Written by Seattle student Dexter Tang

In any functioning system of democracy, it is the collective majority whose interests are represented. But in education, the student body, whose collective majority ranges in the tens of thousands, doesn’t seem to have their interests thoroughly conveyed. Therefore, the Seattle Student Senate serves to be the public student’s advocate.

The Seattle Student Senate is a student advocacy organization that represents the interests and ideals of the over 47,000 students of Seattle Public Schools. Consisting of representatives of the 12 different Seattle public high schools, the Seattle Student Senate’s primary goal is to lobby for and represent the Seattle student body’s general goals and to the serves as tool for the student body to voice their concerns and articulate their perspectives on matters unheard.

Our group’s primary focus is on establishing communication with the Seattle School Board over procedural and legislative amendments. Some of the work we are doing right now includes advocating for modification in the district’s competitive foods among other policies that are adversely affecting schools’ capabilities to generate revenue for their associated student body (ASB) budgets.

Already, our organization holds strong relationships with the Seattle Council PTSA, the Seattle School Board, the District Leadership, and numerous other educational organizations. However, as a result of the recent turbulence in the state and local governments’ support of public education, we are attempting to expand our focus and actively participate in the legislative process that profoundly affects our schools.

Please feel free to contact us about our work. We welcome all support.

Dexter can be contacted at dexter.e.tang@gmail.com

This editorial ran in the Seattle Times.

STATE lawmakers are again punting on sensible education reforms.

Senate education committee chair Rosemary McAuliffe, D-Bothell, and her counterpart in the House, Rep. Sharon Tomiko Santos, D-Seattle, used their gavels to doom promising legislation adding accountability to teacher evaluations and allowing a small number of charter schools into our state.

“It is discouraging that two individuals could completely block the dialogue from happening,” said Ramona Hattendorf, of the Washington state PTA. “The idea of having a good evaluation and discussing how it should be used is not radical.”

McAuliffe and Santos were aided by a stunning lack of political courage by all but a handful of Democrats.

Many thought the moment for true progress had come in the Senate, where the charter and evaluation bills have broad support.

But McAuliffe and the majority of her committee were at an impasse Friday. She refused to let her committee vote on a single education-reform bill, even canceling Thursday’s committee meeting where votes were expected. Colleagues, led by Republican Sens. Steve Litzow, R-Mercer Island, and Rodney Tom, D-Medina, refused to take a vote on any bill if McAuliffe refused to consider charters.

The governor spent Friday trying to broker an agreement.

It’s worth reviewing what’s at stake. Stronger teacher evaluations are set to go statewide in 2013 but a key ingredient, student achievement, is missing from the policy critera. Teachers like the more-robust evaluations’ inclusion of individualized development plans and training to help improve their craft.

But efforts to tie them to student growth measures — including test scores — have been rejected by the teachers union and the Democrats who do their bidding. That’s too bad. The credibility of the new evaluations hinges on the ability to hold teachers accountable.

Continue reading >>>

This op-ed was written by Paul Pastorek, former Louisiana state superintendent of education. It appeared in the Seattle Times.

The Big Easy is about food, music and Bourbon Street, not about innovation, right? Wrong! New Orleans is at the center of an education revolution that is developing an “education system” that defies conventional wisdom.

If, as they say, an ill wind blows no good, then Katrina, while devastating in many ways, was not an ill wind. It provided an opportunity for New Orleans to wash away not only the old decrepit buildings, but a decrepit education institution that was the seed of poverty and crime in the city.

So in 2006, community leaders conducted neighborhood meetings to consider promising ideas for school reform from around the country. Instead of focusing on the latest fad for the superintendent to force-feed every educator, we focused on what climate would be necessary to motivate educators to search for their own best practices tailored to each child. Competition was the answer.

The community identified the portfolio-management model to administer public schools. Its most prominent feature was discarding the traditional command and control of a school district central office, which micromanages its version of a “one size fits all” approach to educating children. Instead, the new central office would: 1) set goals; 2) allow schools (meaning principals and teachers) the autonomy to direct the school; 3) hold each school in its portfolio accountable to meet goals, and 4) if the school met goals, offer the principal the opportunity to run more schools — or, if the school failed to do so, it would be removed from the portfolio and replaced with new management.

Continue reading >>>

This op-ed by Kaya McRuer ran in the Seattle Times.

