Is a 360 degree education a realistic goal for inner city and rural youth?

At http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2010/04/heres_something_you_probably_d.html in an article written about a year ago, Arne Duncan said "I reject the notion that the arts, history, foreign languages, geography, and civics are ornamental offerings that can or should be cut from schools during a fiscal crunch," he also said "The truth is that, in the information age, a well-rounded curriculum is not a luxury but a necessity"

Now, if shared with middle/upper-middle class parents with children learning via a suburban public school system, this statement would probably be supported as a "no-brainer". Beside the fact that some parents may suggest an offering (or two) they felt should have been added to this list, there would most likely be a general consensus.

But, what about rural or urban parents with children attending schools that are struggling to effectively educate and graduate their students. What would they say about Arne Duncan's statement?

Would they agree?

Would the reaction from urban and rural parents be divided?

If they didn't agree, what reasons would they have not to?

Some administrators of traditional public school districts seem to hold "the notion that the arts, history, foreign languages, geography, and civics are ornamental offerings" as true. There are multiple examples of these same "offerings" being categorized as "enrichment" by (public school district) administrators across the U.S.

What does enrichment really mean and does the definition depend on who's defining enrichment? For instance, would administrators and parents define enrichment in the same way?

Here are a few recent examples of plans to both fight for and cut-back on arts, "gifted and talented programs", kindergarten and at-risk programs in school districts in the U.S. by state:

New Jersey
Texas
Pennsylvania
Arizona
Florida

Although these examples vary in location - some being urban examples and some not - they all depict a need to decrease local education spending as an issue and cutting teachers and/or programs as a controversial solution. You may have noticed these examples are similar to those you've read about (or experienced) in years past.

So...if the same issue (a need to decrease local education spending) is a focus every year and the same solution is proposed every year; is it working?

How are American youth (no matter where they live) supposed to close the apparent achievement gap between the U.S. and the rest of the world -and (domestically) between socio-economic classes - by employing the same tactics? Cutting spending (via terminating teachers and programs), fighting about education reform and watching more children fail doesn't seem to be working.

If Arne Duncan's statement that "a well-rounded curriculum is not a luxury but a necessity" is true, how does the current cut-fight-fail cycle help American children attain this necessary 360 degree education?

Last question, what are the literacy, high school graduation, college graduation and salary rates of those students who do receive an enriched education?

How many millionaires are illiterate?

After watching a 5-minute film on 21st Century Literacy one education enthusiast emailed HEEDblog asking a few questions relating literacy to healthcare, wealth and incarceration/recidivism.

What’s interesting is the verbiage from www.caliteracy.org/economic/ starts to address a lot of the following questions (received from the before mentioned enthusiast):

• Does illiteracy have an impact on healthcare and/or the general health of the lower socio-economic class in the US?
• How does illiteracy affect the economy?
• How many millionaires are illiterate?

• Should accomplished members of society be more concerned / engaged with literacy efforts in their areas?
• How are there so many illiterate people in the US? (What does that say about our school system?)

Below is the verbiage from the www.caliteracy.org/economic/ :

"Literacy in America and Economic Impact

Many people consider literacy issues as personal concerns that
affect the illiterate individual and not society as a whole. In reality,
literacy issues are a collective concern that affects the quality and prosperity
of our entire nation. The struggle to win the battle of literacy in America is
one which should be fought by everyone.
The wealth creation opportunities
for those who lack reading skills are severely limited. The Washington Literacy
Council conducted a study which found that more than three out of four of those
who are on welfare are illiterate. This has a disastrous effect on our economy.
Without the ability to read classified ads, fill out an application, or gather
the skills necessary to acquire employment that pays well enough to be
self-sufficient, there almost seems no choice but to turn to welfare. This
limitation affects their ability to spend which hurts the economy by limiting
demand for products and stunting job creation.

The prison population
represents another pool of lost opportunity in the fight for economic stability
in America. The Washington Literacy Council found that 68% of those arrested are
illiterate. While valuable tax dollars are spent housing and caring for inmates,
taxpayers are forced to look for additional sources of income to try to live the
American dream. Inmates, limited to non-existent reading skills and lost in a
cycle of violence and non-productivity, will rarely be able to escape a life
devoid of opportunity to make a legitimate living and contribute to the success
of our economy.

Improving the reading skills of children and adults is
key to promoting literacy in America. As we struggle to battle the
ever-increasing costs of health care in this nation, we may also consider
literacy in America as key in our fight. Literacy affects an individual’s
ability to learn about different insurance policy options, complete an
application for insurance coverage, understand diseases and disorders, and read
prescription bottles and dosage instructions. This inability to properly care
for oneself as well as the resulting lack of preventative care results in an
increased occurrence of emergency care needed. Since these individuals may also
lack proper insurance coverage, or the ability to pay for insurance coverage,
unpaid hospital bills flood the nation. This cost is passed on to other
citizens.

