student learning styles and because of their autonomy they tend to be more agile when it comes to change and adaptation.  But like many new entrepreneurial ventures, results have been mixed.

Passion is not enough in pursuit of high-quality education reform.  Accountability is the ironclad responsibility that comes with autonomy.  In Ohio, successful charter school leaders and management companies are hewing to the tenets of accountability and they are welcoming state laws that are explicit in these regards.  Educational “reformers” who are solely transfixed on high-minded educational philosophies at the expense of student performance are doomed to fail in today’s reform environment.

I’m happy to report that Ohio charter schools are making progress in these regards.  Most all Ohio charter schools are in the “Big-8” urban districts.  Of these, 75% of charter schools achieved an Ohio Department of Education grade of “continuous improvement” or better (effective or excellent).  Of the traditional public schools in the same Big-8 districts 66% achieved a grade of continuous improvement or better. In previous years the performance difference has been virtually indistinguishable.  This is a positive trend and Ohio’s strict closure laws for chronically underperforming charter schools have provided essential encouragement for charter schools to take accountability seriously.

Waiting for Superman is a great title, but it’s still a comic myth.  Education reform and school performance is just plain hard work.  But this soon-to-be released movie does evidence the fact that too many American families are waiting for reform to catch up to their children and their children’s futures.

About the Author

Mr. Sims’s career spans the fields of education, non-profit organizations and the private sector. Mr. Sims is currently the President and CEO of the Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools based in Columbus, Ohio.  In addition to teaching and a school principalship, Sims held previous management positions with the Denver Council on for Relations, The Brookings Institution, the Cisneros Foundation, OneSoft Corporation, and K-12 Inc.  Sims led the first American students into China in 1976, 1978, and 1980 after the Cultural Revolution.

Editorial Notes: Superman = Super Effort

Posted by P.I.E. | September 21, 2010

Mary Welsh Schlueter, PIE Founder and Chief Executive

Education-based films are a hard sell among movie producers and directors.  The typical American film audience is age 10-17, and typical “shoot ‘em up” photography and thin plot lines are basic frameworks sold to this profitable demographic.  Art film festivals showcase more off-center or intellectual films, with thinner profit potential.  A film following ordinary school kids desperate for a chance to improve their lives isn’t generally a popular story line.

Until now.  This past spring, Waiting for Superman wowed Sundance Film Festival audiences.  Because of the film, increasing numbers of viewers and media vehicles began to publicize how public schools, charter organizations, teachers unions, and politics affected the education system.

Case in point, Oprah Winfrey featured the movie, its director (Davis Guggenheim), and key funders (Bill Gates) on her afternoon talk show just before the movie launches. Clearly, the film has hit pay dirt:  Oprah’s mainstream audience is a key stakeholder community directly targeted by the movie’s premise.

Waiting for Superman is a bit like the best-selling teen novel, The Hunger Games.  However, instead of being awarded a fateful chance to almost sure death, the kids profiled in Superman wait to discover if they have “won” placement in several highly successful charter schools operated in New York City.

In my opinion, this film could make us all activists.  But by both scapegoating and glorifying a range of stakeholder groups, it simplifies the issues and fails to provide viable solutions.  It takes hard work to create an equitable and individualized education system.  And change comes faster if we collaborate rather than point fingers.

We all benefit by having a smarter and intellectually stimulated populace.  And it starts with you.   Join us.

Editorial: Education is Destiny

Posted by P.I.E. | September 21, 2010

Mary Welsh Schlueter, PIE Founder and Chief Executive

Education is a hot topic right now.  So popular that newspaper and other media vehicles are trying to make it more palatable and less abstract by picturing children and students in innovative, yet sometimes disturbing situations.  Recently, I wrote a newspaper editorial expressing my concern about photographs featuring students learning the basics of shooting guns and operating tasers.  Organizing “Citizen Academies” with local police departments is a commendable partnership; but is it necessary for the activities to include guns and violence?   In my opinion, real innovation might be hard-to-photograph, but the results are not.

