|
Sitemap
| Jobs
|
Contact Us
|
Building Smart Education Systems |
Voices in Urban Education
Archives
Skills for Smart Systems
VUE Number 17, Fall 2007
| VUE Home | Archives | Order Print Copy |
Building Capacity for Smart Education Systems
By Robert Rothman
Robert Rothman is a Principal Associate & Editor of VUE at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform.
> Author's bio
As school systems and communities struggle to improve student learning and bring all students to proficiency, the idea of building capacity has become increasingly critical. As the early years of No Child Left Behind have made clear, simply pointing out that students need to learn more is not enough; schools and school systems, community organizations, and other agencies need to have the ability to function effectively to ensure that all students learn at high levels.
Much of the initial focus on capacity building has emphasized the technical abilities all stakeholders need. Teachers need the knowledge and skills to be able to teach diverse learners effectively; school leaders need to be able to supervise instruction and manage learning organizations; district leaders need to operate nimble systems that provide the support schools need in a timely fashion; community organizations need to be able to provide support to students, families, and schools on a scale large enough to ensure equity; and much more.
All of these capacities are critically important. Yet equally important are some abilities that are receiving less attention. For example, school districts need to be able to manage multiple partnerships with national and local philanthropies, community organizations, and civic agencies. Municipal leaders need to be able to negotiate among groups with varying levels of power. And all stakeholders need to be able to work through differences in race and class that are ever-present but seldom discussed.
These political and social capacities are particularly important in building smart education systems, in which schools, community organizations, civic agencies, and parents are linked to provide supports in and out of school to ensure that all young people develop a broad range of outcomes. Although smart education systems are not a completely new idea, they have not existed on a large scale in any city, and creating one requires institutions and individuals to work together in new ways. At the same time, all of these institutions and individuals need the technical capacity to ensure that they work effectively for young people.
What are the capacities schools and community organizations and agencies need? How have nascent smart education systems managed to build such capacities? What kind of professional development or support is available to build capacities for smart education systems?
This issue of Voices in Urban Education will address these and other issues by examining how communities are attempting to build smart education systems.
Warren Simmons outlines the features of an infrastructure needed to support the connections between schools and community organizations that smart systems require.
> Full text
Bill Strickland describes the abilities needed to build and sustain a long-term partnership between a community organization and a school district.
> Excerpt
Jesse Register and Joanne Thompson recount how the Hamilton County Schools engaged multiple partners to reform low-performing elementary schools, redesign high schools, and ensure college access and success for students.
> Full text
Joanna Brown illustrates the Logan Square Neighborhood Association's approach to engaging parents in school development and improvement.
> Excerpt
Kavitha Mediratta describes how the Urban Youth Collaborative develops youth leadership in support of educational improvement in New York City.
> Excerpt
Mark Warren considers ways that school reformers and community builders can break down their traditional isolation from one another.
> Excerpt
These articles show clearly that the partnerships necessary to build smart systems flow in many directions and require a new view of leadership. Such systems are not hierarchical, with one leader at the top; rather, leadership is distributed across all partners, with different leaders taking on responsibility for areas where they have the most expertise and experience.
In addition, these systems require considerable attention to the political, social, and cultural aspects of educational improvement. As an enterprise involving people with widely varying backgrounds and divergent histories and experiences, education depends on the ability to negotiate and build bridges that might not have been even considered in the past. And in cities in which racial and ethnic divisions are prominent, though usually unspoken, such bridge building is particularly critical.
To address these political, social, and cultural aspects of improvement, community involvement is crucial. Partnerships must be developed by and with community members, not just for them. That will ensure that the services the partnerships provide actually serve those they are intended to serve.
Such involvement would also help build and maintain community support for education systems. Educators, public officials, and funders increasingly are aware that community support is essential to sustain educational improvement. Only with full community involvement can such systems maintain — and deserve — support.