Providing help for citizens with impaired reading skills is
integral to ensuring economic prosperity in our future. As a concerned citizen,
you can help by joining a volunteer program that provides lessons in reading
skills. In doing so, you not only serve to improve the success and well-being of
the individuals who seek assistance, you help to promote the continued economic
success of America.”

HEEDtweet : Who's TED?

...actually not a who but a what. TED is a non-profit that is committed to ideas worth spreading. They often spread these ideas through informative annual conferences. TED.com is a website featuring "worth-watching" speeches from the world's leading thinkers and doers.

Want an example?
Ok, let's look at something refreshing that relates to teaching! While looking for something completely unrelated a HEEDblog enthusiast came across this video of Salman Khan, creator of Khan Academy on TED.

Who's Salman Khan?

A former hedge fund analyst who began posting math tutorials on YouTube. Six years later, he has posted more than 2.000 tutorials, which are viewed nearly 100,000 times around the world each day. Also, he quite his job at the hedge fund to create the Khan Academy.

Full bio here.

HEEDtweet: What do YOU think about teacher layoffs?

After discussing the current debate over (almost anything to do with) education, it can be hard to formulate your own objective view. If you've spoken with friends, family or someone riding the elevator with you regarding recent education-related chatter, many folks are focused on the improper treatment and/or hire-fire practices of teachers. The conversation will often include terms like LIFO, union, unfair and lazy.

Reading the excerpt below from a Washington Post article written by Joel Klein (the complete article can be read here) seemed to give all the attention teacher layoffs (and unions) are getting some shape. Even if you don't agree with everything Klein writes, at least the article gives you a (quiet) starting place to explore your own opinion.

Who is Joel Klein?
Joel Klein is both a former chancellor of New York public schools and current chief executive of News Corp.'s educational division.

These are his words:

As the debate rages over public unions and, in particular, over their role in school reform, an unfortunate dichotomy about America's teachers has emerged. On one side, unions and many teachers say that teachers are unfairly vilified, that they work incredibly hard under difficult circumstances and that they are underpaid. Critics, meanwhile, say that our education system is broken and that to fix it we need better teachers. They say that teachers today have protections and benefits not seen in the private sector - such as life tenure, lifetime pension and health benefits, and short workdays and workyears.

Both sides are right.

Teaching is incredibly hard, especially when dealing with children in high-poverty communities who come to school with enormous challenges. Many teachers work long hours, staying at school past 6 p.m., and then working at home grading papers and preparing lessons. Some teachers get outstanding results, even with our most challenged students. These are America's heroes, and they should be recognized as such. Sadly, they aren't.

On the other hand, there are also many teachers who work by the clock - they show up a minute before 8:30 and leave a minute after 3; when in school, they do the barest minimum. They get dreadful results with students and, if you spend time in their classrooms, as I have over the past eight years, it's painfully obvious that they belong in another line of work.

The problem is that our discussion too often fails to distinguish between these very different types of teachers, treating them all the same. This "group-think" not only pollutes the current public debate - either you're for or against teachers - it is also killing our opportunity to fix our schools. Any reform worth its name must start by recognizing that teachers are our most important educational asset. That's why we need to treat teaching as a profession, by supporting excellence, striving for constant improvement and ridding the system of poor performers.

Alas, we do none of this. Whether you are good or bad, work hard or don't, teach in a shortage area (such as math) or work in a highly challenged school, you get treated precisely the same: You have life tenure and generous lifetime health and pension benefits, and you get paid more money next year simply because of seniority.

Consider the fight over teacher layoffs. In many states, you must lay teachers off solely based on reverse seniority - last in, first out. That's nuts. Do you know anyone who would say "I want the most senior surgeon" rather than "I want the best surgeon"? Sure, experience matters. That's why, in baseball, the rookie of the year is almost never the most valuable player. But the rookie of the year is better than a whole lot of 10-year veterans, and every baseball team takes this into account when deciding its roster.

Are young minority women screened for Chlamydia at a higher rate than young white women? #disparitiesmatter

Lots of people, who have recently read a study done by the Regenstrief Institute at the Indiana University School of Medicine, agree that young minority women are tested for Chlamydia more often than young white women. The purpose of this post is to begin to highlight the questions that follow this statement of STD testing disparity.

How much more likely are African-American and Hispanic women to be tested for Chlamydia then white women?

"Despite a recommendation from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to annually screen all sexually active young women for this disease, only about half of sexually active women, ages 14 to 25, who receive health care, are screened appropriately. The IU and Regenstrief researchers found that black young women were 2.7 times more likely and Hispanic young women 9.7 times more likely to be screened for chlamydia, compared with white young women."
(According to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110124111148.htm)

Why?

When asked if young minority women are screened for Chlamydia at a higher rate than young white women? Most providers said "Yes." When asked, "Why?", some providers thought that judgments are made about a woman's likelihood of infection based on her race or ethnicity and some did not. Those that did not think judgments are made based on race or ethnicity cited statistical probability as a possible motivation for (seemingly) biased Chlamydia screening, which seemed like circular reasoning to their opposition...

Does type of insurance factor into screening probability?

