I have been involved in the education community all of my life. Beginning first as a high risk youth, I was blessed with mentors who guided me and helped me to achieve my own dreams—not just of graduating high school, but moving into college and graduate school before starting my own education foundation.

I’ve spent the better part of 15 years researching schools across the country and working to get at the heart of what works when it comes to improving our schools. Through all my years advocating enduring education reform, I have worked with schools across the country on why courageous leadership is crucial and the steps needed for true school reform.

That’s why I was so pleased to hear President Obama focus his remarks this week in part on the Transformational Model of reform. Success for every child will not be found in closing down schools or firing 51 percent of a school’s staff, but in strengthening the culture of our schools, in a meaningful way.

As a starting point (and as the first of my six principles that guide high-performing schools), successful schools should define their mission, vision, values and goals to create a clear and unifying purpose for student learning. A good mission, for example, would articulate the following:

• What students should learn;
• How will we ensure engaging and relevant pedagogy;
• How we will know whether they have learned it; and
• What will happen if that learning does not occur.

If we are to make success the only option for all students, we would also answer two questions honestly. First, what will it take for everyone involved (administrators, teachers and parents) to resolve that failure is not an acceptable option for any student? And second, who is responsible for every child’s success—is it the student, the parent, the teacher or the administrators?

The second question hopefully is rhetorical and the answer, hopefully, is everyone. Research has shown that in high-performing schools, everyone is responsible for a student’s success. In low-performing schools, however, that feeling of collective responsibility is not there.

To transform lower performing schools, we have to significantly reshape the school culture so that failure is not an option for any student. This is particularly challenging in chronically low-performing schools, but it can be done, and done well.

For the HOPE Foundation, this has been true both domestically and internationally. The idea of pressure alone—via threats of termination, school closings, etc. —is not sufficient. Since people are generally doing as well as they are able, the supports and capacity-building must be at least as robust as the pressure. Here are some guidelines for the kind of support that have been fundamental to our success:

• Build self-efficacy beginning with staff abilities. This may not initially focus exclusively on instruction. In some cases, we set simple goals, such as asking staff to contact a certain number of parents per day. Physical changes to one of our schools in the Bronx led to planting a garden where there had only been broken glass, so that people could see and feel the changes afoot. The important lesson is to have quick, easy and continuous wins and then to celebrate successes.

• Build the leadership team. Shared leadership is essential to sustain school improvement. The combination of district and site leadership rallying around a shared mission and purpose leads to shared accountability, empowering multiple stakeholders to engage in the process and work together toward agreed upon priority. Our approach calls for developing the entire leadership team—together. This has been particularly helpful during times of transition. In areas where we have lost formal leaders, the surrounding emerging leaders and teaching staff have filled in the gaps.

• Developing a construct for lateral learning. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the leader of a school or district has three possible means of affecting change—through staff morale; working conditions; and staff capacity. Of the three, the latter is least affected by the leader’s actions because there are so few leaders and so many people who need skill and knowledge development. Our construct has called for job-embedded professional learning—where staff learn to identify and engage colleagues in knowledge sharing, especially with high-yield strategies already underway in a given school or district.

• Using a common framework and guiding principles. Each school circumstance is different, which is why programs and policies have limitations. Principles are portable, however. While they yield different approaches and conversations in each context, they can lead to similarly effective outcomes. As indicated in a recent Education Week report by Anthony Bryck, having a systems approach where all elements of the system are necessary to support the outcome is essential for success. The system we have used for the past decade, likewise, mirrors the elements in this report.

• Shifting the culture with trust as the foundation. One common element in almost all low-performing schools is a lack of trust among the adults in their schools. Changing this culture is essential to high-performing leadership teams, collaboration and relations with the community, students and colleagues. While not easy, trust builds overtime through well-structured and facilitated conversations using new practices and protocols on building agreements on what counts: Success for every student.

Lisa Henson, CEO, The Jim Henson Company

Since our earliest days, The Jim Henson Company has been dedicated to making learning exciting and easy to relate to for our young audiences. Of course, it can be challenging but we have found that fostering a child’s curiosity and creativity goes far in education. Using innovative puppetry and digital animation, our programming has inspired knowledge in children around the world. We channel the “How’s” and “Why’s” of children and use that genuine curiosity and desire for answers to encourage discovery and exploration.