I am a high school student and I spend seven hours a day, five days a week in school. So shouldn’t I get a say in how I am being taught?

In many Washington high schools, the classes are so full that almost every core course is taught by at least two different teachers, teaching from the same basic curriculum and textbook. Why, then, is there almost always a favorite between these pairings when they are teaching, more or less, the same course?

According to my peers, favorite teachers allow for student creativity and independence in the classroom. They understand and explain to their students why it is important to learn the curriculum. A favorite teacher is not created by giving easy A’s, but by challenging his or her students and encouraging inquisitiveness. Favorite teachers make every effort to give clear, easily understood instructions and explanations and provide extra help to any student who needs it.

The problem is that these types of teachers are viewed as lucky breaks in education, rather than the norm.

Great teachers can make their students fall in love with their subject, whereas a bad one can cause an antipathy that could prevent further interest. The subject being taught does not define whether the students will like the class, rather it is the teacher who makes the subject interesting or not.

Continue reading >>>

Crystal Garvin is a mother of three from Bellingham, WA. She has a degree in Early Childhood Education from Whatcom Community College.

I am a stay at home mother of three children. My oldest is an Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP) graduate and is currently in kindergarten. She is a model student and helps her peers when they struggle. My second child is a current ECEAP student in her second year of preschool. She enjoys learning and helps in her classroom in many ways, like showing other children what to do during class and encouraging children to use their words when they are upset or need something.

My son is two years old and is in the Early Support for Infants and Toddlers program (ESIT) because he has a social-emotional delay. He is doing well in the program and my husband and I already see improvements. However, we are still concerned. My family has worked really hard to succeed. My husband is the only working person in our family. One year ago, I was also working in my field, but I had to quit because my wage was not enough to pay for childcare. At the end of the day, I owed more than I made. I am a smart woman. I have an Associate Degree in Early Childhood Education and I won an award for best student in my field. I want to work, but that is not an option for my family right now.

My husband has worked very hard to get where he is in his career and has done so well that he now makes enough money to put us just above the income eligible limit to qualify for the ECEAP program. This means when my son turns three and is no longer in the ESIT program, he will not be able to go to preschool. This terrifies us because if he is not in a prekindergarten learning environment, any progress he makes with the ESIT program will be lost. Social-emotional skills are skills that have to be practiced and the place to do that is in a prekindergarten class.

I have checked into other preschools in our area and I have not found a preschool that we can afford. If we pass the High Quality Early Learning Act of 2012, we would be able to have our son in an exceptional prekindergarten learning environment and we would most likely pay a fee that we can afford. If my son does not get into preschool, he will not be prepared for kindergarten. No child should have to start school unprepared! No child should be left out of a prekindergarten learning environment because their parents made too much money to qualify for low income programs but were unable to pay private school tuition because they still didn’t make enough money. I urge you to support the High Quality Early Learning Act of 2012 and give all children the chance to succeed!

This column is by Macy Olivas. It appeared in the Spokesman Review.

“If I close my eyes, I can still see the college pennants hanging in the classrooms, and hear the echoes of voices asking who’s staying after school for Advanced Placement tutoring. I can still feel the texture of the well-used SAT prep books that were glued to everyone’s hands and served as reminders of our college goals.

That was the atmosphere and those were the expectations of the public charter school I attended in California. And now that I’m attending college in Washington, I believe this state should offer that same opportunity to families and students here.

My parents immigrated to the United States with the sole purpose of ensuring that my brothers and I had access to a great education. Living in San Diego, I learned about The Preuss School University of California San Diego from a neighborhood friend. I instantly sat with my parents and helped them translate the public charter school’s application to Spanish.

The application asked if I had thought about going to college, and which schools I was considering. My 12-year-old mind quickly caught on that this school was unlike any other I had attended. It was a public charter school dedicated to helping low-income minorities become the first generation in their families to go to college. This is the intent of HB 2428 in Washington, which will offer opportunities to low-income students and those in persistently struggling schools.

Continue reading >>>

A six-word essay contest to describe great teachers is generating some great submissions on Twitter (#6wordessay) .

A sampling:

Not a Twitter person? You can enter your submission online.

The contest runs through Friday and is sponsored by Students First. Details here.

Sonja Lennox is a mother of two from the city of Tacoma. She is an advocate for early learning and parent engagement across the state of Washington. She has traveled to Washington, DC and given presentations on the importance of family involvement in children’s education.

