NewSector.org looking for Fellows

For those who are passionate about social impact, and looking to develop the tools and skills to become an effective social sector leader... New Sector Alliance is looking to recruit Fellows to become the next generation of social impact leaders. It targets college students, recent college grads, and those with 5 years work experience. Applications for New Sector's 2015-2016 programs are now open. The program is in Boston and San Francisco, Chicago and the Twin Cities. Specifically, it's accepting applications for our AmeriCorps RISE, Summer Fellowship and Senior Summer Fellowship programs.

For more information, see here: http://www.newsector.org/content/our-fellows-0 

You can apply now to a New Sector Fellowship Program, by following this: bit.ly/ZQ6CWi  

-e

U.S. Department of Education orders districts to fix funding disparities

In an official "Dear Colleague Letter" released this week, the U.S. Department of Education basically instructed school districts to have similar academic course offerings for its students, regardless of race, color, origin, etc. The Letter is issued by the Office of Civil Rights, which enforces Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance).

Chronic and widespread racial disparities in access to rigorous courses, academic programs, and extracurricular activities; stable workforces of effective teachers, leaders, and support staff; safe and appropriate school buildings and facilities; and modern technology and high-quality instructional materials further hinder the education of
students of color today. (Page 2).  

 As concrete examples, the letter cites:

But schools serving more students of color are less likely to offer advanced courses and gifted and talented programs than schools serving mostly white populations, and students of color are less likely than their white peers to be enrolled in those courses and programs within schools that have those offerings. For example, almost one in five black high school students attend a high school that does not offer Advanced Placement (AP) courses, a higher proportion than any other racial group. Students with limited-English-proficiency (English language learners) are also underrepresented in AP courses according to data from the 2011-12 school year. In that year, English language learners represented five percent of high school students, but only two percent of the students enrolled in an AP course.11 Similarly, of the high schools serving the most black and Latino students in the 2011-12 school year, only 74 percent offered Algebra II and only 66 percent offered chemistry. Comparable high-level opportunities were provided much more often in schools serving the fewest black and Latino students, where 83 percent offered Algebra II courses and 78 percent offered chemistry. (Page 3.)

On the facilities of schools:

The physical spaces where our children are educated are also important resources that influence the learning and development of all students, yet many of our Nation’s schools have fallen into disrepair. Too often, school districts with higher enrollments of students of color invest thousands of dollars less per student in their facilities than those districts with predominantly white enrollments. (Page 4.)

On teacher pay within the same school district:

. . . [D]isparities may be indicative of broader discriminatory policies or practices that, even if facially neutral, disadvantage students of color. For example, teachers in high schools serving the highest percentage of black and Latino students during the 2011-12 school year were paid on average $1,913 less per year than their colleagues in other schools within the same district that serve the lowest percentage of black and Latino students. (Page 5.)

The Letter also recognizes that snap-shot data may not tell the whole story.

The provision of equal opportunities may require more or less funding depending on the location of the school, the condition of existing facilities, and the particular needs of students such as English language learners and students with disabilities. For example, older facilities generally require more money for annual maintenance than do newer facilities. Similarly, greater annual per-pupil library expenditures for one school may reflect an effort to correct years of underfunding of a library collection. Funding disparities that benefit students of a particular race, color, or national origin may also permissibly occur when districts are attempting to remedy past discrimination. (Page 10.)

---

I encourage you to read more to find your own gems.

-e

DeKalb County (Atlanta) ranks 15th on School Choice -- Ahead of Boston and Charlotte and Cobb Co. (outside Atlanta) School Districts

A Brookings study released in Q1 2014, purportedly ranks school districts based School Choice, measured by 13 different categories of policy and practice.  Some of the 13 categories include virtual schools (and the % of students enrolled), availability of alternative schools (such as magnets, vouchers, affordable private, and tax credit scholarships), whether there is a policy of restructuring or closing schools, whether there is a common application to enroll, performance data, comparable standards and assessments, and transportation.  The purpose of the study is to "to create public awareness of the differences among districts in their support of school choice."  

A conversation about measurables aside (everyone knows that what you measure often dictates what you find), Brookings ranks the top 107 school districts -- with only New Orleans schools and NYC schools getting overall "A" or "A-" grades and school districts like Atlanta - Fulton County, Clayton County (south of Atlanta) and Shelby County, TN receiving grades of "F."  