Archives
Skills for Smart Systems
VUE Number 17, Fall 2007
| VUE Home | Archives | Order Print Copy |
Building Capacity for Smart Education Systems
By Robert Rothman
Robert Rothman is a Principal Associate & Editor of VUE at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform.> Author's bio
As school systems and communities struggle to improve student learning and bring all students to proficiency, the idea of building capacity has become increasingly critical. As the early years of No Child Left Behind have made clear, simply pointing out that students need to learn more is not enough; schools and school systems, community organizations, and other agencies need to have the ability to function effectively to ensure that all students learn at high levels.
Much of the initial focus on capacity building has emphasized the technical abilities all stakeholders need. Teachers need the knowledge and skills to be able to teach diverse learners effectively; school leaders need to be able to supervise instruction and manage learning organizations; district leaders need to operate nimble systems that provide the support schools need in a timely fashion; community organizations need to be able to provide support to students, families, and schools on a scale large enough to ensure equity; and much more.
All of these capacities are critically important. Yet equally important are some abilities that are receiving less attention. For example, school districts need to be able to manage multiple partnerships with national and local philanthropies, community organizations, and civic agencies. Municipal leaders need to be able to negotiate among groups with varying levels of power. And all stakeholders need to be able to work through differences in race and class that are ever-present but seldom discussed.
These political and social capacities are particularly important in building smart education systems, in which schools, community organizations, civic agencies, and parents are linked to provide supports in and out of school to ensure that all young people develop a broad range of outcomes. Although smart education systems are not a completely new idea, they have not existed on a large scale in any city, and creating one requires institutions and individuals to work together in new ways. At the same time, all of these institutions and individuals need the technical capacity to ensure that they work effectively for young people.
What are the capacities schools and community organizations and agencies need? How have nascent smart education systems managed to build such capacities? What kind of professional development or support is available to build capacities for smart education systems?
This issue of Voices in Urban Education will address these and other issues by examining how communities are attempting to build smart education systems.
Warren Simmons outlines the features of an infrastructure needed to support the connections between schools and community organizations that smart systems require.
> Full text
Bill Strickland describes the abilities needed to build and sustain a long-term partnership between a community organization and a school district.
> Excerpt
Jesse Register and Joanne Thompson recount how the Hamilton County Schools engaged multiple partners to reform low-performing elementary schools, redesign high schools, and ensure college access and success for students.
> Full text
Joanna Brown illustrates the Logan Square Neighborhood Association's approach to engaging parents in school development and improvement.
> Excerpt
Kavitha Mediratta describes how the Urban Youth Collaborative develops youth leadership in support of educational improvement in New York City.
> Excerpt
Mark Warren considers ways that school reformers and community builders can break down their traditional isolation from one another.
> Excerpt
These articles show clearly that the partnerships necessary to build smart systems flow in many directions and require a new view of leadership. Such systems are not hierarchical, with one leader at the top; rather, leadership is distributed across all partners, with different leaders taking on responsibility for areas where they have the most expertise and experience.
In addition, these systems require considerable attention to the political, social, and cultural aspects of educational improvement. As an enterprise involving people with widely varying backgrounds and divergent histories and experiences, education depends on the ability to negotiate and build bridges that might not have been even considered in the past. And in cities in which racial and ethnic divisions are prominent, though usually unspoken, such bridge building is particularly critical.
To address these political, social, and cultural aspects of improvement, community involvement is crucial. Partnerships must be developed by and with community members, not just for them. That will ensure that the services the partnerships provide actually serve those they are intended to serve.
Such involvement would also help build and maintain community support for education systems. Educators, public officials, and funders increasingly are aware that community support is essential to sustain educational improvement. Only with full community involvement can such systems maintain — and deserve — support.
|
Annenberg Institute for School Reform Brown University, Box 1985 Providence, RI 02912 |
Telephone: 401.863.7790 Fax: 401.863.1290 |
AISR_info@brown.edu
|
© all material AISR