Both of my children have attended Head Start. I am truly thankful that I was able to send my children to such a high quality preschool program. My children are both thriving because of their preschool experience. My 15-year-old daughter, Randi wants to be a lawyer and advocate for children’s rights and was just accepted to be a page in the Senate. My son, Danner, who is only five, is going to fly helicopters on a Navy ship.

Research has shown that children who receive high-quality preschool opportunities make significantly greater academic gains, display more positive behaviors, have fewer health problems and are less likely to commit violent crimes and get involved in drug and gang related activities.

Early learning programs like ECEAP and Head Start also provide at least one nutritious meal and snack a day. For some children, this is their only meal. It also provides well child check-ups and dental care so they can learn. This is something children desperately need and some would not other wise receive.

Our children are going to be the future presidents, lawmakers, and teachers. They are going to be the ones to deal with our decisions on global warming, nuclear arms, and the national debt. It only makes sense that we give them the best educational start possible.

Preschool should be expanded so all children can receive quality early learning like mine did. I would like to see a universal pre-kindergarten program that would give all our children the same chance at high quality early learning and support a school readiness program. All children deserve a chance at a better education. It should not be limited to the wealthy who can afford private preschool or the disadvantaged who qualify for programs such as Head Start and ECEAP.

From an editorial in The Olympian:

Anyone who has had students in this state’s K-12 education system knows that there are effective teachers who inspire and motivate their students. The result is students who reach for academic success.

Unfortunately, there are also teachers who seem to have lost their passion, lost their drive and simply go through the motions to collect their next paycheck. They are failing their students, but often get a passing grade on their evaluation.

It’s time – past time, actually – to get an effective measurement tool in place so those underperforming teachers can get some mentoring and guidance and if they still don’t perform, move them out the schoolhouse door.

On education matters, it’s hard to find anyone more knowledgeable than Dr. Thelma Jackson, former president of the North Thurston School Board, longtime board member, a leader in the African American community and staunch advocate for closing this state’s achievement gap between minority and white students. Jackson knows the importance of quality educators.

In a column for The Olympian a year ago, Jackson hit the nail on the head when she said, “The research is clear – an effective teacher is the most important factor in raising student achievement. If we provide an evaluation system that rewards and retains effective teachers and equips them with targeted professional development, we can give our students the teachers they need and deserve.”

We couldn’t agree more.

Sarah Ramsdell is a mother of two and lives in the Vancouver, Washington area.

Everyone knows children don’t come with instruction manuals. I imagine, at some point, every parent has wished their child had. Regardless of the lack of an instruction manual, every parent is conscious of the fact that the first years of a child’s life are dedicated solely to learning. From sitting on their own, to taking their first steps and speaking their first word. We are their teachers and caregivers. We delight in each milestone our children achieve. Providing encouragement and support in the form of clapping, snuggles and laughter, to name a few.

There comes a point, between toddler and kindergarten, that we are faced with a choice. Do I send my child to preschool or not? I have heard the term “preschool panic” used. I can relate to that! This is a time where an instruction manual would certainly come in handy! If there were one, it would undoubtedly tell us preschool is vital for the development of our little ones. Not just for the time being but for building life long skills and knowledge. Whether it be at home or in a classroom setting early learning is not something that should be neglected. It is my belief that it sets a solid foundation for both life long learning and life it’s self. The choice depends largely on many factors unique to each family situation. In this case, my family situation.

Technically, I think we fall into the category of “working class.” We aren’t in poverty, we receive no assistance of any kind and are able to pay our bills and put food on the table without struggling most of the time. Something we have worked hard to achieve. Although we are wealthier than most in the world, as almost all in America are, we fall well short of what is considered wealthy or even middle class in this country. It is us and others like us that fall through the cracks all too often.

There are many preschools in my area. So many, in fact, it is quite overwhelming. I’m sure there are informational resources available that would help make an advised decision. The problem is, where do we find them and which ones do we trust? When we place our children in grade school, we know exactly where to go. Even for those who choose to home school, there are several trusted, established programs available. For preschool, unless you qualify for the Head Start program or are wealthy enough to ensure your preschooler gets the early education they need, you are stuck in a sellers market. Make no mistake about it, it IS a sellers market and I find it quite discouraging. From the cost to the curriculum these early learning centers want your business and they will sell themselves and their programs to get your child (and your money) in the door. It is their business, their livelihood and, despite being a “preschool,” the children’s education does not always come first.

