|
The more I visit schools and hear about the challenges for teaching, the more I am convinced that educators must move VERY quickly to make better use of the phenomenal technologies that are available to them. I have met teachers who understand how it works and are transforming the engagement of students in their schools. One sharp high schooler made reference to a teacher that integrated blogging and open-source voice-over IP into the language curriculum. ‘By making these tools available to us, she changed us from students into scholars!” I remember Eric Nord, entrepreneur and philanthropist extraordinaire, once cautioned our trustees saying that people in the foundation world tended to be risk averse. I find this to be true with far too many of my colleagues from foundations who tend to be surprisingly hesitant about pushing the technology and learning agenda in schools. There are exceptions of course. The work of people at the Hewlett Foundation and the George Lucas Foundations are leaders in seeking innovative solutions to the challenges facing teaching and learning in our nation’s public schools. Edutopia, published by the Lucas Foundation provides examples of how technology serves to usher in new ways that students can learn.
I think that high-stakes testing in schools and even the way States try to fix “the standards” are thwarting creativity in the classroom. Worse, is the system of so-called “assessment” which is emerging as a orgy of testing that focuses on a fixed moment of time in a child’s development. Rather than seeing learning as a process, current assessment tools serve the needs of statisticians but not teachers. Therein lies one of the huge rifts in our systems. There is a bureaucracy in the Departments of Education that appear to fetish-ize data collection and assessments and then there is the teacher in the classroom who feels pressured by the “officials” to give the tests and report back. The current system is an abomination, yet we in the philanthropic field, for the most part feel the need to tinker with the current system rather than seek out and then support systems that promote real learning.
We cannot ignore the power of social software an its impact on the future of education of young people in our schools. Appropriate use of technology can and will result in budgetary savings. One area alone is the textbook frenzy. In Ohio schools, the yearly budget for one students text book is $900 per student. One of my favorite websites is TED. Check the following website that talks about how technology can change the way a school system deals with textbooks in schools. Check out the
Most of my colleagues use their computer in the following ways: 1. an expensive electric typewriter, 2. The thing on which you get and read your e-mail. 3. The thing on which you can occasionally shop. 4. A resource to read information that are typically brochure-like websites. In addition to philanthropy program officers, too many teachers are comfortable with very antiquated forms of communication such as e-mail and do not understand the new technologies and impact they are having on teaching and learning. They really need to be challenged by visionary superintendents and principles to explore how the tools can enhance learning. More importantly, teachers and education leaders need to understand the way to assess learning with these tools is almost impossible given current assessment tools. Learning with and through technology (especially with the use of e-portfolios) allows teachers to view learning as a process rather than a static moment in time, which is what the current system uses. It is like the difference between viewing a students process on carefully edited video presentation, opposed to a series of photos.
In my opinion, Philanthropy can play an important role by providing teachers and school building leaders with opportunities for focused professional development in these areas. Concentrated programs bringing teachers and software program developers on a regular basis would serve the enhance education tremendously.
We in the philanthropy field do ourselves a great disservice (not to mention our grantees) by NOT engaging in conversations about these important technological tools that are changing the very lives our young people experience…..except in public schools! We cannot allow ourselves to become complacent in this area. I welcome comments. |
Tag Archives: Philanthropy
Education and Philanthropic Impact
The Nord Family Foundation is a small family foundation with assets approximating $100 million dollars. Annual distributions for education-related fields are in the vicinity of $2 million.
In recent years, The Nord Family Foundation investments in education include private and faith-based schools. Typically these schools are located in economically depressed neighborhoods and draw students from families that face a variety of hardship and challenges. Among these schools are: Arrupe Prep, in Denver, Colorado; Epiphany Prep in Dorchester, MA; Nativity Prep in Boston, MA; the Denver Street School in Denver and the Cleveland’s Urban Community School. Funding private and faith-based schools vs. support for programs in public schools are interesting challenges for staff and trustees. For many foundations, the choice is to support one or the other. When one considers where the highest impact can be made, investments in public schools are harder to discern and are often hidden in the complexities of public school bureaucracies. That is not to say we do not have success in that area. Foundation support for The Center for Applied Special Technology CAST and its Universal Design for Learning has had high impact on delivery of instruction and learning in public schools. The foundation support for private schools (typically in a range between $10,000 – $50,000) appears to have very high impact on the young people served by them. Each school reports the same results – children from inner city families are transformed when they become part of the school’s community. A recent article in The Boston Globe described the Epiphany School, “The small school takes in children whose worlds can sometimes be filled with chaos, neglect, and violence – and devoid of role models or even warm meals and housing. Rather than ignore those forces or battle them one by one, the school has tried to create a competing and almost all-encompassing universe where students can not only learn, but grow up.”