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) are skills that often pose a challenge for educators to present creatively. However, if we can get children engaged in these subjects early, there is a greater chance their interest will take root and grow.

I’m sure you will recognize two programs produced by The Jim Henson Company—and currently airing on public television—that each take two very different approaches to science to engage young, curious minds, Dinosaur Train and Sid the Science Kid (co-produced with KCET). Dinosaur Train helps kids imagine themselves in the role of a scientist and explorer as they see the world through the eyes of a curious T-Rex and discover new types of dinosaur species in a world of prehistoric jungles, swamps, volcanoes and oceans. Each segment is followed by a clip of a real paleontologist, Dr. Scott Sampson (also appearing at this event) interacting with real kids interested in exploration and discovery. Sid the Science Kid takes a more realistic approach as Sid, an inquisitive young student, asks questions and solves problems using comedy and the help of his family and friends. Every week the show focuses on a different scientific theme, covering concepts that range from the weather to scientific tools and measurement.

Public television has proven a tremendous resource for educators in the past, and in working on these productions, we have seen first-hand how stations continue to find new ways to assist in presenting the content of our shows in an interactive manner. THIRTEEN & WLIW21 are excellent examples of this; not only is the educational material on television, but also online in games, lesson plans, videos and even iTunes. These tools have made it easier than ever to find new ways to inspire students, caregivers and teachers alike.

By focusing on specific scientific topics, we have joined in the mission to meet student achievement goals within the important STEM curriculum. As we create these shows, we know that we are speaking to the potential scientists of tomorrow; scientists who already have their work cut out for them and hold the key to our future in their hands. It is for this reason that I’m excited by my work each day and why I am coming to share my experiences for the first time at the Celebration of Teaching & Learning. I look forward to hopefully providing some inspiration and share ideas with educators who have the ability to connect with and ignite the spark of curiosity in their students.

One of the most enduring analogies related to teaching and learning, and one that I have heard many different versions of during my tenure in the field of education, is that good teaching is like a dance between students and their teacher. Teachers who take heed to this saying quickly learn that this requires the teacher to take the lead in the dance of teaching and learning. However, it also means that teachers must provide opportunities for students to guide the flow of the classroom.

In my observations of good teaching, I find that the comparison of teaching to dancing has much merit. This is the case not only because teachers and students take turns in guiding the dance of learning in the classroom, but also because the best teachers move and teach in a rhythmic fashion. They combine their content knowledge with their understanding of students’ academic strengths and weaknesses, and when they are in front of the classroom, they perform. They listen to the conversations the students are having, and then they move in response to what they see and hear. They are nimble in regards to picking up cues from students in the classroom and using them in their instruction, and they have an unparalleled emotional dexterity, that is activated when they interact with students.

Despite the value of the analogy that compares teaching to dancing, and the fact that many good teachers use this analogy to better their practice, I find that teaching in urban schools can more effectively described as a swim in the ocean rather than a dance. This is the case because, while a traditional dance requires movement through air, and we are all for the most part able to move through air (some more deftly than others), swimming requires the same coordination, rhythm, and attentiveness to detail as dancing, with the exception that it that has to be enacted underwater. In other words, urban education requires the same set of skills necessary for the dance of teaching, with the exception of the additional and more intense medium that we must dance through. Urban educators must be attuned to the rhythm of the classroom, attentive to the moments where it is necessary for the students to take the lead, and also deal with the strong currents of dancing in the ocean.

The ocean that I refer to, that educators must contend with as they dance, is hip-hop and the way that it has captured the imaginations of youth across the urban landscape. Unfortunately, in most urban classrooms, while teachers are engaged in a dance of teaching and learning with their students, the tune they are dancing to is different from the rhythm of hip-hop that drives their students. Hip-hop, which is a culture that is laden with unique understandings and practices that are oftentimes the embodiment of the ways that urban youth look at the world, is rooted in rhythm and movement. More importantly, it engulfs all that surrounds it in a powerful way, and consistently imposes its power to subtly connect to, and then take command over previous traditions. For instance, music, sports, and even politics have been influenced by hip-hop as opera singers collaborate with hip-hop artists, professional basketball players listen to hip-hop music in their locker rooms and on the court, and politicians debate hip-hop’s influence on voting.