There is something inherently wrong with this. We live in the wealthiest country in the world, we have the means to provide early learning for ALL preschool age children. Yet we don’t, despite the fact that much of the rest of the world does. A glaring illustration of one of the many things amiss with the education system in America. As well as social implications that are long lasting and far reaching. We should be embarrassed by our approach to early learning in this country.

All of that aside, I understand how important it is for my child to receive a quality preschool education. It’s a strong foundation for lifetime learning and success. It’s unfortunate that the quantity of preschools does not match the quality of the education needed. However, it is a priority and we will make the necessary sacrifices to ensure our son, Jordan, receives the early learning opportunity he deserves.

I have two children enrolled in Alexander Twilight College Prep Academy, an Aspire charter school in Sacramento, CA. My daughter started at this school the first year that it opened and she was part of the first kindergarten class. We decided to enroll her there because our neighborhood school had very low scores and we had some experience with the school district already and were quite unhappy with it.

This year my son started kindergarten, but things are different for him. He is diagnosed with autism. I have been working with the local district since my son turned three, and it was battle after battle to get my son the services he needed. I had to fight for an aide so my son could attend mainstream kindergarten. I had to fight to get extra speech therapy for a child who was practically non-verbal. I had to go into every meeting with the district school with a strict list of demands just so my son could get the services he needed to succeed.

I was nervous when I approached our charter school to talk about my son and the services he would receive. But, it turns out, I didn’t need to be nervous. Even before school started, the charter school’s special needs staff scheduled meetings with me to talk about my son’s needs. They always found the time to work with us to set him up for success. They visited my home and his preschool to see him in different settings. I was blown away! They seemed to truly care about my son, and they had a goal for my son that no one had set before: To get him to college, just like every other child. They are willing to do what it takes to get him there.

My son no longer needs a full-time aide, is in full inclusion, and takes direction from his teacher. My son has friends in class. Every kindergarten teacher knows his name and is there to support him. The principal checks in on him. Everyone there wants to see him succeed. I am not afraid he will be lost in an uncaring system like I felt in our school district. In the school district, I felt like the expectation was to give my son the bare minimum and then push him out the door – bound to sweep floors in a fast food restaurant. At our charter school, I know the expectation has been set for him to go to college.

Our charter school has been amazing for my children the past two and a half years. I am excited for their educational future there.

Traci lives in Puyallup, WA, is a mother to three, and works at the Bethel School District. She has her Masters of Teaching from University of Puget Sound.

Budget cuts again. The teacher in me shudders. The mom in me is grateful to have been blessed with the children I have. Let me elaborate.

In my classroom this means: more students, a more physically crowded classroom, more prep, more grading, and more diverse needs to meet. It also means, bigger “small group” instruction, more challenging classroom management, and less people to implement effective Response to Intervention models. It means less resources in general to attend to the ever-increasing workload.

As a mother, I thank God every day that I am blessed with children who do not face challenges in learning. When I send my daughter off to her class of 30 first graders, I breathe a deep sigh of relief that she is among the top readers in her class. I take overwhelming comfort in the fact that my fourth grade son participates in a highly capable program, relieving my concern about his ability to learn in such crowded conditions. And I pray that my preschool age son continues to develop on track and follows in the fortunate academic footsteps of his older siblings while trying NOT to think about how many kids will be in his kindergarten class next year. I refuse to think about what these conditions would mean if my children were not so fortunate.

In spite of what seems like utter disregard for the education of our future, I will maintain my usually-positive attitude about this crisis. I will continue to rise to the challenge presented to me as both a teacher and a mother, because one of these days someone is going to come to their senses and get this state’s priorities in order.

The following is prepared testimony given on Friday in the House Education Committee in favor of HB 2428, which would allow for transformation zones and public charter schools in Washington state. Written testimony sometimes varies from the spoken testimony, as panelists are dissuaded from reading from a script.

Members of the committee, my name is Robin Lake. I’m Associate Director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington. I’ve studied charter schools and urban school reform for more than 15 years.  Today I’m here as a parent. My kids attend a Title 1 public school in South Seattle.

Charter schools are by no means a panacea but they are an important opportunity for excellence. More than two-dozen urban school districts around the country now partner with high performing charter schools. They’ve turned to charter schools because after trying for decades, they continue to have inexcusable achievement gaps and dropout rates.

