Langhorne for Forbes, “The ‘Dating App’ That Helps Teachers Find A Best-Fit School”

After two years of teaching pre-kindergarten, Cristina Guadalupe was ready to transition to the elementary level. Dedicated to working with low-income students, she began applying to schools in underserved communities across Camden, New Jersey. She sent out application after application but heard nothing back.

“Each application took me hours to complete, and I couldn’t even be sure someone read it. It was getting hard to stay hopeful,” she says.

Then, she found Selected.

Launched in 2016, Selected is a hiring tool for schools, but Waine Tam, the app’s developer and company’s CEO, describes it as a “dating app for teachers and schools.”

Teachers fill out a profile where they relay their qualifications and experience. Then, they answer questions about desired school culture and pedagogical preferences.

 

Continue reading at Forbes.

Ben Ritz Discusses New PPI Report on Two Radio Interviews

Director of PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future, Ben Ritz, participated in two radio interviews this week to discuss his new report, Defunding America’s Future: The Squeeze on Public Investment in the United States. The report explains how short-sighted fiscal policy is undermining critical investments in education, infrastructure and scientific research that are integral to the long-term health of our economy. Read the full report here.

The first interview was on Facing the Future with host Chase Hagaman, which airs on New Hampshire’s WKXL radio station. Listen to the WKXL interview here.

The second interview was on Reality Check with host Charles Ellison, which airs on Philadelphia’s WURD radio station. Listen to the WURD interview here.

Langhorne for The 74, “From Troubled School to Turnaround to Texas ‘Teaching Lab'”

“Good morning, scholars!” principal-in-training Jackie Navar yells, kicking off the community meeting at Ogden Elementary School, part of the 78207 zip code on San Antonio’s struggling West Side.

Hundreds of children echo Navar’s salutations.

“What’s a college-ready word for ‘good’?” Navar asks the room. Hands shoot up into the air: “Amazing.” “Fantastic.” “Great.”

“Excellent. Here’s a new one for you — ‘phenomenal.’ Can we all say that together?”

At Ogden, each school day begins with breakfast followed by community meetings like this one. Preschoolers eat in their classrooms, kindergartners through third-graders in the cafeteria, fourth- and fifth-graders in the gym, and sixth-graders upstairs. Ninety-eight percent of Ogden’s 650 students qualify as economically disadvantaged, and every one receives a free school breakfast.

“The community meeting helps our scholars start the day with a positive mindset,” says Tim Saintsing, executive director of teaching and learning labs at Relay Graduate School of Education, which was brought in to run the school after years of poor performance. “It lets students and staff reflect on our core values and our sense of self as a school. It gives us a chance to celebrate our successes and discuss our challenges.”

Today, a first- and second-grade class are being honored with attendance awards. As a prize, the students get to sing their homeroom chants, and then, in what’s known as a “thunder clap,” the room simultaneously brings their hands together once — loudly — in their honor.

“Remember,” Navar yells across the cafeteria, “If you miss school, you…”

“Miss out!” the kids shout back in unison.

It’s a vastly different atmosphere from the Ogden Elementary of 2016.

Continue reading at The 74.

Press Release: New PPI Report Explores Why Suburban America Needs Charter Schools Too

WASHINGTON—Despite dramatically improving academic achievement and performance in America’s urban areas, public charter schools have had difficulty expanding into the country’s more affluent suburban communities. A new report released today by the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) investigates why.

Authored by PPI education analyst Emily Langhorne, the report analyzes the performance of existing suburban charter schools, explores how charter schools can benefit suburban students, and highlights why charter schools are struggling to expand into the suburbs.

“The spread of charter schools in suburban areas can create tremendous opportunities for families dissatisfied with the traditional neighborhood schools, whose children might do better in a system that offered a variety of educational models, specialized curriculum, and personalized learning,” writes Langhorne.

“In a thriving charter sector, one finds Montessori programs and other project-based models, dual-language immersion schools, schools that use computer-based learning in creative ways, competency-based schools, Waldorf schools, early college high schools, arts-focused schools, STEM schools, and more.”

However, three major factors are preventing schools like these from expanding into suburban areas, according to the report. These include: political barriers erected in states by teachers unions, who feel as though charters are in direct competition with local school districts; the overestimation of local public schools by suburbanites, despite evidence that suburban students are falling behind on international tests when compared to their socio-economic peers in other countries; and widespread charter school myths, misconceptions, and misinformation.

“Unfortunately, Americans overall—especially those who have been exposed to charters only through media coverage—still don’t understand how charter schools can benefit their communities because they don’t have a clear picture of what charter schools are,” Langhorne says. “Because of this lack of experience, upscale, suburban families have become susceptible to the well-trodden myths about the supposed dangers of public charters.”