Unfortunately, too many educators are so engaged in the dance of teaching and learning that they do not pay attention to the fact that they are engaging in this dance in the middle of a strong tide. They continue to teach with mouths open wide as they spout out words about their subject areas, and unbeknownst to them, they are sinking in their well-intentioned ineptitude. Other educators realize that the strong tide of hip-hop has commanded the passions of their students, but rather than attempt to understand hip-hop, fight vigorously against it. These are the educators who are swimming against the tide and inevitably, end up (in the best case scenario) right where they started in regards to student outcomes, or (in the worst case scenario) drowning in their feverish futility by failing to garner their students’ attention.

In response to the sweeping tides of hip-hop, I argue that the time has come in the field of education for a reanalysis of urbanness, a new focus on those that dwell in urban settings, and a more concerted focus on the subtleties in the everyday experiences that cause urban youth to be immersed in hip-hop. This type of approach considers hip-hop as a pedagogical tool and not just a type of music or a passing interest of certain students.

In order to move in the direction of the tides of change in urban education, and make it to the shore of student attainment, it is necessary to stop vigorously swimming against the tides of change. Swimming against the tide, or teaching in traditional ways, is equivalent to feverishly dancing to the same old tune and realizing that your partner is no longer in the room. If hip-hop is sweeping the students’ out-of-school realities, and teachers are teaching in traditional ways and against the current of hip-hop, their practices are equivalent to swimming against the tide, and educational attainment will not be reached.

It is also necessary to swim without our mouths open wide. By this, I mean that it is necessary to not be too vocal with our critiques of hip-hop without first finding ways to use it in our teaching. Swimming with mouths open wide only results in an absorption of all the negative parts of the current. We take in the water, and end up sinking. Urban educators, who are quick to open their mouths with critiques, will only get retorts. Those who proceed in their swim with mouths closed, learn more, and can survive the strong tide.

Considering hip-hop in urban education requires the following four steps to assist teachers caught up in a strong tide. First, there has to be a comfort/openness with the unchartered waters that following the tides may take us. Teachers have to understand that allowing parts of hip-hop into the classroom may be new and different from the ways they have learned to teach. However, using tools from hip-hop like presentations of rap songs about what is being taught, and allowing students to complete assignments and work together in cliques that are structured like rap cyphers (where rappers come together and rap in a circle) will lead to greater student interest in the classroom. Next, there must be a willingness to let those who have been through the tides save us when we are at a loss for how to make it. Urban students are deeply immersed in hip-hop, and can provide the teacher with examples of how to relate their culture to classroom instruction if they are asked. Teachers must talk to students about the culture the students are a part of, and allow them to both coteach and provide insight into improving teaching and learning. Thirdly, we must use whatever tools we have to stay afloat, even as we follow the tide. By this I mean that the skills that teachers have acquired about teaching are not completely useless. The need to engage in the dance of teaching, and the ways that teachers pose and answer questions are still important. I am arguing for an expansion of the tools we already have without countering new ways of teaching and learning that may develop from a focus on hip-hop. Finally, and most importantly, we must remind ourselves that following the tide will eventually bring us back to shore if we swim across the tide, and not against it. Embrace the students’ culture and utilize it in your teaching, and success will follow.

The US ranks much worse than most of our economic competitors in the mathematics performance of high school students.

We now have the knowledge to turn that around. We could raise the level of mathematics performance across the board, within a single school generation, so that we are number one in the world. All it would take is a one-time, national investment of $100 million over a five-year period. That’s what it would cost to build and put in place a system that could achieve that change, with the existing school system and the existing teachers. Once built, that system would be self-sustaining.

That sounds like a lot of money for an upfront investment. But thought of as a national initiative, it’s peanuts. The payoff for the nation’s health and future prosperity is far greater than the long term benefits we got from the far greater investment in NASA’s Apollo Program to put a man on the Moon.

I don’t think it’s going to happen in this way, but not because people don’t think it’s a good idea. Rather, it would probably require a combination of nonprofit and for-profit funding that our system does not allow.

The same goal can, and surely will, be attained. But it will take a lot longer.
I’ll tell you, briefly, what the approach is, how I am so sure it will work, and where I got that cost figure. Everything I say is based on work that has already been done.

First, let me tell you who I am.

I’m a mathematician at Stanford who directs a multidisciplinary think tank called the H-STAR institute, that looks at issues involving human sciences and new technologies, with a view to improving technology design and use, including applications of technology in education at all levels. (I’m also the Math Guy on National Public Radio.)

What I want to tell you about is connected with the H-STAR institute, but is based on some work I’ve just completed as an individual, working with a large software company in Silicon Valley.