Leaders in these cities don’t see their job as running a school system. Instead they believe they have to oversee a system of schools in the city that ensures success for every student. They believe that their work is too urgent and too important to close off any viable options. Instead of trying to compete with charters, they are sharing buildings and transportation with them and using them to serve the kinds of kids they have failed for decades.

Charter schools in these cities have proven effective. In fact, rigorous studies show that charter schools consistently outpace district schools in urban areas and with low-income students. As importantly, they offer evidence proofs of what’s possible. The presence of even one high performing charter school in a city proves that public schools can overcome influences of poverty.

We can point to a very small numbers of “no excuses” schools in our state. Only 5 of the 22 schools recognized as innovative by OSPI serve a high poverty student population. We need hundreds. We can’t create “no excuses” schools by offering waivers or by threatening schools to change. We can only do it by opening new schools that have a rock solid plan and are determined to succeed no matter what.

We have a choice. We can continue to insist that Washington could theoretically close achievement gaps without charter schools while we continue to fail too many students. Or we can start opening high performing charter schools next year. We have 20 years of experience to draw on and this legislation is the best of breed. We can get the breakthrough results that Denver, New York, and dozens of other cities have had. We know how to create high performing charter schools. We know how to oversee them so that they serve students equitably and effectively.

Maybe Washington will be the first state to dramatically improve the odds for kids in poverty without charter schools. But creating schools that work seems like a much safer bet.  Washington needs to act with urgency to pursue every opportunity for excellence.

The following is prepared testimony given on Friday in the House Education Committee in favor of HB 2428, which would allow for transformation zones and public charter schools in Washington state. Written testimony sometimes varies from the spoken testimony, as panelists are dissuaded from reading from a script.

Hello, my name is Christopher Eide and I am representing Teachers United, a newly-formed organization of educators from the Puget Sound area.  Our educators, many of whom are award-winning, National Board Certified, and/or leaders in their teachers union, begin discussion of education policy with the question: “what does it mean for students?” We pride ourselves on principled dialogue and debate using research and experience and will advocate for policies that we believe put students first.

Charter schools have been a highly-controversial topic in Washington state for over a decade, so we intended to determine what they are and whether they would be good for students in Washington.  We were able to send ten educators to charter schools in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, Houston, and New York City to interview students, teachers, principals and parents as well as observe instruction. We read research, had discussions with educators at our school sites and engaged in debates. We examined the proposed legislation.

Because this bill targets disadvantaged students, our framework was then: “what does it mean for disadvantaged students?” We read that the opportunity gap in Washington is growing, and we know that our graduation rate is too low. Very few schools in Washington are successful in doing this work, and roughly 25% of our ‘innovative schools’ serve student populations with greater than 50% disadvantaged students. There don’t appear to be any other programs in place to address this persistent issue in the near future.

We also read that while charter schools on balance are only slightly outperform their traditional public school counterparts, they excel in educating disadvantaged students in urban areas. We also believe that because this bill is highly-restrictive, the data on the average charter school performance is irrelevant for us.

The most convincing element, however, was actually visiting the schools. The leadership, the love of learning, the level of parent engagement and respect for educators that we saw in high-performing charter schools was different than anything we had seen in a traditional public school.  These schools are alive and the excitement is contagious.

Our board, comprised entirely of educators of all levels of seniority, very active in their union, voted to support this bill as it is written.  We do not support all charter school laws, but we believe that this bill is a positive step forward for students, and we hope that you will support it as well.

Marina is a mother of two from Elma, WA. She works for the Aberdeen School District. She is a graduate of Western Washington University.

My name is Marina Richardson, and my husband Rick and I have two children ages four (soon to be five) and two. My husband works for the state as a corrections officer, and I work for the local school district as a social worker, as well as a juvenile corrections officer as a second job.

I was very excited to start thinking about having my son Ryder start preschool this year. I started researching options within my community early and was shocked to find that we had very limited options. The local school district was only accepting special education students, due to budget cuts. This meant that if I wanted my son to have any preschool education, it meant looking at private options. Here too I was limited; my husband and I both work, but our income is spent every month maintaining our house hold and mortgage. This leaves no money left over at the end of the month for a preschool tuition, not to mention we both make two percent less a month per pay check due to budget cuts.