DeKalb County (Atlanta) comes out passing with a "C+" at rank number 15.

Article found here:
http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2014/ecci_2013

-E

Debriefing the 2013 Atlanta-Fulton Co. Election results

• one of my favored city councilpersons no longer has a seat (pretty bummed about that),
• a new member of the school board will be representing "me" (though was completely unimpressive/uninspiring when we spoke one-on-one),
• the mayor is still the mayor (silver lining), 
• municipal judges running unopposed (hmmmm.....), 
• FOUR former TFA'ers are now on the APS school board (#onedayall)
• turnout for my polling place was below 15%--shesh.

Full results can be found here: http://www.fultoncountyga.gov/county/election/results/ 

Kellogg Foundation chooses its Next CEO and President: Ms. Tabron aspires to change the world for vulnerable kids

Ms. Tabron is many things:  an employee of the company for 26 years, a woman who grew up in Detroit, the current the executive vice president of operations and treasurer, the organization's 12th leader since its founding in 1930, a Michigan alumna, and the company's first African American leader and first female leader in its history.

After conducting and international and U.S. wide search, Tabron was the best candidate for the job.  She will replace Sterling Speirn, "who announced he will step down this year after heading the organization for nearly eight years."

For more:  http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/article/20131021/NEWS01/310210017/Kellogg-Foundation-looks-within-new-CEO?nclick_check=1

Research from Boston Public Schools: Student Achievement Scores over Art/Science Offerings

A recent report from a Harvard Kennedy School researcher analyzed parents' school preferences for Kindergarten, Sixth Grade, and Ninth Grade to determine which factors made the most differences.  In his new paper, the researcher, Edward Glaser, found:

"parents favor closer schools and schools with higher levels of academic achievement (as measured by the MCAS test). It also finds that certain school structures -- K1 (over K2 only) schools and K-8 (over K-5) schools – are preferred. . . .
Overall school size, computer facilities, and gyms did not have a significant impact. Art, music, and science lab facilities had minimal or no impact."

For the abstract and more on the paper, see here: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/citation.aspx?PubId=9043&type=WPN 

Judge Profits from Jail Sentences

The School-to-Prison Pipeline is real.  Education policy spaces are full of statistics, anecdotes, narratives, and campaigns to inform and correct for what happens to many, many students and youth, particularly our black and brown babies.

Well, here is a REAL account (so it seems) of a JUDGE that has allegedly been sentencing adolescents and teenagers to JAIL and PROFITING FROM IT.

It's sickening.  Deeply sickening.

Judge to serve 28 years after making $2 million for sending black children to jail

2:15 PM EDT

7/30/2013 by Amir Shaw   http://rollingout.com/criminal-behavior/judge-must-serve-28-years-after-making-2-million-for-sending-children-to-jail/

"Judge Mark A. Ciavarella, 63, serves as an example of why the private prison industry can do more harm than good. Ciavarella worked alongside owners of private juvenile facilities to ensure that the prison remained occupied. The more prisoners equated to more profits for the owners of the prison"

(Read more directly from the article.) 

Affirmative Action still not "decided"

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court released its Opinion of the Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin et al. case, also known as our time's Affirmative Action case.

For the non-lawyers, my reading is that the Supreme Court held that a university gets deference in deciding and determining its diversity mission...but University does not get deference in deciding how to go about achieving diversity. Judicial review (strict scrutiny) is required. The case now goes back to lower courts to review whether the university went about achieving their mission in a "narrowly-tailored" (as race-neutral as possible) way.

So, the Court did not do much "deciding" today on the merits on the case (which means they did not get into whether "diversity" is actually a compelling interest, except Justice Thomas who long ago decided his stance that no use of race is acceptable to him) but rather did some clarifying on what the judicial standard is for college admissions cases. The initial Plaintiff, Fisher, did not ask the Court to decide whether past cases on college admissions (Grutter, especially) needed overturning -- a point which Scalia writes separately to justify as his reason for joining the Court's decision on this case. 