We have spent the past four years looking to see if we can use the range of today’s technologies to improve the dismal math performance level of the nation’s high school students.

The slide in math performance among US children occurs during the age range 8 to 13. Essentially the middle-school years. That was the target group for our study.

Many attempts have been made to improve US middle-school mathematics education, but all have failed to achieve the desired results. I think the reason is clear. They have all focused on improving basic math skills.

In contrast, I (and a great many of my colleagues) believe the emphasis should be elsewhere. Mathematics is a way of thinking about problems and issues in the world. Get the thinking right and the skills come largely for free.

There are two reasons why the focus has been on skills. First, many people, even those in positions of power and influence don’t understand what mathematics is and how it works. All they see are the skills, and they think, wrongly, that is what mathematics is about. (Given that for most people, their last close encounter with mathematics was a skills-based school math class, it is not hard to see how this misconception arises.)

The other reason is more substantial. For over two thousand years, the only way to provide mathematics education to the masses was through the written word. Textbooks. But in order to learn mathematical thinking from a textbook, you have to approach it via the skills. That means you have to master the skills first.

But as I already remarked, mathematics is not about acquiring basic skills or learning formulas. It’s a way of thinking. It’s not about things you know, it’s something you do. And the printed word is a terribly inefficient way to learn how to do something.

The best way for an individual to learn how to do something is, as the Nike slogan says, “Just do it!”

Until now, learning by doing was not a viable approach to mathematics education. It was possible one-on-one, by an apprenticeship system, but not on a broad scale. Now it can be done.

We now have the know-how to raise the mathematical performance of our nation’s schoolchildren in the 8 to 13 age-range to the top of the world rankings in a single school generation.

The method is simulation. That’s the way we train pilots to fly aircraft, the way we train astronauts to fly the shuttle and to work in the Space Station, the way we train surgeons, and the way the US Army trains soldiers before they go anywhere near the battlefield.

And that’s the way we should train young people to think mathematically.

The technology to do that has been provided to us by the leisure and entertainment industries. Basically, it’s videogame technology and Web 2.0 infrastructure.

No one has yet tried to do this on the scale that is required. Yes, there are a lot of so-called math ed videogames out there. Lots of them are very superficial, some are more thoughtfully designed. But they all focus primarily on skills. They use the compelling nature of videogames as a wrapper for conventional curriculum, to try to get kids to learn and practice the basic skills. But as I’ve noted, mastery of skills does not lead to mathematical thinking.

For over two thousand years, mastery of mathematical skills had to come before developing the higher level thinking because we did not have simulators. All we had was books. Now we know how to build simulators.

Based on the work I and my colleagues have done over the last four years, we have a pretty good sense of what it would take to build such a simulator. That’s where I get my figure of $100 million over five years. Building the simulator in the first place would cost around $50 million. (That was the cost of building World of Warcraft.) The remaining amount is what it would cost to build the infrastructure to support and maintain the system for use across the nation. Once in place, it could be self-sustaining through user subscriptions.

Diane Ravitch, Historian and Education Author

We must keep a close watch on the “reforms” that are now in vogue. In light of the nearly $5 billion that the federal government is using to promote its version of “reform,” there will be quite a lot for us to talk about. None of these “reforms” have been validated by experience or experiments, but we’ll talk more about that later. They just happen to be the ideas that Barack Obama, Arne Duncan, Joanne Weiss (previously COO of the NewSchools Venture Fund, now director of the Race to the Top fund), the Gates Foundation, and the Broad Foundation want to impose. Someday we will find out if they make a difference.

I want to kick off 2010 by talking about the new era of greed. Not a pleasant topic, to be sure, but there’s no time like the present.

Living as we do in a market economy, we all understand that the profit motive rules in most private transactions. That’s okay with me. I don’t mind if the guy who sells me a car makes a commission, and the auto manufacturer makes a profit. I expect that there is a profit margin built into everything I buy, whether it is shoes or groceries or office supplies. This is no surprise.

Most people, however, feel uncomfortable at the idea of the profit motive becoming a regular part of public education, unless referring to vendors of materials. I know I do. I recoiled when I first heard the idea that children would be paid for raising their grades and test scores; I saw this scheme as undermining the core value of intrinsic motivation. If we pay children to study, will they continue to study if the pay stops? Without intrinsic motivation, education is a lost cause. My discomfort with the profit motive in public education is another reason I dislike merit pay. Merit pay assumes that teachers will not work hard unless they are paid more. It has been my experience that the overwhelming majority of teachers are working as hard as they know how; they will be happy to get more money for their efforts, but they have not been holding back and waiting for a bonus to spur them to greater effort.