I continued to look at our options, and the bottom line was that we made too much money to qualify for any kind of reduced tuition or federal programs, yet we did not make enough to pay for a private preschool tuition. Like any good parent, I wanted my child to have the best start in their education, the first step being preschool. Yet the reality for us was that we could not afford it on our income. I cannot tell you how difficult it is as a parent to have to admit that my child’s education was going to be compromised because of money.

After serious contemplation Rick and I decided to rent out our garage to a friend and the money he paid in rent would go to pay preschool tuition. Though this seems to have solved the problem for the time being, having a roommate does not come without its own expenses on my family. Having someone live with us has compromised our family time at times, as well as added additional stress to my family. I know that this situation is not forever; however I will never understand why giving my child a good start to their education has to be so difficult. My husband and I work hard, own a house and pay taxes, and yet it’s not enough to fund my child’s education.

The Washington Supreme Court ruled the Legislature can’t continue to cut education. In fact, they must add funding and come up with a plan for a fully-funded education system.

The court provided the catalyst the Legislature needed to act. Yet legislators are in a tough position. The economy continues to struggle. They need to hear from you – all of you.

Please sign this petition asking legislators to make the tough decisions needed this year to begin fully funding basic education. A court ruling without legislative action won’t cut it.

Let’s face it – we’ve been asking for more school funding for years, and you might think that a petition won’t make a difference. But the political and economic landscape have changed, and even though you are tired and frustrated, this will make a difference. Now is the time for every one of us to act. Sign this petition, and ask your friends to join you.

Our kids are counting on you!

This post is republished with permission and originally appeared on Beth Sigall’s School House Wonk blog.

The Foundation for Excellence in Education and Digital Learning Now! issued digital report cards this week. These report cards assess the effectiveness of each state’s online learning opportunities for K-12 students. States earned grades of “achieved,” “partial” or “not yet achieved” for each metric measured.

The grades reflected the extent to which states have adopted policies or practices aligned with these ten elements:

• student access
• barriers to student access
• personalized learning
• competency-based advancement
• quality content
• quality instruction
• quality choices
• assessment and accountability
• funding
• infrastructure

What grade did your state earn? Click here find out. You can also compare your state to the “ideal” digital learning state (as defined by Digital Learning Now!).

***

My take – The digital report cards provide of wealth of information about the state of play of online learning in each state, including citations to authorizing laws and regulations. Policy makers and others can learn much about the depth of online learning offerings across the U.S. (e.g., access for various grade levels, caps on enrollment, funding, etc.).

One metric used that didn’t quite make sense is this one:

“State law requires students to complete at least one online course to earn a high school diploma.”

Question – How does the requirement that students complete an online course to earn a diploma measure the effectiveness of a state’s online learning programs? Requiring online learning for graduation is a policy decision, not an objective measure of the quality of a state’s digital learning opportunities.

Upshot - The report card is still worth the click for those interested in what’s happening in the world of online learning at the state level.

Yesterday, Gov. Chris Gregoire proposed $1.7 billion in cuts to state government, while suggesting a temporary sales tax increase to prevent some of the more severe reductions, which include shortening the school year. We wrote that cutting education is the wrong solution for our ailing economy. The Legislature will tackle the budget deficit in a special session beginning on Nov. 28th.

We know that all of these numbers can be difficult to visualize, so our policy team created these budget charts from the governor’s proposal.

You can also view them as higher-quality images: Early Learning | K-12 | Higher Ed

This post is republished with permission and originally appeared on Beth Sigall’s School House Wonk blog.

It is common for assistance programs to use chronological age cut-offs to determine eligibility. In the foster care system, this typically means that children must exit foster care at age 18 even if they are in no way prepared to do so. In a recent interview on NPR, Gary Stangler, executive director of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, described the process this way:

So when you are [a foster child] at age 18, on your birthday you’re very often handed all of your belongings in a plastic trash bag and you’re assumed to now be fully independent and on your own, even though other people have been making all of your life decisions for you up till now.

And the consequences are fairly predictable. Homelessness is very common, at least temporarily among young people leaving foster care. Many don’t go on to complete their education. And for many who are couch surfing, trying to find places to live, the rate of child bearing is higher than the regular population.

The latest research in brain development suggests that helping foster children transition from foster care to independence means we need to look past bright-line tests of chronological age. This is because during adolescence, the brain experiences a phase of major development similar to that of early childhood. During these latter stages of growth, all children, including and especially those in foster care, are learning to become adults.