Each of these schools seems to have a key to changing children’s lives: a caring environment, parental and family involvement in the education of the child, holding children to high standards and instilling confidence they can succeed in life. This philosophy strikes at the heart of the mission of The Nord Family Foundation. Schools such as these count on the generosity of foundations like this one, to continue transforming the lives of families in our nation’s inner cities.
Philanthropys Challenge – College Success
Last month, I had the opportunity to attend a meeting sponsored by the grantmaking affinity group called Grantmakers for Education. The meeting challenged colleagues from grantmaking institutions to think beyond College Access, i.e. programs that ensure high school students get in to colleges, and focus instead on College Success. College Success considers the number of students who not only get into college, but complete it. The line up of speakers was impressive by any measure bringing together some of the most serious thinkers in the area.
This is a problem in the NE Ohio and in other areas the Nord Family Foundation provides support. Lorain County Community College is one of Northeast Ohio’s treasures. Its University Partnership Program is a gateway to higher education that opens opportunity for students who would otherwise not have either the funding or the time to leave home to get a college degree. Dr. Church and LCCC board are examples of how American “can-do”, tenacity and focus can realize hope in a part of the world that sees economic challenge and hardship increasing every day. The unfortunate news however is that approximately 40% to 60% of the students entering LCCC are not prepared for college work. A good many are students coming from public schools but there is also an increasingly large adult population that is returning to school after time in the workforces.
This problem is not reserved for Lorain County or Northeast Ohio. It is a national problem found at other Community Colleges across the country. Jamie Meristosis of the Lumina Foundation for Education suggests there are two levels at the Community College level that challenges to the remediation issue. First is the challenge of unprepared public school students and secondly, the problem or adults returning to the workforce.
Foundations seem to focus on the first challenge as they try to play their role in improving public schools. My own involvement with the issue leads me to the analysis of public schools in inner cities provided by Christopher Barbic, founder and head of YES Prep Public Schools, “The system is broken. The way we provide public education to inner city kids in this country does then a great disservice.”
One of the featured speakers was Dr. Michael Kirst Professor Emeritus of Education and Business Administration at Stanford University. Check hise blog site. Unprepared high school students is is a focus of his research. pondered by Dr. Michael Kirst. His main topic was the dis-articulation between how learning takes place in high school, and what is expected of students when they begin college.
A GREAT review of the issue of remediation and its definition can be found at Crosstalk. In this article, Dr. Kirst addresses the issue of remediation and college preparedness in public schools saying,
College Success Begins in High School
More than 70% of high school graduates now go on to postsecondary education. Yet, a new study of high school student engagement reveals some major concerns about the level of college preparedness of those students. See Voices of Students on Engagement: A Report on the 2006 Survey of Student Engagement out of Indiana Univeristy School of Education.
Using a national sample of grades 9-12, the survey found that:
· Fewer than half of the students go to high school because of what happens within the classroom environment
· A great majority of students are bored every day, if not in every class
· 43% spend 0-1 hour doing written homework, 83% spend 5 hours or less
· 55% spend 0 or 1 hour per week reading and studying for class, 90% spend 5 hours or fewer
· Students want more active learning such as peer working groups and presentations
· Girls report being more engaged across all dimensions of high school engagement than boys. (Girls were 58% of 4 year college graduates in 2006).
Engagement within a high school context is about a student’s relationship with the school community (adults, peers, curriculum, facilities, etc). More importantly, however, Kirst states, ” I believe that this study should raise concerns that many of these high school students will become at-risk college students who will not experience college success for the very reason that they were not sufficiently engaged in high school.” posted by The College Puzzle at 4/01/2007
Dr. Kirst’s analysis gives pause to any grantmaker attempting to “reform” schools in this country. As more foundations and affinity groups envision schools that will prepare students to succeed academically and intellectually in college.