Now, the Obama administration, with its odious Race to the Top, is welcoming entrepreneurs into public education with the expectation that the profit motive will lift achievement. This is arrant nonsense, though it is likely to take a decade before we see how little we have gained by this venture. A few weeks ago, my friends Checker Finn and Rick Hess published an amusing little essay called “Greedheads’ Christmas: The Seedy Side of Entrepreneurial Education Reform.” They acknowledged that many of today’s “for-profit and non-profit operators are self-promoters out to make a buck—and some are little more than snake oil salesmen.” The Race to the Top, they note, “has become a red light district for lusty charlatans and randy peddlers.”

The new era of greed doesn’t trouble them, because they believe that the world of public education has long been dominated by a government monopoly that serves the interests of adults, but not children. They believe that the only thing worse than a marketplace of greedy vendors is a government monopoly that is sluggish and bureaucratic.

Yes, there will be many greedy vendors in this new marketplace. Adult interests will be very well served. I know of charter school leaders who are paid between $400,000 and $500,000 annually. These are not principals, but entrepreneurs. Some of their schools enroll no more than 1,000 students. I read about a charter school founder who owns a for-profit company that supplies all the goods and services needed by his charter school; he clears a profit of over $1 million yearly. Who says that education doesn’t pay?

As the states remove their caps on charter schools, the entire sector will expand rapidly and become the Wild West of entrepreneurship. As more students are handed over to the private sector with public dollars, there will be financial scandals. It is inevitable. Greed is a powerful motivator.

During the 1930s, educators debated whether the schools were reflections of society or whether they might lead the way to social change. I think it is pretty clear that the so-called “reform” movement reflects the dominant values of an earlier decade. Remember how policymakers became excited in the early 1990s by the idea of reinventing government, outsourcing, and deregulation? The formula for success, they believed, was choice, competition, and accountability. Charter schools were born in this era and are only now becoming the Great Hope for the Future of Education, the darling of the big foundations and the Obama administration, as they were for the Bush administration.

Look what deregulation did for our nation’s financial institutions. Over the past year or so, we have seen the ruin that unchecked greed unleashed on our society. Let’s see what it does to our nation’s public education system.

The world is definitely round — I’ve seen the picture — and nothing you or the equally brilliant Tom Friedman says is going to make it flat.

And, the world economy is flat — I‘ve seen the diagram — and hopefully nothing I say is going to make it revert to a world of disconnected, isolated tribes and nations filled with illiterate hungry people living brutish short lives.

How do these two worlds, the spherical and flat interact? Where is the interface, the connections, the commons? Do sparks fly when they touch?

The intersection of geography and economics, culture and technology, history and current events, art and design and engineering, English literature and “foreign” languages — all play a role in the boundary-crossing integrated curriculum referred to as “global education”. What globalization is to the world at large, global education needs to be to the world of education. It needs to be an integrative force, a systems view of the world showing connections, overlap and patterns. It needs to bring perspective to the parochial, context to the country, and connections to the disparate content silos of our educational system.

Globalization is making the world into one system– one environment, one market, one pool of technology, labor, finance, culture, disease, crime, and problems. So too, global education needs to makes the world of disparate subject matter into one integrated cross-disciplinary subject — that makes sense, and is relevant to students.

Globalization is measured by the flows of goods, services, people, money, ideas, and problems across borders. Global education can be measured by the connections it makes with other subjects, the crossing of borders and disciplinary boundaries, the integration of math and science with geography, history, literature, political science and current events. Making the world relevant in an age of information overload, showing the patterns that connect, the intersections of influence and invention, place and planet, inspiring with hope and vision when all seems disconnected and irrelevant– that’s quite an achievement — and exactly what our world needs. And that’s our challenge as global educators — and here’s the punch line — in a global age, we are all global educators.

“Scientist in the house!” That’s what you’ll hear from a curious 5-year-old named Sid when his grandmother brings him home from preschool each day. You’ll also hear questions. Big questions like “Why are my shoes shrinking?” and “Why do bananas get mushy?” But then that’s what scientists do, and that’s why in many respects children are born scientists.

