[Day 3 of my guest bloggingâ€¦]
U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings is under fire. Not only is the Department of Education dealing with the Reading First corruption scandal, challenges to the reauthorization of NCLB, and blowback from the recommendations of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education, apparently Secretary Spellings also is receiving heat from members of Congress and others for the Departmentâ€™s proposal to cut all educational technology funding at a time when many folks are quite concerned about Americaâ€™s ability to remain globally competitive (see, e.g.., A nation left behind on ed tech?).
Whatâ€™s Spellingsâ€™ solution to her ed tech problem? Well, according to one of my well-connected sources inside Washington, she seems to be setting up a series of invite-only â€˜ed tech roundtablesâ€™ to talk about educational technology issues. Her first one was in March in New York. She said that she met with some of the â€˜leading minds in technology and education,â€™ but two of the three people she listed, Wendy Kopp of Teach for America and New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, arenâ€™t obvious fits for that label and many of the other participants seemed to either be government types or corporations. She did hear from a few K-12 educators about their uses of digital technologies.
My inside sourceâ€™s biggest concern is that the major ed tech organizations â€“ ISTE, CoSN, SETDA, NACOL, many of the foundations, etc. â€“ are being completely left out of the conversation. These groups have done an awful lot to further the cause of K-12 educational technology. At some point one hopes that they will have an opportunity to participate in these roundtables. Moreover, Secretary Spellings likely has some purpose in mind for these discussions. The last time she did this kind of thing it resulted in the Commission on the Future of Higher Education, which immediately made most postsecondary institutions quite unhappy. Is she planning a similar group for K-12 educational technology?
Another issue that will be of concern to many is her seeming interest in technology for data collection purposes, not for pedagogical purposes. As a participant in the first roundtable said, â€œShe was especially interested in the role of technology in collecting data about kids and their achievement levels.â€ If students truly are to become globally competitive workers, attention must be given to effective classroom technology usage that helps students learn, be creative, and become collaborative problem-solvers. Technology to collect performance data on yearly, summative, standardized tests of basic skills isnâ€™t going to cut it.
The biggest challenge for Spellings is that her rhetoric doesnâ€™t coincide with her actions. She says that underfunding of technology in schools is a big problem, but the Departmentâ€™s failure to fund the federal Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT) program gives her statements no credibility. The federal Technology Innovation Challenge Grant program, the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund, the Preparing Tomorrowâ€™s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program, the Community Technology Centers, and the Regional Technology in Education Consortia â€“ they are all gone. The only thing left is EETT, and now the feds have proposed zeroing out that budget yet again.
If youâ€™re an educational technology advocate, it is time to spread the word about whatâ€™s occurring (e.g., link to this post!), express your concerns to politicians and policymakers, and educate those around you about what the issues are and what potential responses might be. Although itâ€™s not quite clear what Secretary Spellings is doing with these roundtables, the notable absence of the ed tech organizations and a seeming emphasis on NCLB-related technologies is of at least some concern. And of course the biggest concern of all is the fact that the U.S. Department of Education, under Secretary Spellingsâ€™ watch, keeps trying to walk away from our childrenâ€™s technologically-suffused future. I wish it werenâ€™t so, but itâ€™s hard to interpret the facts any other way.
Be informed. Be proactive, not reactive. Get involved.
If you enjoyed this post and found it useful, subscribe to Wes' free newsletter. Check out Wes' video tutorial library, "Playing with Media." Information about more ways to learn with Dr. Wesley Fryer are available on wesfryer.com/after.
On this day..
- Why Connected Camps ROCKS for Minecraft After School - 2016
- Attend a Summer 2015 iPad Media Camp in June, July or August - 2015
- Oklahoma Digital Learning Summit 2012: In Tweets - 2012
- Closing Session Recommendations & Learning Points: 2012 Oklahoma Digital Learning Summit - 2012
- Conversations about Quality Content in Online / Blended Learning Contexts: 20 April 2012 - 2012
- Conversations about Quality Content in Online / Blended Learning Contexts: 19 April 2012 - 2012
- Spectacular Scenes of Controlled Burning on the Kansas Prairie - 2011
- Super Digital Stories from Celebrate Texas Voices in Lubbock - 2011
- Mandatory Reading for School Reformers and Transformers: Alvin Toffler's 2007 Interview in EduTopia - 2010
- Do District IT Staff Spout FUD at Macs, Linux, or BYOT Proposals? - 2010
So here’s what I don’t understand. It’s clear from your post that you’re not a fan of Spellings. But as far as I can tell, the lack of an ed tech discussion is bigger than just her. Look at the competitiveness reports: Gathering Storm, National Innovation Intiative, etc. Not a single reccomendation or reference to ed tech. Competitiveness legislation is going to be introduced this coming week – I suspect there won’t be any new funding for ed tech in it.
There’s a similar theme in the general education policy space. A bunch of education bills are getting dropped on the Hill, the most recent being the Graduation Promise Act (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/04/gpa.html). Again, ed tech isn’t a part of the agenda.
You make it sound like Spellings is unusual in her interest in data systems yet a quick review of major education associations and their reccomendations for NCLB, finds lengthy discussions about the importance of data systems:
Allience for Excellent Education: http://www.all4ed.org/press/pr_042307.html
Ed Trust: http://www2.edtrust.org/EdTrust/Press+Room/NCLB+Recommendations.htm
Aspen Commission: http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7BDEB6F227-659B-4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7D/NCLB_Section7.pdf
NGA, NASBE, CCSSO: http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0704NCLBSTATEMENT.PDF
Here’s my concern. I think the ed tech community has tried to blame the Admin for taking ed tech off the agenda. But it isn’t on the Democrats agenda either, as evidenced by the recent legislation that doesn’t include any ed tech programs. And despite ISTE’s claims in the eschoolnews article you cite, ed tech isn’t listed in any of the competitiveness reports. Where are the groups in these discussions? Blaming the Dept. of Ed is an easy way to get an applause line but I think it misses this bigger problem that maybe we’re to blame for allowing this to slip off of everyone’s agenda.