Ohio Association for Gifted Children Monday, December 8, 2008

Constituent Outreach Forum Ohio Association for Gifted Children Monday, December 8, 2008

National Education Commission on Time and Learning, 1994 “ . . . people learn at different rates, and in different ways with different subjects. “ … we have put the cart before the horse: our schools and the people involved with them … are captives of clock and calendar. “The boundaries of student growth are defined by schedules for bells, buses and vacations instead of standards for students and learning. “

Confronting Reality We want our high schools to work for all students. But today, many students aren’t being served … or served well. Gifted and other accelerated students Dropouts and underachieving students Graduates needing remediation

Why ourhigh schools aren’tworkingfor allstudents Our education system . . . Wasn’t designed for all students to achieve at high levels. Was created for a time when only 20% or 30% finished high school and went on to college. Is built on a walled-in, building-centered “industrial age” model. But that industrial age is fast disappearing … and our student’s needs have changed.

What’s wrong with the industrial model? • It’s a one-size-fits-all factory process model. • It’s structured around counting seats and dollars. • It ignores students’ differing learning styles, paces and interests. • It doesn’t offer students opportunities to practice creativity … explore academic and career interests … or practice critical thinking • All students must achieve at high levels … not just “attend” or have access

ConsidertheseMYTHS • Carnegie guarantees quality • There’s not other way to measure achievement • Alternatives are impossible … too much work • There’s little or no support for the alternatives to the Carnegie Unit • There no research saying alternatives produce positive outcomes • Better teachers and resources … that’s the better solution

Now, considertheseFACTS • There is no guarantee withthe Carnegie Unit • There are piloted assessmentsand other college/career readiness measures • Many are doing it … the learning curve is acceptable … despite substantial system barriers • Metro School • Gifted programs

A Critical Issue • Ohio law ALLOWS alternatives to the Carnegie Unit … but few have used them to direct instruction. • Six provisions in law for delivering instruction differently in Ohio • “Permitted” language is not enough… as confirmed by the Ed Options data • Other states’ experiences are the same … “permitting’ alternatives is not enough.

Let’slookat the research • Lack of rigor, relevance and personalized pace leave many student disengaged … “doing seat time” or leaving school. • Lack of engagement • Lack of relevance • Lack of ability to apply learned information … students need practice

Additionalresearch • Stress … new brain research shows serious negative effects for rote learning. • Electives and arts forced out … even though arts improve academics. • Creativity stifled by fear and drilling … yet 21st century employers want creative people. • Lack of connection to work and postsecondary activity … to help schools and students properly prepare for “what comes next.”

Substantialsystem barriers • Financial penalties to districtsfor acceleration and out-of-school experiences. • Accountability penalties to schools and districts for acceleration and out-of-school experiences. • Reporting procedures (EMIS) create some significant barriers to interdisciplinary and other individualized learning

The scale of effortis huge • It’s like trying to get to the moon with a horse-drawn cart. • Significant gains in closing achievement gaps have not occurred since the advent of A Nation at Risk ... 20 years ago. • There’s a lot of “reform” out there … but none is perfect. • Our solution is not “one-size-fits-all” … but rather learning that is customized to students, schools and communities.

Senate Bill 311 . . . develop a statewide plan for implementing methods for students to earn units of high school credit based on the demonstration of subject area competency, instead of or in combination with completing hours of classroom instruction

A New Emphasis on Learning Shifting the focus from “seat time” to performance • Plan to be adopted by the State Board of Education by March 31, 2009 • Implementation efforts will commence on April 1, 2009 … with “start-up” scheduled for the 2009-10 academic year • Stakeholder input is being actively sought • Communications and outreach will be ongoing, including Web

Whatthe plan elements mightinclude • “Hold harmless” provisions for early adopters, while system barriers are taken down (i.e., incentives and accountability) • Extensive capacity building at both the state and local levels • Ongoing education throughWeb sites and other support • Menu of assessments • Other?

Provisions for on-going support • Assessments will be piloted • Active, up-to-date Web site for … • Current and accurate information • Examples for use by schools and districts • Technical support for teachers and administrators • Valuable information for parents and families • Continuing engagement with education stakeholders

How will things be different? • Work-based and career-based learning • Service learning • Hands-on, project-based learning (e.g., supercollider) • Online learning • Learning beyond traditional institutional boundaries (e.g., dual-credit) • Alternatives to “walled-in,” “building-centered” learning • More student supports

Beyond Carnegie issues …the bigger picture • EDGE • Acceleration policy • Public-Private Collaborative Commission • Personalized learning • University System of Ohio standards • A comprehensive system of student supports • “Stackable Certificates” and changes in the adult career-technical system • State Board of Education Task Force on Quality High Schools

A New Emphasis on Learning Shifting the focus from “seat time” to performance Let’s talk!

A New Emphasis on Learning Shifting the focus from “seat time” to performance Thank you!

Ohio Association for Gifted Children Monday, December 8, 2008