That so many of those same children grow up to have negative feelings about science — a reversal that must be connected to messages kids pick up in their formal and informal learning environments and from society in general — is a topic for another day. Today, I want to talk about Sid, who besides being a typical preschooler, is also the star of “Sid the Science Kid,” the daily television series created by The Jim Henson Company, designed to meet the natural interests of 3-6 year olds, and broadcast on public television. The “Sid” part of the series is animated with the plot revolving around big questions that Sid and his three classmates explore with the help of their teacher, Miss Susie. Sid’s parents, grandmother, and even baby brother Zeke help Sid test what he’s learned. Each episode also contains a “live action” segment that reinforces and extends the learning. There is also a good website (pbskids.org/sid) fashioned in a way for adults and children to work together on further exploration of the topics covered in the shows.

Forget for a moment that the shows are beautifully produced and developmentally right for this age group. We expect that from PBS and especially from The Jim Henson Company. (By the way, this November marks the 40th anniversary of Sesame Street and the introduction of the Muppets on PBS.) “Sid the Science Kid,” is really about preparing children for their first few years of school in ways that are directly tied to both the process and content of learning about science. If you’re a parent, grandparent or caregiver of 3-6 year olds who are preparing for or just starting school, this series should be part of their homework … and yours!

The content is broken down into seven key areas: tools and measurement, transformation and change, senses, health, simple machines, backyard science and the human body. These topics line up closely with what New York City Schools expect students to learn in grades K-2. (Visit schools.nyc.gov to explore how the City describes its science curriculum and standards and to explore for yourself how this series supports those learning goals.) Of course, while a big part of learning for this age group is letting children discover things for themselves, the whole learning experience will be deeper and more fun if the adults participate, too. Watch the programs. Talk to your child about what she or he experienced. Visit the web site with them. Above all, encourage the kind of exploration that Sid and his friends are modeling, and work together to try some of the experiments Sid and his friends conduct. All of the materials needed are readily available in your home or outside.

All of this is starting to sound really serious — a pre-school version of SAT Prep — but it isn’t. Both “Sid the Science Kid,” and science are fun for kids. The series web site is loaded with science games, video from the live action segments of the show and some great songs. My favorite — no doubt because I’m a boy — is “Decay” which illustrates the wonderfully icky things that happen to fruits, vegetables, and flowers when they reach that last cycle of their existence. Any song that uses the word “pee-yoo-ee” is going to make a hit with 3-6 year olds. (And apparently with a 57-year old, too!)

My colleagues in the Education Department at Thirteen are planning some “Sid the Science Kid,” outreach events in the coming months around the country and locally at NYSCI — the cool new name for the New York Hall of Science in Queens. NYSCI is the perfect venue given the interactive exhibits and the large number of families that visit every week. In a way, going to NYSCI is like stepping into your own “Sid the Science Kid,” television show! When these events get scheduled, I’ll alert you in this column.

For now, you can watch “Sid the Science Kid,” on Thirteen/WNET, Monday-Friday at 9 a.m., and on WLIW21 at 11:30 a.m. You can also find it on KIDS Thirteen, but you’ll need to check your cable company listings to learn when and where to find it. The new season of “Sid the Science Kid,” starts on September 14 with a focus on weather.

One last thing. Actually two things. First, The Jim Henson Company is launching another new series on September 7. “Dinosaur Train” — running on Thirteen at 10 a.m. — is created for the same 3-6 age group. I’ve seen some of the series, and both the animated segment and the live action part where kids get to meet Dr. Scott, the paleontologist, are terrific. (Get ready for your child to start singing the A-Z dinosaur song — yep, 26 different dinosaur names.) You can preview a whole episode for yourself at www.pbskids.org/dinosaurtrain.

Second, for those of you who are educators, you’ll be pleased to know that Lisa Henson, Jim Henson’s daughter and CEO of The Jim Henson Company, will be speaking at our next Celebration of Teaching & Learning on March 5, 2010. Stay tuned!

Ronald Thorpe is Vice President and Director of Education at WNET.org, parent company of Thirteen/WNET, WLIW21, and Creative News Group, the public television stations for Metropolitan New York City and Long Island. He oversees a 25-person department dedicated to extending the value of public television’s resources beyond broadcast and especially into preK-12 education.

