My big concern is that today's frenzied enthusiasm for computer-assisted "personalized learning" will lead us to heedlessly charge into some all-too-predictable pitfalls, fueling one more cycle of ed tech faddism and disappointment.
Today, I chat with 2017 National History Teacher of the Year Sara Ziemnik about her thoughts on teaching history, and how one nurtures open and respectful debate in an era of polarization and general nastiness.
In many places, perhaps the most important mission for civic leaders is to provide the persistence, patience, and maturity that can help turn a vicious cycle into a virtuous one.
Today, let's set aside the Beltway stuff to talk a bit about that sign and what lately strikes me as the remarkably promiscuous use of that term—white supremacist—in education circles.
The other week, I called out teachers unions for failing to "walk the walk"; I think the same admonition can be applied to education funders, big time.
While the things that Moskowitz discusses strike me as pretty commonsensical, the reality is that it's just much harder to forge new expectations and norms in organizations marked by inherited cultures, routines, and contracts, and where influential employees have been doing things a certain way for decades.
DeVos' remarks were much more "tread carefully" than "go for it." That seems a healthy evolution.
There's much to say on testing and accountability in 2017. But today I'll stick to offering just five thoughts sparked by Dan Koretz's new book and yesterday's discussion.
More than a quarter of teachers miss more than two weeks each year, above and beyond scheduled breaks and holidays. That's a problem. And the fact that union leaders can't say so is perhaps a bigger one.
If we're going to refashion a 19th-century model of schooling for the 21st century (and I think we need to), how we go about it will be at least as important as what we try to do.