In addition to race or ethnicity, the researchers found screening likelihood varied by insurance status and also by age. Women with public insurance had greater odds of chlamydia testing, compared with women with private insurance.
(According to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110124111148.htm)

Does medical history factor into screening probability?

A medical history of STDs was more important than race or ethnicity or insurance status in terms of differences in chlamydia screening. Young women who had a previous STD were more likely to be screened for chlamydia, no matter their race or ethnicity, and differences by race or ethnicity in testing decreased substantially in this subgroup.
(According to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110124111148.htm)

What about pregnancy?

The same was not true for young women who had been pregnant in the past. After a pregnancy, young minority women were much more likely (24 times for Hispanic women and 4 times for black women) to be screened than young white women.
(According to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110124111148.htm)

What if any impact does this disparate chlamydia screening practice have on the Chlamydia infection rates of minority women?

What do you think?

Are teens using the web for sex-ed/sexual health info? Should they be? #disparitiesmatter

It almost seemed that Dr. Fulbright was against teens using the web as a resource for sex-ed/sexual health info. But, if you read the article all the way through it seems to highlight the fact that - although a recent study (done by Guttmacher Institute and United Nations Population Division) shows teens are more likely to get sex-ed info from friends, family, doctors or teachers - previous studies on web users build a case for the internet being the ideal arena for sex info exploration. Moreover, the Doc actually cites some useful websites and valid reasons to seek sex-ed/sexual health info (from reputable resources) online.

Recapping Dr. Yvonne K. Fulbright's insights:

“...previous studies have found that web users, in general, see the anonymity and openness offered by the Internet as attractive for finding answers to their questions. Other positive features are that a person can do so with minimal embarrassment and judgment when it comes to one's physical appearance, gender, age, or health status, especially if dealing with private, sensitive issues like sex. Users are further able to explore the information on their own, working at their own pace and without the fears that a more public setting for sexuality information may invite.”

Re-posting sex-ed/sexual health resources here ...just in case you didn’t get to check them out the first time.

What do you think?

Should teens be using the web for sex ed?

HEEDtweet : Education by any means necessary?

So, you may have heard about (Kelley Williams-Bolar) the mother in Ohio that falsified the addresses of her children in order to get them enrolled into a quality school without paying tuition. It seems the Copley-Fairlawn school district (in which Williams-Bolar enrolled her two daughters) became suspicious that some malfeasance was afoot and hired a private investigator to find the children's residential records. (Find the full story at http://clevelandleader.com/node/15780 )

What does American society think of this incident?
There has actually been vast media coverage surrounding Williams-Bolar and her actions. One blog posits that "What this woman chose to do was wrong by cheating the system and getting caught then lying about it and not wanting to pay back the taxes because of her crime." On the other hand some articles/essays have likened Kelly Williams-Bolar to Rosa.

But, how do ed-choice groups, parents, teachers and you respond to Williams-Bolar's actions?

Below is the response the Black Alliance of Educational Options' (BAEO) posted to the incident.

BAEO Responds to Imprisonment of Ohio Mother
BAEO Communication Office | News Release Jan 26, 2011

We are writing to express outrage at the circumstances that led to the prosecution and conviction of Kelley Williams-Bolar. As reported in the Akron Beacon Journal, Williams-Bolar was found guilty and sentenced severely for an act that defied the strict letter of the law but does not defy reason.

She sent her daughters to schools outside her district of residence. Ohio law says that if you live in Akron, you must send your children to your neighborhood school, even if it is a failing school and regardless of whether you feel your child would get a better education and stand a better chance of success elsewhere.

The law says you’re stuck—unless you’re wealthy enough to opt out or fortunate enough to get into a high-performing charter school or to get selected for one of only 14,000 EdChoice scholarships available state-wide. Williams-Bolar is not wealthy, so paying private school tuition for her two children was not an option, nor could she afford to move out of public housing and into a district with better schools.

To be fair, Ohio has done more than most states in terms providing options for parents whose children need better educational opportunities. But clearly, more could and should be done. In far too many states, however, these parents have no choice at all. It is high time we change the laws that force low-income and working-class families to choose between playing by the rules and doing what’s best for their children.

Earlier this month, our nation honored the life of Martin Luther King, Jr., and this week, BAEO joins families, educators, and advocacy groups coast to coast in celebrating National School Choice Week. The Williams-Bolar case is a sober reminder that Dr. King’s dream remains unrealized, and parental choice is the most pressing civil rights issue of our time. Every child deserves access to a quality education, and as Dr. King said, we must act with the fierce urgency of now.

Today, Kelley Williams-Bolar is serving a jail sentence for pursuing a better educational option for her daughters. Meanwhile, her children must—like thousands of other low-income students of color—endure a sentence of their own: consignment to unsafe, underperforming schools in close proximity to their homes, year after year. There is no justice here.

But, what do you think?
Was Williams-Bolar's choice unique?
Would the right move have been for Williams-Bolar to move to the district where her children attended school?
Should she have contacted ed-choice organizations for legal options?

Last question, how many children at Copley-Fairlawn school district are being investigated today?