Among other initiatives, Dr. Thorpe is responsible for the annual Celebration of Teaching & Learning, a two-day professional development conference for more than 8,000 teachers and administrators. Write to Ron at thorpe@thirteen.org.

This blog entry is an adaptation of Dr. Thorpe’s monthly column in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.

As the anniversary month of the Apollo 11 moon landing is upon us, it’s a good time to remember what it took to achieve such an accomplishment and how much the country gained from it. It also should be a wake-up call for how far our country has slipped internationally in developing the human capacity that fueled that historic flight.

There is much talk among educators these days about STEM, an acronym for “science, technology, engineering, and math.” The United States has fallen seriously behind on a variety of measures connected with student achievement and interest in these areas, and this gap could pose a threat to our economic competitiveness — and more! — if we don’t do something about it. A year or so ago, a senior official in the Department of Homeland Security told me that he considered the situation so serious that it was now a threat to national security.

The last time we faced such a scenario was back in 1957 after the Russians launched Sputnik. The nation mobilized, but it also was galvanized by the fear of what could happen if we didn’t refocus our energy and resources. By the time President Kennedy gave his famous speech in 1961 announcing that the U.S. would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade, a large array of new and well-funded initiatives had been put in place to promote what we now would call STEM initiatives. They started with comprehensive investments in K-12 education and reached all the way to the creation of NASA. Many of the initiatives were so successful that we lived off the “capital” they created for decades.

That capital is now long spent, and with the general dis-investment in STEM areas over the last eight years, the nation finds itself in a difficult spot. The full extent of these decisions, especially as they relate to schools, is still mostly unknown. Students entering eighth grade this coming September mark the leading edge of a generation of children whose elementary school years took place during “No Child Left Behind.” The pressure to test students in math and English language arts in order to demonstrate student proficiency forced schools to short-change children in other subjects. The tests for science kept getting pushed aside while schools tried to get things right in the subject areas that were tested. I will not be surprised if the next outcry we hear from middle school and high school teachers will be that they don’t know what to do with large numbers of students who aren’t prepared for the most basic courses in biology, chemistry and physics, and whose knowledge of math is too rudimentary to get them into a track that will lead them to calculus. Ironically, these same students have been raised on technology, but their exposure to using technology in problem-solving or knowledge-gaining situations falls far below their abilities in gaming and social networking.

Of course, these gaps are the greatest among poor children, children of color, and those who don’t speak English as a first language.

Public television has never abandoned the STEM areas, even though traditional funders have pulled back their support. Many of programs are designed to engage children in seeing the world through the lens of science, technology, engineering and math. “Sid the Science Kid,” from the Jim Henson Company, began last fall and has become a major hit with children ages 3-6. For the last seven years “Cyberchase,” an animated series that focuses on STEM topics, has enjoyed a massive nationwide audience with 7-10 year olds spending an average of 60 minutes per visit to the web site where they are playing … math games! “Design Squad” and “Fetch” appeal to the next higher age group, while our two iconic series, “Nature” and “Nova,” along with the more recent “Nova Science Now,” are enjoyed by older students, teachers, and a broad general public. Special offerings such as “Mysterious Human Heart,” the recent “Music Instinct” and the upcoming “Human Spark,” hosted by Alan Alda, provide a steady stream of new content.

As is always the case with public television, the value of these programs goes far beyond the broadcast. More and more, the programs are available for streaming and downloading off the internet, and the Education Department at Thirteen — along with others throughout public broadcasting — creates many materials to help teachers and students use these programs effectively in classrooms. A trip to THIRTEEN’s website at www.thirteen.org and a simple click on the “education” tab will take any visitor into a world of possibilities along with the web sites connected to the programs themselves.

Oh, and did I mention that all of these resources are free? How’s that as an opportunity for schools facing tight budgets!

New York State is deeply concerned about how our students are doing in STEM areas. Recently Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson, distinguished scientist and president of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, convened a large group to begin charting what could become a blueprint for the New York State STEM Learning Network. I was pleased to be there representing Thirteen/WNET and the other eight public television stations in the State. Earlier in June the Carnegie Corporation of New York released its new commission report, “The Opportunity Equation,” addressing the same topic. Carnegie President Vartan Gregorian presided at the meeting in front of what was one of the most power-packed audiences I’ve seen in years, including U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, and Chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents, Merryl Tisch. I came away from both meetings encouraged by the prospects. (You can find the Carnegie report at www.opportunityequation.org.)