Such thoughts were echoed in President Obama’s “Going Back to School” speech highlighting how students write their own destiny.  Speaking at Masterman Laboratory and Demonstration School in Philadelphia, Obama talked about diversity, bullying, and how the “golden rule” helped the public school — with almost a 50% disadvantaged population — become a leader in Pennsylvania and the nation.  What made the difference?  Committed students, teachers, parents, and school leaders working with innovative programs and hard-working curriculums.

Listen to Obama’s speech.  Delivering quality education moves across party lines.   No matter your political views, I think you’ll agree that providing a quality education is the ultimate “service” we offer our children and our country.

Status Quo vs. Compensation Reform: Who Wins?

Posted by P.I.E. | September 17, 2010

Jason Glass, Senior Director of Human Capital Strategy at Battelle for Kids

Marketing guru and futurist Seth Godin tells us that one of the first steps to significant change is that the new approach must be “better than nothing.” More precisely, the new system must reasonably offer the promise that it will be significantly better than doing nothing.

Seeing new systems or significant change through this lens gives us some insight into why districts would consider changing their educator compensation systems. Why is a strategic compensation system, one that aligns pay with performance, organizational goals and market conditions, better than just continuing with the near century-old step and level pay system? And, why is strategic compensation better than doing nothing?

One major reason relates to labor economics. A common cliché among labor economists is “you can’t repeal the law of supply and demand.” Meaning, like it or not, there is a market for teaching talent where what you pay effects supply and demand. We don’t pay enough for teachers who work in high poverty schools and we don’t pay enough for math, science and especially special education teachers. How do we know we are underpaying these areas? The market tells us this because there is a shortage. Would we have teachers jumping out of special education jobs to teach in less challenging areas or leaving the field at the rate they do if we doubled their pay? Could we attract and retain more math and science teachers by paying them closer to what the outside market pays for their skills? Could we keep better teachers in tough schools if we paid them in a way that acknowledges that the job of teaching economically challenged students is harder than teaching affluent students?

Practically everyone wants to pay teachers more, especially the teachers I’ve just noted. The question is, of course, “how?” We all know financial resources are finite, especially in our field. Strategic compensation calls on us to use the money that we have in ways that are sensitive to the market. Some types of teachers do in fact demand higher rates of pay than others. The persistent shortages of teachers in tough schools, in STEM subjects and in special education calls on us to do something different with compensation.

A second reason schools should be strategic with their compensation relates to signals. Organizations use compensation as a signal to employees about what’s important. Current compensation systems in education signal that sticking around another year and taking more higher education credits are what’s important. Research on experience and higher education credits show little effect (or at best a conditional effect) of these two concepts on what school organizations should really hold as important – quality teaching and learning. This begs the question, why not compensate based on the important concepts of quality teaching and high student learning rather than their poor proxies of experience and education credits? At least part of the answer to this question lies in definition and measurement. Defining what quality teaching and what high levels of student learning look like are difficult tasks and measuring them is even more daunting. However, just because something is hard is not a justification for not doing it. Schools should be having conversations about, defining, and measuring quality teaching and high levels of student learning. There is nothing of greater importance to schools than teaching and learning.

Finally, we should be using compensation strategically out of a simple sense of fairness. While it can, and should, be argued that all teachers are valuable human beings and their efforts on behalf of our children deserve our respect and admiration, it cannot be argued that all teachers are of the same quality. Simply, some teachers work harder than others or have greater natural ability than others. This is not a job everyone can do. It takes dedication and it takes skill to do this well. The best teachers should be making more than those who are less deserving. One of the most insulting things we do to great teachers is to treat them exactly the same as everyone else. Do teachers need great leadership? Absolutely. Do teachers need better and more coordinated professional development? Without question. However, neither of these mitigates the fact that not all teachers are the same and that they shouldn’t be compensated the same.

In sum, here are three compelling reasons why school districts should be using their compensation systems strategically: labor economics, organizational signals, and simple fairness. For the sake of our best teachers and our students, it’s high time we step off the “step and level” system and start some significant change when it comes to teacher pay.

Doing nothing should no longer be accepted as a viable option.