And that’s where life as a foster child can become terribly complicated. Most adolescents rely on their family and an extended network of friends and others to acquire the basic skills of adulthood through part-time jobs, extra-curricular activities, internships, etc. From this process, adolescents learn to take risks and become independent within a relatively risk-free and highly supportive environment. So whether it’s getting a short-term loan from a parent to cover a few months of rent, or working after-school at a part-time job for the parent of a friend, it is common for adolescents to rely on an informal support network as they transition to adulthood.

In foster care, children are raised in a system where decisions are made for them in almost every instance, because the system was designed for the care and safety of young children removed from the custody of their biological parents. But as children grow older in foster care, they need to learn new skills that will help them function independently as adults. Right now the system for the most part throws them in the deep end of the pool at age 18. But a few states are trying a new approach called Positive Youth Development, based on research from the Jim Casey foundation.

In Positive Youth Development, adolescents are provided opportunities for “healthy risk taking via constructive, meaningful activities.” They receive counseling to help them determine their strengths, interests and passions. Family-based networks provide the adolescent with an environment where getting a part-time job is the norm, and participation in extra-curricular activities is encouraged. Most importantly, adolescents are taught to pursue their interests and proactively plan for their future by learning decision-making skills. In sum, they begin the process of owning their future.

Foster care is but one example of a social services system where policy-makers are examining the role of brain development to help improve outcomes. In other arenas, such as gifted education and special education, neuroscience research again suggests we should reconsider the role of brain development throughout childhood in administering these programs, particularly when it comes to over-reliance on chronological age cut-offs for testing and eligibility.

This blog post is part of our edCored series on education funding and written by M. Colleen Clancy, J.D., a policy advocate and the founder of PROMOTE-EDU, a consultancy dedicated to advancing opportunities for community college students. For comments, contact clancy@promote-edu.com. If you want to be notified when new content is published in this month-long series, please subscribe to the LEV Blog’s RSS feed or once-a-day email digest.

This is a story about community college funding. Really.

But first I want to tell you a story about a little organization you’ve never heard of. The kind of organization that springs from a big heart and a good idea. The kind that’s hatched at the kitchen table and funded with pennies. The kind that changes lives.

Nine years ago, Polly Trout was tutoring homeless youth for the GED test when she got her big idea: Seattle Education Access, the only organization in the state that specializes in supporting poor, homeless and marginalized youth through college. They know what they’re doing; a large number of the students who work with SEA make it through at least two years of college. Many go on to earn four-year degrees and some go on to graduate school. One of them graduated from the UW as president of the associated student body.

What does this have to do with community college funding? Everything. Almost all of SEA’s students start in community college. And they’re not alone. Washington’s community colleges are our most important resource for raising individuals out of poverty and into a better life. And this is a good thing for all of us. It builds an educated work force and takes families off the poverty rolls.

So, what about funding? Education involves math, right? Here’s an equation to think about: When our economy tanks and workers lose jobs, community college enrollments skyrocket. At the same time, funding shrinks (and shrinks, and shrinks some more). What does this look like in the current economy? Since the recession began, community college fulltime enrollments have increased by 17%. Funding has decreased by 15%. Last year, our community colleges educated 21,669 more full-time students than the state paid for.

The colleges have responded with the only tools they have. They’ve laid off valuable employees; they’ve cut classes and programs; they’ve gone without needed improvements; they’ve raised tuition and student fees. They’ve also gotten good at finding outside resources and partnering with other organizations. But they can only do so much. Here’s a real world look at some of the consequences of the current recession:

Students are poorer and more stressed. Many are unemployed, or can become unemployed at any moment. Those who can find work labor long hours to make ends meet. They may be one brake job away from dropping out to keep their families afloat. They need a higher level of support and more financial aid than the college can offer.

Almost 45% of community college students receive financial aid and many more apply for it but can’t qualify. Financial aid applications have increased by as much at 50% at some colleges. The financial aid offices are understaffed and hard pressed to process the volume of work. More work translates to more funding delays. Funding delays translate to students leaving school because they can’t pay their tuition on time.

Working students need classes that fit with their work schedules. Classes have been cut and consolidated to save money. The remaining sections are over-crowded and can’t accommodate all of the students who need to get in.

Programs that prepare students for technical jobs have limited enrollment. Employers want trained workers; students want the training. The wait lists are long. Students become discouraged as real life intervenes; the college window of opportunity closes.