I did find some of the Court's point particularly interesting.  First, the Court actually said that universities are not required to exhaust all the race-neutral means of admissions processes that they can think of.  Instead, the Court said that universities are required to have serious, good faith consideration of race-neutral means of admissions and then justify why those alternative admissions process would not work.  570 U.S. ___ at 10 (2013).  Further, the Court reemphasized that the university's decision must be a workable decision, and tipped its hat that an administratively viable solution might be a consideration in the narrowly-tailored analysis that will follow once the lower courts sort out the judicial review.  570 U.S. ___ at 11 (2013).  Finally, the Court also restated that the judicial standard of strict scrutiny not be "fatal in fact"--which means that it cannot be the case that each time a court reviews a program by which the state has taken action or made some type of determination, a court later strikes it down and says that it was not good enough to muster the constitutional protections of the 14th Amendment.  In fairness, the Court also stated that the strict scrutiny analysis cannot also be "feeble" such that state action gets deference or an easy pass in its process.  570 U.S. ___ at 13 (2013).  

For me, I'm kinda happy that the deciding did not come today (dunno if my heart could take it), but in line with many of my colleagues' sentiments, I don't know whether the odds are going to be better years from now... And, I certainly would have loved to hear Justice Ginsburg on the merits of this case another, wonderful time.


As always, I'm providing the actual Opinion:  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf
 

[Summer Opportunity] 2013 Policy Leaders Fellowship

Colorado State Senator Mike Johnston is offering an opportunity to attend the 2013 Policy Leaders Fellowship.

According to several sources of information (MikeJohnston.org, Denver St-Cloud Public Schools website, and Ga Tech advertisement):

Seeking Undergraduates, 1L and 2L Law Students, and Graduate Students for 30-50 paid (stipend will be approx. $2000), 6-week Urban Leader Fellowships in Denver, Memphis, and possibly other areas.  

Hiring projections are for 20-25 Fellows in Denver; 6-10 Fellows in Memphis; and possibility of 6-10 Fellows in additional regions.  Fellows will work half-time on high-level policy projects with an elected official.  They will also work half-time alongside community partner organizations.

Denver fellowships are available in 6 areas:  Education, Energy, School Finance, Health, Judiciary, and Transportation, and past community partner organizations have included  Denver School of Science and Technology, Denver Public Schools, Colorado Department of Education, Prodigal Son Initiative (anti-gang violence non-profit), Education Reform Now, Teach for America, Stand for Children. 

Memphis Fellows work on a project-basis, typically in areas such as affordable housing, urban blight, and community engagement; past community partner organizations have included Stand for Children, Memphis Chamber of Commerce, Tennessee Department of Education, and Achievement School District. 

Fellows’ assignments during community partner placement will vary, but all work will be substantive and meaningful for organization.  Fellows working at a school site might run a summer school program or conduct data analysis of student outcomes, while Fellows at non-profit might draft strategic plans for a project or conduct a special research project.  Candidates may indicate location preferences (if any) and issue area preferences during the application process.

There it is, go tell someone.

"That's not my Job, YOU teach That"

In the headlines yesterday is an article in the Washington Post about how Common Core State Standards are being misused -- wow, breaking headlines.  Sense my sarcasm?

The rift between policy and practice is deep, wide, and well-documented.  My most fond experience in law+graduate school was walking between campuses (literally) attending education policy-focused discussions at the law school, the education school, the policy school, and (even) the business school.  Those conversations talked past one another.  Every time.  There were such disjointed starting points, that it became very obvious to me how this policy-practice ravine began and why it persists.

Yesterday's latest, on how the curriculum standards for English Language Arts  require more nonfiction texts and the burden that is being placed on English teachers specifically, is but another example of what happens when worlds don't collide.

The article's main assertion is that the new common core standards in English require more nonfiction, rigorous texts that can appropriately be spread across teaching subjects.  It asserts that teachers from other subject areas (non English Language Arts teachers) are hesitant (if not opposed) to increase the teaching of nonfiction texts in their subject areas.  So, in practice, English Language Arts teachers will be forced to cut poetry, fiction, or some other beloved, endearing text to replace it with government reports.  (I'm summarizing and paraphrasing here.)

More after the break...

Voters in Georgia Passed the Charter Schools Amendment, and then the Hype was Gone

Voters in Georgia Passed the Charter Schools Amendment, and then the Hype was Gone

One of the initiatives on the voting ballot this November was a proposed Amendment to the Constitution of the State of Georgia.  The Amendment, aptly named the "Charter Schools Amendment," read as follows:

 - 1 - 

Provides for improving student achievement and parental involvement through more public charter school options.

"Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow state or local approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities?"