About the Author

Jason Glass, is Senior Director of Human Capital Strategy at Battelle for Kids, a Columbus, Ohio-based not-for-profit organization that works with hundreds of school districts in Ohio and across the country to improve teaching and learning. He can be contacted at jglass@battelleforkids.org.

Editorial Notes: Jason Glass

Posted by P.I.E. | September 17, 2010

Mary Welsh Schlueter, PIE Founder and Chief Executive

I first met Jason Glass at an educational forum, where he spoke about a successful implementation of performance pay contracts and teacher evaluation systems in the Eagle County Schools, where he served as Human Resource Director.

Glass is a convincing advocate of how progressive change within the education system helps kids achieve higher rates of academic progress.   Just as Randi Weingarten (President, American Federation of Teachers) has proven with the Washington, D.C. “transformational” teacher’s contract, unionized teachers are willing to face new realities regarding their effectiveness and student growth.

Read Jason’s article and you’ll discover why many districts have implemented strategic compensation, and consider it just another tool in their education reform kit…

Teacher Profile: Youth + Dynamism = Success

Posted by P.I.E. | September 15, 2010

Alexandra Ball, Math Department Head Oakhurst Academy & Teach For America Alumna

After completing the rigorous Teach for America national program, Alexandra Ball was prepared for just about anything.  However, at first glance, she was faced with a roomful of challenges at Oakhurst Academy for Math, Science, and Language Immersion when she began her career during the 2007 school year in Clarksdale, Mississippi.  Located in a rural and economically challenged school district, students were, in some cases, three to four grade levels behind the national average for seventh grade Mathematics classes.  But there was something she noticed through the maze of students. There was a glimmer of opportunity in that room.

“I quickly realized I would have to adopt strategies and teaching methods to reach a wide array of learners at various academic levels,” she said.

Armed with a Promethean board and surmising students learn best by doing, she developed and planned rigorous activities touching each academic level. This included strategically grouping students offering them differentiated instruction, incorporating manipulatives, and providing lots of structured work time for students to practice daily skills.  Her efforts were well received and the results were equally impressive. Out of 11 middle schools, Ball’s school was one of two able to meet the Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) in core academic areas such as math and language arts during both the 08-09 and 09-10 school years. But Ball wasn’t quite satisfied with those results and took it a step further.

“Our Math standardized test scores were significantly higher than our neighboring middle schools and the data showed teach year we were performing closer and closer to the averages of other top schools in the state,” she said. “As an educator, these results further fueled our ongoing mission of providing the best education possible to our students.”

With Ball’s help, school administrators implemented a Saturday School Program in 2008 to provide additional instruction for struggling students. The Program proved to have such a positive impact on student achievement, that in 2009, Saturday School became a district-wide program and helped more than 100 students each week.  Ball was appointed Math Department Head in 2009 and began pushing for increased teacher collaboration, team planning, and encouraged teachers to schedule time to exchange ideas and learn from each other.

The increased collaboration led to even better results for the students. Many of the math students experienced 1 ½ to 2 ½ years of academic growth in one, 180 day school year. Students traditionally testing at a basic level of knowledge were leaving the school year performing proficiently on grade level. They also exhibited more confidence in the classroom, an increased level of comfort reaching out for support, and displayed a genuine excitement about coming to an environment committed to providing a high level of classroom instruction.  Ball attributes her success to the success of her students, but believes their efforts are far from over.

“There is so much work and so little time,” she said. “I will forever seek ways to become a better educator and develop other educators as well.”

BIO:

Cincinnati, Ohio native, Alexandra Ball and 2005 graduate of Eastern Michigan University, holds a Bachelor of Arts in African American Studies.  She is a 2007 Teach For America Alumna and continues to work with the organization on a regular basis. Teach For America is the national corps of outstanding recent college graduates of all academic majors and career interests who commit two years to teach in urban and rural public schools and become leaders in the effort to expand educational opportunity.  Ball was awarded Teacher of the Year in May 2010 and was voted by the student body as Favorite Teacher of the Year for the last three years.