Community colleges are pressured from all sides to increase the number of students who complete credentials. All of the research says that the best way to do this is to provide students with more support, but support staff is the first target of lay-offs. Advising positions are cut while student numbers increase. Instructional aide positions disappear. Library and study center hours are reduced.

How are SEA’s students doing? Pretty well, thanks for asking. They suffered when the state cut back on work study funds and they struggle to pay the higher tuition and fees but they have the support of SEA’s dedicated staff and modest scholarship fund.

And how are things looking for the rest of the college students? Frankly, not so good. SEA can serve, maybe, 400 students in a good year; our community colleges serve close to 500,000. Our state budget shortfall is alarming and the colleges are preparing to be hit hard once again. The tools left in the bottom of the box look pretty grim. Higher tuition? Restricted enrollment? Anything is possible.

Dr. Mark Anderson, associate superintendent of Spokane Public Schools, wrote this blog post for our edCored series on education funding. If you want to be notified when new content is published in this month-long series, please subscribe to the LEV Blog’s RSS feed or once-a-day email digest.

Local Effort Assistance (LEA), also called levy equalization, is a critical source of funding for Spokane Public Schools and other school districts in the State whose property values are less than the state average. In 2012, Spokane anticipates receiving $13.4 million of LEA funding from the State.

LEA helps create equity for school districts, given the significant differences in property values of districts across the State. The current local levy and State LEA funding system reflects a long standing compromise between property “rich” and property “poor” school districts in Washington. It allows property “rich” districts to raise dollars locally while providing a means for property “poor” districts, like Spokane, to secure State funding to help equalize a part of the difference.

If the Legislature reduces or eliminates LEA, Spokane Public Schools will be forced to make significant cuts in its education programs to include classroom teachers, librarians, and counselors, just to name a few, and in extracurricular activities – an impact on the local Spokane economy as well. Or, alternatively, Spokane Public Schools will be forced to ask voters to increase their property taxes beyond the effort required by taxpayers in property rich school districts just to offer the same level of programs.

Bottom line: Cuts to LEA will potentially harm students and could jeopardize local levies in Spokane and in other communities with above-average property tax rates. All students in the State should have a fair access to educational opportunities and services. At a minimum, the State Legislature should continue the current policy for levy equalization as was recommended by the Levy and Local Effort Assistance Technical Working Group in their 2011 report to the Legislature.

This post is republished with permission from the School House Wonk, which is the creation of Beth Sigall. A special education attorney, Sigall has represented students with special needs and their families.  She is involved in education policy at the state and local level here in Washington state and advocates for foster children in the Dependency/Juvenile Court system. She is the mother of three children. Visit the School House Wonk.

U.S. News & World Report has taken its “Best High Schools” survey to the digital level with its new Most Connected Classrooms rankings. The survey aims to measure “the modernity and sophistication of high schools’ online infrastructures, and the access students, faculty, and parents have to them at school and home.”

How did it work? More than 300 public high schools from the U.S. News “Best High School Rankings” were assessed using a Connectivity Index. The Index considered these criteria:

• Internet speed and wireless access
• Access to computers
• Additional technological resources
• Connected to school from home

Because I live in Washington where computers (and airplanes and coffee and Kindles) are king, I decided to look at results in terms of state representation.  So, I compared the states represented on the Most Connected Classrooms index to “America’s Top States for Technology and Innovation 2011” ranking from CNBC. The CNBC index ranks states based on their degree of innovation in the technology industry.

Some interesting results from this highly unscientific comparison:

• Of the Top Ten” Most Connected” high schools, only two schools hail from states in CNBC’s Top Ten States for Technology (Michigan and Pennsylvania).
• The top five states in CNBC’s index (California, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, Texas and Washington) placed no schools in the Top Ten.  New York placed three schools in the Top 25.
• Defying conventional wisdom, Alabama placed two schools in the Top Ten, and three in the Top 25.  Same goes for South Dakota, which placed two schools in the Top 25.  Neither state is ranked in CNBC’s Top Ten. (Alabama is ranked 33^rd and South Dakota 49^th).
• California’s highest-ranked school was 26^th (Amino Inglewood Charter High School/Inglewood, CA).
• The highest- ranked school from my state, Washington, placed fifty-seventh (Royal High School/Royal City, WA).