Of course, many complained about indirect and ambiguous language.  Aside from the obvious critique that "improving student achievement and parental involvement" is being directly linked to "public charter options" (I've seen the research-- in some cases this assertion is true and in others it is not so accurate), the language also fails to distinguish the new addition to the Georgia Constitution-- that the state (or a state board of representatives) would be authorized to approve public charter schools separate from (or perhaps in an appellate capacity) local approval processes.  Now, the state authority to approve charter schools that would operate in local districts is what all the hoopla was about.  So, let's cut to that.

Georgia voters approved the Amendment with results of approximately 58% to 42% (or 58.5% to 41.5% depending on who you consult).


Those that Vote "Nay"
National education voices, like that of Diane Ravich suggested that the measure would ultimately "gut local control."

Other local, Metro-Atlanta columnists agreed that a NO vote on the Charter Amendment was deserved for at least 10 reasons.  See also this article on the 8 Myths of the Proposed Charter Amendment.  Persuasively for some, even the editorial board of the major state newspaper published a piece urging a NO vote.

Those that Vote "Yay"
The Vice President of the Georgia Charter Schools Association had this to say.  Further, there were even reports that President Obama supposedly supported the Amendment (which would fall in line with the President's education "Blueprint" plan (old and new) that has been a mantle piece for some time).

And the Rest...
Still other journalists tried to distill the issues for voters.  Even in my hometown of Athens, Georgia, which I lovingly remember as having an activist/involved education population, there were open forums and discussions on both sides of the issue.

More than Just Georgia
According to the New York Times, here's more on the political breakdown:

• "Alice Walton, the daughter of Walmart’s founder, Sam Walton, has contributed to campaigns supporting the measure"
• "several companies that manage charter schools, including K12 Inc., Charter Schools USA and National Heritage Academies" supported
• "committees supporting the ballot measure have collected 15 times as much as groups opposing the measure, according to public filings."

 A Mixed Bag
Many tried to cast Amendment 1 as a partisan issue, but I believe it is a bit more complicated than attaching an "R" or "D" label.  (I acknowledge that Republicans were supposedly responsible for the language of the Amendment.).  Evidence shows that some Democrats joined Republicans in support of the Amendment.

"conservatives who typically champion decentralized government are giving the amendment full-throated support. Meanwhile, some Tea Party members have joined Democratic legislators, including State Senators Jason Carter and Vincent D. Fort, in opposing the measure. The state’s school superintendent, John D. Barge, a Republican, has come out against it as well." (NYT)

Further, as the creation of Democrats for Education Reform attests, the policies of U.S. education splice creed, regionalism, and background.  I could continue with the examples, but I think you get the point.


So what's my point?
Well, my point is that there was all this political speech-- ads for a YES vote, ads for a NO vote all over the airwaves on this issue.  Even among my friends, there were chatty talks about "the future of public education in Georgia."  But now?  Radio silence.  I hear not one chirp, besides the articles that I am digging up for this blog post, about what the passage of the Amendment means for Georgia charter schools-- and Georgia schools more broadly.

And, I would like to hear more.  I'll keep you tuned.

Closing the School-to-Prison Pipeline [Conference]

Blogging from Harvard Law School Advocate 4 Education’s 1^st Conference on the School-to-Prison Pipeline

March 8, 2012

                The purpose of the conference is to generate multi-disciplinary dialogue about the challenges and foster solutions to the school-to-prison pipeline.  There’s a call for people to work on specific areas of the pipeline, but a greater call for people to see how these pieces fit together.  The speakers are both legal and non-legal, non-profits, juvenile justice officials.  The audience includes service-providers, policy advocates, lawyers, teachers, and students.  Most dynamic, the closing session will be a dialogue from each of the panels applied to a vignette in hopes to find creative ways to approach the particular case.

Panel 1: Education—How do educational institutions add to the problem and how can they solve it?

Moderator:  Susan Cole:  HLS Director of Ed Law Clinic of Trauma and Law clinic

Dr. Laura McNeal, Charles Hamilton Houston Institute

• ·         Research projects are underway that look at some of the causes of disparate impact that policies have (like “zero-tolerance”).  Also developing research tools that will quantify unconscious/implicit bias in order to push public policy change.