For charter schools to take root in suburban areas, Langhorne argues, the narrative around them needs to change from one centered on creating options for low-income families to one that emphasizes creating innovative schools for all kids.

“The priorities of charter school parents in the suburbs are not the same as those in urban areas. For suburban parents, public charter schools aren’t usually a means to escape failing public schools; they’re an alternative to an education system that is not innovative, engaging, or specialized. Appealing to such parents means placing less emphasis on test scores and more on curriculum, less talk about failing schools and more about different learning models.”

###

Why Suburban Districts Need Public Charter Schools Too

On November 8, 2016, while the rest of the world anxiously awaited the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, a subset of voters with a keen interest in education had their eyes on Massachusetts. This was the day Bay Staters would vote on Ballot Question 2, a proposal to raise the state’s cap on public charter schools by up to 12 new schools per year.

Massachusetts is home to some of the highest performing charter schools in the country, with especially impressive gains at schools serving urban, low-income and minority students. In Boston, one of the eight districts in the state to have reached its cap on charter schools, students at charters learn the equivalent of an extra year of math and reading each year, when compared to their peers with similar demographics and past test scores at the city’s traditional public schools.1The local school district, Boston Public Schools (BPS), enrolls about 53,000 students in a city of about 77,000 students. Currently, public charters enroll only about 10,000 students, but there are more than 32,000 children on waitlists for these schools.

 

Osborne and Langhorne for The 74, “Where Politics Make Charters Difficult, 9 Tips for How Urban Districts Can Create Charter-like Schools – and Improve Their Success”

Over the past 15 years, the fastest improvement in urban public education has come from cities that have embraced charter schools’ formula for success — autonomy, choice, diversity of school designs, and real accountability for performance. To compete, many districts have recently tried to spur charterlike innovation and increase student achievement by granting their school leaders more autonomy.

District-run autonomous schools are a hybrid model, a halfway point between charters and traditional public schools. They’re operated by district employees, but they can opt out of many district policies and — in some cities — union contracts.

Our recent analysis of state exam scores from 2015 and 2016 in Boston, Memphis, Denver, and Los Angeles showed that public charter schools outperformed both traditional public and in-district autonomous schools on standardized tests in three of the four cities studied. In the one exception, Memphis, the district concentrated its best principals and teachers in, and provided extra funding and support to, its autonomous iZone schools.

However, when the political landscape makes chartering difficult, in-district autonomous models may be the second-best option. Districts can increase the success of these schools if they heed these nine lessons learned by the four cities in our study.

 

Continue reading at The 74.

Langhorne for Forbes, “An Unlikely Alliance: Here’s What Can Happen If Teachers Unions Embrace Charter Schools”

For the past six months, education experts have speculated at length about the role of teachers unions after the Supreme Court decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Some argue that the inability to charge all teachers agency fees, even if they don’t join the union, will force the unions to focus more on the needs of teachers and less on influencing election results. Others suggest that to attract new members the unions will need to highlight and increase the professional development opportunities– continuing education, technology training, leadership conferences, etc.– that they offer.

While the loss of agency fees may hurt teachers unions in the short term, it clearly presents an opportunity for them to reinvent themselves, to evolve and find their place in 21st century education systems.

In Minnesota, two local union leaders have spent the better part of the last decade doing just that. In 2011, Louise Sundin and Lynn Nordgren helped form The Minnesota Guild of Public Charter Schools, a union-backed charter school authorizer created to oversee schools that promote teacher leadership and professionalism.

Continue reading at Forbes.

The Progressive Choice: Creating 21st Century School Systems

Progressives have long understood that access to a quality education is the one factor that consistently and permanently changes the trajectory of a life. As such, creating a strong public school system has been at the epicenter of our decades-long struggle to promote equal rights and equal opportunity for all.

For many of America’s families of color, a public school education has historically been the path to the middle class. Unfortunately, America’s public education system is stagnant. Scores on the most widely respected test, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), have been flat for a decade. Without transformation, our school districts will be unable to prepare students for the demands of the future, and our kids won’t be productive in tomorrow’s global workforce. As President Barack Obama said, “In a global economy, where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity – it is a prerequisite.”

It’s a prerequisite we’re not close to attaining. America’s public education system continues to function like one designed for the industrial era. While other industries have adapted to the Information Age and the global marketplace, most of America’s school districts remain trapped in a structural model of centralized decision making and top-down bureaucracy.

 

Kim for Washington Monthly, “Degrees of Separation”

Geography is a barrier to higher education for tens of millions of rural Americans. A few states have hit on an innovative solution.

fter graduating from her rural Pennsylvania high school in 2005, Tesla Rae Moore did what many, perhaps most American high school seniors today expect to do: she left home for college with her sights set on a four-year degree. But when she was a sophomore in nursing school at the University of Pittsburgh at Bradford, the unexpected intervened: she became pregnant with her son.