Having been in education now for 35 years, however, I know enough to temper my enthusiasm for such promises. The Carnegie Report is not the first, but the newest in a rather long list. The RPI meeting also has many precursors. The promoters of these initiatives are sincere and committed, and they are definitely on the right track. But the nation has a way of putting such concerns on the shelf rather than into practice. We are much better at reacting to real or perceived threats to our well being than taking a proactive stance, especially during bad economic times when the temptation to hunker down and protect the status quo is great. In a world that is increasingly “flat,” the United States has lost much of what kept us easily ahead of other countries. If we are to remain strong, and if the core of the American Dream is to stay alive for our children, we need to get serious about what the Carnegie Report suggests and what Dr. Jackson is trying to mobilize. There’s no better place to start than here in New York, and public television is an eager partner in all such efforts.

Ronald Thorpe is Vice President and Director of Education at WNET.org, parent company of Thirteen/WNET, WLIW21, and Creative News Group, the public television stations for Metropolitan New York City and Long Island. He oversees a 25-person department dedicated to extending the value of public television’s resources beyond broadcast and especially into preK-12 education.

Among other initiatives, Dr. Thorpe is responsible for the annual Celebration of Teaching & Learning, a two-day professional development conference for more than 8,000 teachers and administrators. Write to Ron at thorpe@thirteen.org.

This blog entry is an adaptation of Dr. Thorpe’s monthly column in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle.

In New York City alone, 850,000 trays are disposed of daily (4 million weekly!) from our public schools. Styrofoam* (or polystyrene) trays take hundreds or maybe thousands of years to decompose. Studies have shown that styrene may leach out of these containers and contaminate hot foods, especially those with a fatty content.

This student project utilized three-dimensional design and the concept of time in art and design to frame this complex tray problem as a visual metaphor. The class had only 2 class periods and a little over a week to complete the collaborative design and construction process. Initially, working in small groups, students proposed several designs. The entire piece was constructed in the Aronson Gallery, beginning Sunday afternoon with 7 class members and completed the following morning with the entire class.

The industrial quality of the lightweight polystyrene foam trays provided an interesting material and shape for unit repetition, linear layering, and organic configurations. Structurally, creating enough weight at the base to stabilize any constructed height was challenging. Text was incorporated via cutouts and stitching.

McDonalds stopped using Styrofoam* food containers in 1990. Brooklyn Council Member Bill De Blasio has introduced legislation to prohibit the use of polystyrene in New York City agencies and restaurants. Some west coast cities, such as Portland, Seattle and Berkeley, have implemented such laws (San Francisco’s law has an affordability clause).

Several NYC DOE schools have switched to alternative bagasse or biodegradable trays by self-funding the cost increase. The best long-term solution may be to return to washable, permanent ware trays, creating green collar tray-cleaning jobs in school cafeterias. Washable trays eliminate the unending financial and environmental costs of manufacturing, transporting and disposal of one-use trays. This is a solvable problem!

For more information, go to www.SOSnyc.org (Styrofoam Out of Schools, nyc)…

*Styrofoam is a licensed trademark of its manufacturer, the Dow Chemical Company

This blog originally appeared on The School of Design Strategies web site, sds.parsons.edu/?cat=17

In the United States, a growing number of community organizations are embracing this celebration by celebrating the children in their community through activities or events that:

• are child centered and fun
• inspire confidence and determination
• involve unique community
• mirror the cultural diversity of each community
• inspire and empower new generations of achievers

Due to a special relationship with PS 143 Louis Armstrong School in Queens, Thirteen’s Family Literacy Unit spent an extraordinary morning kicking off the week of El Día de los Niños with the first grade students there and Maya and Miguel. The students in a predominantly Hispanic community had an exciting morning meeting Maya and Miguel and watching an episode WITH Maya and Miguel that helped instill the concepts of determination, confidence and hard work. On this very warm day, Maya and Miguel surprised the well-behaved students at the end of the screening with Popsicles in celebration of all of their hard work. To make these students feel even more important and celebrated each child was provided the opportunity to have some quick one-on-one time with Maya and Miguel. At this time they were provided with Superfabuloso! pencils from two of their favorite characters.

This small event really encompassed the meaning of El Día de los Niños — allowing the children to feel honored and celebrated while inspiring them to continue to work hard to realize their hopes and dreams. What will you do on April 30^th to celebrate El Día de los Niños?