Lessons from Cleveland
How to bring schools from the brink of doom to stellar success
Does the presence of charters spur public schools to improve?
Why Can’t Our Schools Acknowledge Them?
A new kind of principal would work with a “team of leaders” made up of great teachers within their school and could also lead multiple schools.
… the results of teacher evaluations are used to give teachers better on-the-job training and meaningful opportunities for advancement.
What should we take away from News Corp.’s recent announcement that it is writing off losses stemming from its digital education wing Amplify?
TNTP’s new report The Mirage is appropriately gloomy on the overall state of professional learning nationwide, but change is already happening in some places.
Can we work together to change policies and systems to support giving every student access to excellent teaching, and giving every teacher outstanding career opportunities without being forced up and out of the classroom?
Higher pay is one currency, but hope is just as powerful for attracting great educators to serve in the schools that need them most.
Redesigning jobs to extend the reach of excellent teachers to more students by having them work in collaborative teams will bring benefits to teachers, students, and the state as a whole.
To transform America’s public education system, it’s all-hands-on-deck time.
In team-based models, schools add new paraprofessionals to teaching teams to do teachers’ administrative paperwork and oversee skill practice, project work, and digital instruction at school.
A new report reviews 25 different systems for rating school quality.
New school models that allow all teachers to succeed in teams increase the odds of widespread improvement in teaching and learning.
When a charter school doesn’t uphold its end of the charter bargain—autonomy for accountability—and fails to produce strong student learning, must closing the school be the only option?
What do you get when you combine an experienced charter school leader with a new model that mixes multi-classroom leaders and blended learning in a high-need school?
How can schools redesign jobs and use technology to reach more students with excellent teachers? And how can they offer teachers more pay, within budget?
Today’s blended models will likely fall short unless they include excellent teachers playing instructional and team leadership roles that maximize technology’s impact in tandem with their own.
A year ago, Public Impact began working with school design teams of pilot schools to choose and tailor school models for extending the reach of excellent teachers to more students.
It’s a big mistake to position technology as a way to replace teachers.
How could cities see their charter school sectors take off in quality, matching or besting the performance of their district schools, and the state?
If you are a teacher who helps students learn exceptionally well, this is your moment.
Schools could free funds to pay excellent teachers in teaching roles up to 40 percent more and teacher-leaders up to about 130 percent more, within current budgets and without increasing class sizes.
Rather than seeing a painful (and politically volatile) trade-off between technology and teachers, we propose that digital education needs excellent teachers and that a first-rate teaching profession needs digital education.
A number of forward looking cities have set aside contentious debates about charter schools, and have instead chosen to embrace high-quality charter schools in their reform strategies. This is a welcome development for students stuck in underperforming schools. But these city-based movements are not without challenges.
In the digital future, teacher effectiveness may matter even more than it does today.
Rick Hess was right to question the simplistic hyping of Khan Academy’s online video lectures. But we think he’s only got it half-right: it’s less a matter of OVER-hyping than MIS-hyping the true potential of what Khan is doing
My colleagues recently released a report about building parent and community demand for school turnarounds. Here I share their thoughts on what they found.
With unprecedented federal investment in failing schools through the multi-billion-dollar School Improvement Grant program, it’s been a big year for school turnaround efforts.
For those of you who missed it, David Brooks’ February 28 column touted the money-saving potential of extending the best teachers’ reach, by increasing their class sizes – in exchange for more pay. We’re encouraged to see more talk about this concept. But adding more kids to a great teacher’s class, or broadcasting that teacher’s lessons over the Internet, are just the most immediately available and straightforward forms of reach extension.
In our new report, Opportunity at the Top: How America’s Best Teachers Could Close the Gaps, Raise the Bar, and Keep Our Nation Great, Emily Ayscue Hassel and I asked a simple question: “Will our nation’s bold efforts to recruit more top teachers and remove the least effective teachers put a great teacher in every classroom?” We ran the numbers and discovered a disappointing answer: No. Even if these reforms were wildly successful, most classrooms still would not have great teachers.
School finance reform continues to light up debates whenever it arises. The Holy Grail here is a system that gets incentives right, allocating funding in ways that encourage schools and districts to do what’s best for kids, AND addresses the immense equity challenge posed by the various yawning achievement gaps.