“It was a high-risk pregnancy, and I decided to stop the program,” she said. Moore returned to her hometown of Kane, a community of about 3,500 nestled at the edge of the Allegheny National Forest in northwestern Pennsylvania. At first just intending to take a break, she ended up dropping out. “I was going to go back, and then it was just one of those things,” she said. “Life happened.”

Moore didn’t lose her desire to return to school; she just couldn’t figure out how to make it work as the years went by and her family grew. “I’m a single mom, and the only income earner, so I couldn’t quit my job to go to school,” she said. “And if I took classes all day, I’d have to work at night, and who would take care of the kids?” Given her work and family obligations, Moore couldn’t fit in college unless she could attend classes nearby. But getting to Pitt-Bradford, the nearest four-year school, required a round-trip commute of an hour and a half. The nearest community college, in Butler County, was a two-hour drive each way. Moore didn’t have that kind of time to spare. Online-only classes might have been a solution, but Moore felt she needed more structure to succeed. “Especially for somebody that’s been out of school, it takes a lot of discipline,” she said.

A surprising number of Americans face the same problem Moore did. According to the Urban Institute, nearly one in five American adults—as many as forty-one million people—lives twenty-five miles or more from the nearest college or university, or in areas where a single community college is the only source of broad-access public higher education within that distance. Three million of the Americans in these so-called “higher education deserts” lack broadband internet, as well.

Continue reading at Washington Monthly.

Kim for Inside Higher Ed, “Higher Ed Solutions for Rural Students”

More states should consider creating rural higher education centers, writes Anne Kim, and colleges should embrace such centers as a way to help more students succeed.

Career Tech Academy at Southern Virginia Higher Education Center (Credit: Inside Higher Ed)

After graduating from her rural Pennsylvania high school in 2005, Tesla Rae Moore did what most American high school seniors today expect to do: she left home for college with her sights on a four-year degree. But when she was a sophomore in nursing school at the University of Pittsburgh at Bradford, the unexpected intervened: she became pregnant with her son.

“It was a high-risk pregnancy, and I decided to stop the program,” she said. Moore returned to her hometown of Kane, a community of about 3,500 in northwestern Pennsylvania. At first intending just to take a break, she ended up dropping out. “I was going to go back, and then it was just one of those things,” she said. “Life happened.”

Moore didn’t lose her desire to return to college; she just couldn’t figure out how to make it work. As a single mom, she couldn’t quit her job. Moreover, getting to Pitt-Bradford, the nearest four-year institution, required a ninety-minute round-trip commute. The closest two-year college, in Butler County, was a two-hour drive each way. Online-only classes might have been a solution, but Moore felt she needed more structure to succeed. “Especially for somebody that’s been out of school, it takes a lot of discipline,” she said.

Continue reading at Inside Higher Ed.

Langhorne for Forbes, “Five Reasons Why Independent Charters Outperform In-District Autonomous Schools”

Over the past 15 years, cities across the country have experienced rapid growth in the number of public charter schools serving their students. Charter schools are public schools operated by independent organizations, usually nonprofits. They are freed from many of the rules that constrain district-operated schools. In exchange for increased autonomy, they are normally held accountable for their performance by their authorizers, who close or replace them if they fail to educate children. Most are schools of choice, and unlike magnet schools in traditional districts, they are not allowed to select their students. If too many students apply, they hold lotteries to see who gets in.

The charter formula – autonomy, accountability, diversity of learning models, choice and operation by nonprofits – is transforming urban education. In states with strong charter laws and equally strong authorizers, charter schools have produced impressive students gains, especially in schools with high-minority, high-poverty populations.

Recently, districts from Boston to Los Angeles have tried to increase student achievement by replicating parts of this formula, in particular giving their school leaders more autonomy.

Continue reading at Forbes.

Osborne & Langhorne for The 74, “Can Urban Districts Get Charter-Like Performance With Charter-Lite Schools? The Answer Lies in Autonomy”

Over the past 15 years, cities across the country have experienced rapid growth in the number of public charter schools serving their students. In states with strong charter laws and equally strong authorizers, charter schools have produced impressive students gains, especially in schools with high-minority, high-poverty populations.

According to the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) 2015 study on 41 urban regions, the academic gains made by students in charter schools increase with each year students spend at the school. Those who have spent four or more years at a charter gain the equivalent of 108 more days of learning in math and 72 more days in reading each year than their traditional public school peers. In other words, they learn about 50 percent more every year than those with similar demographics and past test scores who stayed in a district school.