The challenge for philanthropy is I thin, to find places where true innovation in learning is taking place and challenge the school infrastructure to bring it to scale. We would do well to visit schools and find programs that foster student engagement. In my experience, these schools make innovative use of technology to enhance already good teachers. In many instances, finding such institutions is difficult. Innovations in schools is almost impossible because public schools have become risk-averse institutions. Schools are so focused on performing well on tests, that few teachers will take the time and fewer principles will take the risk of implementing programs that will risk having students not peform well on the tests. Philanthropy will continue to have a role to serve as informed voice against the unintended negative consequences of No Child Left Behind legislation.
Education and the Achievement Gap
Through the foundation’s work with Fund for Our Economic Future, I have had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Randy McShepard who runs the philanthropic department of the RPM company in Akron. Randy and a group of other African American leaders conducted a study to try an understand the roots of the achievement gap among African American men in the Cleveland Schools.
The study was published and last year, Randy spoke with Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Regina Brett on WCPN about the report if his group which is called Policy Bridge. I think the report has importance to our topic, in that it addresses the education gap in our schools, especially with African American boys. It is called “Rap on Culture.”
The report really pushes many of us to address that uncomfortable conversation about race. What role can philanthropy have in supporting the black leadership as they try to confront these issues?
WCPN did a terrific call-in show on the report. Listen to the podcast at
I would really like to know what people think.
Notes to the Reader
I have worked in some type of philanthropic activity for most of the 25 years of my professional career. My English and Philosophy majors prepared me for that career in ways I could not have imagined when I took my first job that brought me to the Dominican Republic. The ensuing career included working in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, Europe and even Cambridge, Massachusetts. For the past ten years I have served as director of a family foundation office in Amherst, Ohio about 30 miles west of Cleveland. I have come to find that few people in my profession write with and for each other – too busy I suppose with grant review or reading grant evaluations. My colleagues often find time to have telephone conference calls with one another, but few really write. The wisdom shared is evanescent and too valuable to be lost to the archive of public knowledge.
People in the philanthropic sector have great collective wisdom. I am priviledged to work with many people who are dedicated and highly intelligent individuals. We have much to offer each other and others. My colleagues know that I push more open use of social software tools in the nonprofit sector. I have pushed to have us make better use of blogs, wikis and other tools that will keep us connected. I have heretofore not had much luck. My inner English major urges me to persevere.
With that background, I begin with site with a friendly nudge. Put fear aside, and write. Let our colleagues in the government and nonprofit sector share our conversations. It is a very democratic activity and quite rewarding.
In a ramble through a book store in Oberlin, Ohio I happened upon what I thought might be good. Better – A surgeon’s notes on performance turned out to be one of the more delightful reads of the spring. I share with you the comments of its author Dr. Atul Gwande and look forward to your comments.
“My…suggestion: Write something. I do not mean this to be an intimidating suggestion. It makes no difference whether you write five paragraphs for a blog, a paper for a professional journal or a poem for a reading group. Just write. What you write need not achieve perfection. It need only add some small observations about your world.
You should not underestimate the effect of your writing contribution, however modest. As Lewis Thomas once pointed out, quoting the physicist John Zitman, ‘the invention of a mechanism for the systematic publication of fragments of scientific work may well have been the key event in the history of modern science.’ By soliciting modest contributions from the many, we have produced a store of collective know-how with far greater power than any individual could have achieved. And this is as true outside science as inside.
You should also not underestimate the power of the act of writing itself. …writing lets you step back and think through a problem. Even the angriest rant forces the writer to achieve a degree of thoughtfulness.
Most of all, by offering your reflections to an audience, even a small one, you make yourself part of a larger world. Put a few thoughts on a topic in just a newsletter, and you find yourself wondering nervously: Will people notice it? What will they think? Did I say something dumb? An audience is a community. The published word is a declaration of membership in that community and also a willingness to contribute something meaningful to it.
So choose your audience. Write something.
From: Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance, Atul Gawande, Metropolitan books Henry Holt and Company LLC, New York. 2007