Alana Greer, Advancement Project

• ·         Work with community groups and national organizations to get their voices heard at the policy table.  See various takes on what the exact issues are.  Works in LA (truancy tickets for walking to class late or criminal record), Philadelphia (transfers to alternative disciplinary schools, zero-tolerance, out-of-school suspensions).  There’s a background principle being applied that students are different than they were and are more violent and need a police state.  One of the goals is getting administrators’ discretion back so that boyscouts stop getting disciplined for having sporks and students with scissors from gift-wrapping stop getting put in alternative schools.

Daniel Losen, UCLA Civil Rights Project, Director of Center for Civil Rights Remedies

• ·         Focus on school discipline problem—the number of children getting kicked out of school for discipline issues.  For successful remedies have to get to school resources, implicit bias, effective preschool because expulsion is the outcome of these things.  Has promoted a borrowing a disparate impact analysis from administrative law—requiring that a method of administration that has an adverse impact on protected groups (even though it’s facially neutral) can still violate Title XI.  The structure of that disparate impact analysis includes (1) adverse impact on protected group, and either (2) the practice is educationally unsound or (3) less discrimination option exist.  Discipline isn’t just about safety, it’s about students getting time back in school.

Dr. Tim Lisante, New York City Department of Education

• ·         Spent time in Rikers Island in NYC (where there are many jails) teaching and being a principal with students who were sent to the center from their home school.  At this stage, being in the center is pre-adjudication for the students until they have been through their court process.  Now he’s a bureaucrat (J) and a parent of three sons in NYC.  Works on home-school re-entry to transfer students back into their schools once finished in the court systems. (NYC has over 500 high schools).

Politics as a Barrier to Fairness in Educational Outcomes for Our Children

The following is a response to a course presentation on the Achievement Gap.

Until Dai Ellis spoke up, it seemed that the students and speakers were going to continue to mosey around the big elephant in the room that is responsible for stifling the progress of closing racial achievement gaps for our nation’s most vulnerable children.  Professor Roland Fryer told a narrative of how he’d presented several decisionmakers with his “vaccine” of five “common sense” interventions and how each turned him down, even though they had been initially interested in his achievement gap research because it had potential benefits for their communities.  And Professor Tom Payzant followed Fryer’s presentation by adding that parents and community members ought to be engaged in the process of turning around the lowest performing schools in order for reform efforts to be authentic to the communities with the most to benefit or loose from the interventions.  The former Boston Public Schools Superintendent also cautioned reformers to think about creative ways to replicate charter management organizations without also replicating the bureaucratic ills begotten to many school systems.  But until Mr. Ellis, CEO of Excel Academy “no excuses” charter schools network, advanced his two talking points ((1) “ideology kills” and (2) scaling up charter success is possible), the class conversation seemed mainly about the problem of the achievement gap and proffered solutions coming from research and practice.  The conversation would have never moved to the real takeaway lesson for the evening:  individuals from various backgrounds can become change-agents for the education systems in their communities.  The counterintuitive politics of education reform has made it increasingly difficult to deliver solutions that make our student outcomes more fair.

Sign Me Up! (or) Say What?

Another Monday morning where the dirth of good, juicy education policy news is rather annoying.  Being is Washington it seems that the buzz definitely quiets when Congress is on recess.  Meanwhile, the education policy pundits, wonks, and peddlers are gnawing on speculation and media leftovers.  So, thought I'd humor you with my innermost thoughts when it comes to this stuff. 

When it comes to education policy headlines, I find that I am in one of these two camps. 

Either I am willing to immediately jump on board -- no elaboration needed, "sign me up," I'm down --

 or

I put the skids on by seeking much more confirmation -- run that by me again, "say what?"

What are your reactions?  I'm sure you are not nearly as binomial as I.



Image source pages for the cat and baby.

Philadelphia's Arlene Ackerman is Out. But Why?

Booting up my computer this morning, I again saw headlines of the Philadelphia education leader that is no more -- Arlene Ackerman.  Admittedly, I have not followed her administration, the policies, or the press.  I do know, however, that some organizations in the civil rights community welcomed her presences in Philadelphia and were optimistic of what she would do there.  So, I though to ask someone more familiar with Philadelphia about it.  Here's a few lines from my anonymous source:

"Over time, the theatrics surrounding her management style and personality became the story, not what she actually accomplished or attempted to for students.  Due to our schools governance structure, having allies and good relationships is very important.  She didn't seem to do too well with creating the right allies."