Urban districts have spent a lot of time and money trying to compete with the charter sector’s formula for success — autonomy, choice, diversity of school designs, and real accountability. Recently, however, many districts have attempted to replicate parts of it instead. Districts from Boston to Denver to Los Angeles have tried to spur charter-like innovation and increase student achievement by granting school leaders more autonomy.

Continue reading at The 74.

Can Urban Districts Get Charter-like Performance With Charter-lite Schools?

Over the past 15 years, cities across the country have experienced rapid growth in the number of public charter schools serving their students. When implemented with fidelity, the charter formula – autonomy, choice, diversity of school designs, and real accountability –produces continuous improvements in school quality, with impressive student gains in charter schools serving high-minority, high-poverty populations.

Facing competition from public charters, urban school districts from Boston to Denver to Los Angeles began to look for ways to increase student achievement in their schools. Some attempted to spur charter-like innovation by granting traditional public school leaders more autonomy. District-run “autonomous” schools are a hybrid model – a halfway point between charters and traditional public schools. They’re still operated and supported by district employees, but they can opt out of many district policies and, in some models, union contracts.

The theory behind school-level autonomy is that students can achieve more if those who understand their needs best – namely, principals and teachers, not the central office – make the decisions that affect their learning. While the amount of autonomy afforded district run autonomous schools differs from district to district, quite a few have invested in this strategy. In this report – which is based on analysis of test scores from 2015 and 2016 and interviews with participants in Boston, Memphis, Denver, and Los Angeles – we will examine different models, look at their results, and draw out lessons for other districts considering an autonomy strategy.

 

Langhorne for Forbes, “The Teacher-Powered Schools Movement: Transforming Teachers From Industrial Workers To Professionals”

Julie Cook was ready to leave teaching. She’d worked in both urban and suburban districts and in three different states. No matter where she taught, she ended up frustrated with the lack of autonomy given to, and professionalism expected from, teachers.

Top-down policies dictated what she taught, on what timeline, and how her students were assessed. Supervisors didn’t understand why she wanted to create curriculum. And her colleagues treated teaching like a by-the-hour job, rather than a profession.

“They clocked in and out, presented information, and left the rest up to the powers that be,” she says.

In 2002, just as she’d finally decided to leave the field, Cook was offered a position at Souderton Charter School Collaborative, a teacher-powered school in Souderton, Pennsylvania.

“Teachers at our school have full or partial autonomy over our professional development, budget, curriculum, assessments, teacher evaluations, school policies, scheduling, and hiring,” she explains. “I was invited to create, decide, collaborate, and lead. I no longer felt crushed.”

She’s been teaching there ever since.

 

Continue reading at Forbes.

Langhorne for The Washington Post, “Following New Orleans’s Lead on Charter-School Education”

The big moments of historical importance don’t go unremarked, but quieter milestones often pass with little notice unless we stop to commemorate them and note their significance. On July 1, one of those modest but meaningful events will occur when New Orleans marks a change that might sound like a dry bureaucratic reshuffling, but is in fact a remarkable event in the history of American education.

Recall that nearly 13 years ago, one of the effects of the Hurricane Katrinacataclysm was to largely wipe out the city’s abysmal public schools. New Orleans’s educational system was essentially rebuilt from the ground up as a laboratory for charter schools — not a school district with a few charters sprinkled among traditional institutions, but an almost wholly charter-filled system largely run by the state of Louisiana.

The Recovery School District experiment proved successful; New Orleans public schools have improved faster than those of any other city in the nation over the past decade. But 80 percent of the schools were run by the state’s Recovery School District. An indication of the RSD’s success — and of New Orleans’s resurgence as a thriving metropolitan center — is the state’s decision to hand over responsibility for the school district to a locally elected school board on July 1.

Continue reading at The Washington Post.

Langhorne for Forbes, “Mohammed Choudhury on Empowered Educators, Controlled Choice, And The Third Way For Urban Districts”

Big things are quietly happening in San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD).

Ever since Pedro Martinez became superintendent in 2015, creating innovative schools and putting kids first have been at the heart of the district’s values.

Under Martinez’s leadership, the district has begun to create real change and build a system of great schools that provides educational opportunities for all families.

One of the district’s crucial steps in this educational journey was hiring Mohammed Choudhury as Chief Innovation Officer. Before coming to San Antonio, Choudhury served as the founding director of Dallas Independent School District’s Office of Transformation and Innovation.

In the year and a half since he’s been in San Antonio, Choudhury has been overseeing a new innovation zone through which the district is using a growing network of in-district charters as a vehicle to build socioeconomically diverse learning environments and to ensure that all students have access to best-fit schools. In order to prevent the creation of “islands of affluence” and ensure that high-needs families have equitable access, the district has implemented controlled choice for its open enrollment choice schools and programs.

Continue reading at Forbes.