FY 2010 Budget, Department of Education

Thanks to Stacey for alerting us to the release of the White House's FY 2010 Budget blueprints! Check out the Department of Education document here (note: links directly to PDF) (click here to visit the White House budget page and check out impacts on other departments).

The budget would include funds for a variety of educational projects ranging from expanding access to high-quality early childhood education to preparing and rewarding effective teachers and principals. As Stacey points out, it also would also make some pretty major changes to financial aid for higher education. It would expand the Pell Grant program, put the program on sure footing (in other words, they wouldn't be subject to the Appropriations process anymore!), and tie the maximum grant award to inflation.

In addition, the budget would eliminate the Federal Family Education Loan Program (a US DOE program that provides for private organizations to market, originate, and service federally guaranteed student loans, such as Stafford and PLUS loans) by 2010. All new loans would originate from the Federal Direct Loan Program (in which the government acts as a direct lender). Not all stakeholders will be pleased with this development, though, as evidenced in this New York Times article published February 25...


Update: Here is a newer (February 26) NYT article on the changes to the student loan system.

Labels: budget, DOE, student loans

Governor Asks Teachers to Work For Free

The economic crunch is hitting education hard. It's hitting everything hard. And states and districts are dealing with it in different ways, considering alternatives ranging from 4-day school weeks to eliminating sports programs.

But the governor of Oregon has presented what I think is one of the most extreme options: He has asked teachers to work for free some days this spring.

According to the article, Oregon legislative budget leaders have proposed cuts that would force many districts to close early by an average of about five days. The governor (who would lead by example and work four days for free over the next four months) has said that teachers should work without pay to prevent that scenario. While some Democratic legislators applaud the approach, citing "shared sacrifice" as a model to help the state survive the economic crisis. Republicans, though, would prefer that the state's reserve accounts be tapped. The state has an estimated $800 million in two savings accounts, one specifically for schools.

Probably because I am a former teacher, and I have certain sensitivities about the way teachers are treated in society, this proposal makes me so mad. Let me put aside the fact that I think that teachers are already underpaid. While I recognize the value of shared sacrifice, I can't help but notice that while other employees are being put on unpaid furloughs, they don't actually WORK during that time. If the governor is suggesting this, he should suggest unpaid WORK furloughs for other state employees--make them come in to work on days they don't get paid. To me, the fact that teachers are singled out screams disrespect.

Labels: budget, economy

Expanded Learning Time...

Thanks to Rebekah for compiling some resources on expanded learning time! (For those who don't know, expanded learning time is a school reform strategy that lengthens the traditional school day or year to increase learning time)


In January 2009 The Collaboratve for Building After-School Systems released Enhancing School Reform Through Expanded Learning, a report that aims to further the conversation of how school reform and improvement strategies can take full advantage of expanded learning opportunities to promote student learning, development, and engagement. It seeks to make an evidence-based case for the ideas that:
-->Expanded learning time can be an effective strategy to promote student performance.
-->The more effective school improvement strategies will be those that incorporate the key elements of expanded learning time.
-->Resources exist to enable districts and schools to build in expanded learning time activities as core components of their reform plans.

In July 2008 they released the policy brief More Time for Learning: ELT Initiatives & Enrichment Opportunities, which describes the momentum of various ELT initiatives around the country, identifies differences between ELT and traditional after-school programs, and calls for policymakers to explore how ELT might serve as an opportunity to strengthen connections between school and after-school systems.

The Harvard Family Research Project is also taking an interest in this concept, recently (January 2009) releasing the policy brief Supporting Student Outcomes Through Expanded Learning Opportunities (take note--this links directly to the pdf). This brief shines a spotlight on the role of afterschool and summer learning programs in supporting student success and to help bridge the divide between afterschool and summer programs and schools by offering some research-derived principles for effective expanded learning partnership efforts.

Of course, given the current economic situation and the fact that state education budgets are getting cut (though some help is theoretically on its way thanks to the recovery act), some states and districts aren't really looking at expanding learning time. They are looking more to cut it--or at least "reallocate it more effectively"--through 4-day school weeks. 16 states have already experimented with the idea, and proposals have been made in Washington, Utah, Maine, and California, among others. Principals' Partnership has a (nonrigorous) research brief (take note--it links directly to the pdf) out on the topic.

KIPP/Union Update

The New York Times reported Friday that the environment at a KIPP school whose teachers recently voted to unionize has gotten tense, with administrators "making veiled threats" and meeting with students alone--a meeting at which the students "had been encouraged to talk about 'negative feelings and interactions' with [teachers]." This coming after the school's founding principal told those organizing teachers that he was "disappointed" and "not pleased."

Read the article here.

Personal opinion? While I unabashedly support teachers unions, I could put aside those thoughts and just reflect... Perhaps, instead of introducing further tension into the school, the administrators at this school could think about the environment at their school and why these teachers felt it was necessary to organize. If these administrators are so opposed to running a unionized school, how could they let their school culture get to a point where the teachers feel that organizing is their best bet to improve their working environment and their students education? What mistakes did they (the administrators) make?

In none of the press that I have seen on this issue have I seen the administrators publicly taking responsibility for this creating environment. Yet the whole notion of charter schools means that they had that responsibility. This situation is being monitored by many in the educational world and is an important precursor in education reform, in terms of union/charter partnerships or creating sustainable climates in charters (or in a number of other reforms). Yet what observers are seeing is administrators (like executives in other sectors of the American economy) blaming others for their problems. This from an organization that encourages personal responsibility.

Labels: charter, KIPP, union