So it seems the press clippings jive with what Phillies felt on the ground.  But what about her education policies?  How were those received?

"My sense is that most folks wouldn't quabble with her actual agenda."

Hmm.  So are there any important take-a-ways as Ackerman leaves?

"Seems more like a case for 'if you want to be big city superintendent, you gotta be a politician too.'"

Lesson learned.  Resume the forward-charge.

Click here to read Words from Ackerman

It Takes One to Know One

It has occurred to me that many of the high-profile education reforms (many of which I have spent the last 5 weeks following on twitter, attending their speeches, reading their newly released reports, and cruntching their policies) probably have never spent 24 hours in the public schools that they have remedies for. 

Maybe this shocks no one.

But for me, as one who sees such merit in many, many of the reform proposals, it seems a bit disingenous to have a cure and have never interacted with the "patients," their communities, or the everyday stressors that may be responsible for the illness in the first place.

Why Education Needs Teachers More Than Ever

This is not about hiring more effective teachers nor is it about pay-for-performance.


This is not about the achievement gap.


This is not about ensuring that we can "staff" our schools and that each child has someone to teach him or her.


It's not even about the instrinsic value a teacher brings to the classroom.


This is about why, more than ever, policy makers NEED teachers and why teachers NEED to critically analyze (and embrace) significant education research.


I will do my best to make this as generalizable as possible. But, in an effort to be as transparent as possible, it must be understood that my plea cries from not only the academic background I've been exposed to, the professionals I've dialogued with, the policy reports and findings I've read, or the environments I've worked in or have knowledge of. Combined in my statements are deductions from what I've felt around me, from what I've seen, and from what I know-- very concretely-- to be true.


Right there I've lost half of the readers. My appeal to authority has been undermined because I introduced conditions that are outside of objective, data based, or quantitative conclusions. I violated the Harvard-iron-clad law of "substantive argument." That I use my gut isn't good enough. At the least, I would be asked for my antecodotal notes. I need a central thesis, literature review, findings, results and analysis before I make my ultimate judgement. Sorry readers, I don't have any of those. Again, I've lost some.


But those whom I've lost probably wouldn't have accepted my plea anyway.


Actually, it's exactly "those people" who create the environment I'm suggesting we abolish. It's those people that (no matter how politically vulnerable it will make them if they were forthcoming) cringe everytime someone identifies herself as a "teacher." Those people-- these macro-level, policy analyst, think-tank professionals, education-reform stamped experts-- "know better" and "know more" than any teacher would, even though teachers, of course think that they have all the answers. I'm harsh. But I'm precise.


I understand that each education program or social innovation geared toward making improvements in education falls short of its gains. I even get the fact that identifying oneself as a Teach For America alumna builds a barrcade that's extremely difficult to overcome successfully. I even agree, in some cases, why these programs, entrepreunerial endeavors and movements should be challenged. What I don't get is why one's experience in the classroom isn't relevant to policy. Why interfacing with the same children that others count in a sample isn't as significant as the data trend that child produces. I don't understand why there is teacher-aversion.


It sickens me, as it would presumeably sicken any onlooker who's been at the dinner table in both houses, to be a part of a conversation where both policy maker and practioner sit together and dismiss the other.


To be skeptical, yes. To be synical, no. Big no. Brash disjointment is unacceptable when we have children not learning. They don't have time for adults to make themselves play nice or respect one another. They don't really have time for much.


Education policy makers NEED teachers now more than ever.


Perhaps I will develop this argument out further, and the implications of what I am saying, and most importantly, for what I am proposing and what it means for each party. I will list why I think teachers need to be given education policy professional development through university-leave opportunities after the first five years of teaching. And why I think education policy makers need to be recruiting, in high volume, teachers to fill in the seats around their idea tables and to be part of their research evaluation process. And, to get to my purpose in all of this, why every education policy maker or reformer needs to step into a classroom.


Best case scenario? If you wanna make decisions regarding education policy, you need to have taught for at least two-years. Because (and don't believe anyone who tells you otherwise), you don't really know unless you were there.


So, maybe I'll accept comparable education experience. Perhaps you were not a teacher in a classroom, but you have acquired comparable insight which includes being responsibile for implementing the policies you proscribe or support. Not through research or volunteerism, but something that has punitive and biting consequences. Again, still have to flesh this one out. I'll accept coverletters and counter-arguments until then.