You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.

Reinventing Michigan's schools for the 21st century

By Guest Column

062010_tomwatkins.jpg

Tom Watkins

Henry Ford once remarked in the early days of the 20th century, "You can have any color car you like -- as long as it is black".

Fast forward to the second decade of the 21st century and far too many of our public schools are making the same comment to our kids when it comes to the educational model being delivered.

In spite of a computer here and there, our schools are organized and operating on an outdated industrialized one-size- fits-all assembly line model, complete with a three-month summer layoff each year. 

Michigan has 550 smokestack factory school districts chugging along as though nothing has changed, when everything has! Clearly, there are islands of excellences and educational pioneers who are pushing the envelope for change, but they are the exception, not the rule.

We can change that. Change requires vision, leadership, and effort, but our schools must be challenged to innovate, not continue the fight to contain the change.

There is a need to fundamentally redesign our K-12 educational system around the student. We cannot reinvent Michigan without reinventing education -- a requirement for our state's future success.

We live in a world where ideas and jobs can and do move around the globe effortlessly. Other states and nations are passing us by, educating their citizens to thrive in a disruptive, technologically driven, knowledge economy. 

The research is clear: We know how to make effective learners, yet there is a powerful anchor attached to the status quo. 

We can use technology to personalize learning so that it is emotionally engaging, interactive, and social, allowing children to be active and lifelong learners.   

The role of the teacher needs to change from being the "sage on the stage" to being a facilitator of active and individualized learning, remove "seat time" and replacing it with competency-based structures that personalize pathways to student success.

With technology, every students can and should have an IEP, an Individualized Educational Plan, and make the new norm.

The world is changing in dramatic ways and our system of education must embrace those changes or be totally engulfed by them. Without change, our state will become a backwater in a sea of global progress.

An assembly line, one-size-fits-all educational model, based on fixed time, place, and pace with uninspiring and outmoded curriculum, is out of place in today's knowledge-based economy.

Leadership Matters

The protectors of the status quo want desperately to hold onto the comfort of what is. How do we then create a new vision for educational change? The answer is as simple as it is difficult to operationalize: Leadership.

New research and technology exists today to improve learning. We need leaders willing to take bold steps to lead change. Leaders who help others understand the present, and envision a better future.

We can lead the way in inventing a 21st century educational model built on learning sciences that use existing and developing technologies. How can we move into the information age/knowledge economy if our No. 1 information industry, education, remains mired in the Industrial Age?  Holding onto the past and protecting the status quo are not prescriptions that help us thrive, be creative or competitive on a world stage.

Resistance? Of course. 

This new system of educating our youth must not be about educational associations or unions, school vendors or any other special-interest group. We must break away from an educational system that has morphed into protecting adults at the expense of kids and our collective futures.

Our Kids, Our Future

This is not simply another ploy for more money and certainly not for the existing school system. Until we can demonstrate how additional investments in education will help teachers teach and children learn, gaining 21st century skills and knowledge, there should be no additional money for the educational system.

We don't need more money. We need to spend the money we already have based on different priorities. What gives the greatest return to our students, state and nation? "Our Kids, Our Future" must be our collective mantra.

Even Ford realized the time came to let go of an Edsel. Michigan has an opportunity to not simply reinvent itself, but to LEAD change.

Our economic and competitive futures are at stake. Will Michigan lead?

Tom Watkins is a business and educational consultant in the U.S. and China. He served as the Michigan state superintendent of schools, 2001-05, and president and CEO of the economic counsel of Palm Beach County, Fla., 1996-2001. He can be reached at: tdwatkins@aol.com.

Comments

publiccitizen

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 5:57 p.m.

This article sounds like it is describing my children's Montessori classrooms. Montessori is designed around the individual child and is very student-centered. My kids aren't old enough yet, but the Montessori Middle School at our school is already doing exactly what Watkins is advocating, especially in the areas of "The role of the teacher needs to change from being the "sage on the stage" to being a facilitator of active and individualized learning, remove "seat time" and replacing it with competency-based structures that personalize pathways to student success." Before the naysayers jump in and say it is a tuition-based private school, across the country, there are districts adopting the Montessori method into their classrooms. In Michigan, Okemos School District has a Montessori elementary school. I'm sure there are more. According to Jola Publications, there are at least 395 public Montessori schools across the United States (Jola, 2009). Why can't AAPS and other local districts investigate?

bs

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 5:01 p.m.

"Why is it only the Media and not the School that is providing a forum for input?"... guess you missed the public forum in Ypsilanti a week or two ago to discuss the future of the district, eh? It is so easy to throw out statements based on ill formed and inaccurate "talking points"...

bs

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 5 p.m.

"Giving students a month off a couple of times a year is a much better model for kids and for families." Could you point us to the studies that show that?

eastsidemom

Sat, Jan 29, 2011 : 11:37 a.m.

basically it was too expensive...

bs

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 4:59 p.m.

"We don't need more money." I love that statement... because it is just so frigging right wing wrong....

dotdash

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 4:45 p.m.

Why *do* our kids take 3 months off in the summer? We don't need them to till the fields anymore, and it results in large annual drops in academic proficiency from spring to fall, especially among kids whose summer options are education-free. Wealthier kids get camps and adventures, poorer kids get TV. Ouch. Why not have a summer term, as the British do? Giving students a month off a couple of times a year is a much better model for kids and for families. It would be a big change, though, so I suppose there would be big resistance.

bibbitty

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 4:43 p.m.

Providing a free and quality education to all children is a huge responsibility! Children at every level of ability have strengths to build upon and weaknesses to focus on. This accessibility encompassing all degrees of economic, social, and internal resources cannot be abandoned. The public school system is the only available choice that provides this full spectrum. Alternatives should not be accessible only to those who can pay. Try to get a free, traditional IEP anywhere else and you'll see that it is not available. That being said, the public school system must wake up to the reality that families are no longer forced to go with the traditional, industrial-era, neighborhood school. As inevitable technological changes come, the mind set needs to evolve. The major question is how do you cultivate "brand loyalty" from your families? Answer at the top of the list - you ask them what they think and harness the momentum of their ideas. But I notice as a parent that there is no effort to gather input. I am a big supporter of public schools, so why do I find no mechanism within the system for gathering opinions from the true stakeholders - parents and children; especially those who have abandoned the system or will in the near future if they do not feel heard? What is a family's main goal? Answer - to have confidence that the school is fostering the full flowering of their children's academic and personal potential. Why is it only the Media and not the School that is providing a forum for input?

timjbd

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.

Thank you for collecting all of the privatization buzzwords and catch phrases in one place. Very useful for future reference. You didn't spend quite as much time as your colleagues blaming ALL the problems in the country on unions and public employees but we get a steady stream of that here so it was right that you dialed it back a little.

limmy

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:30 p.m.

What I see evolving in schools is a large variety of types of schools that parents can choose from. I believe that this is what is happening and will continue to happen. Even in our neighborhood right now, kids go to all different schools. There are a variety of types of private schools, charter schools, IB schools, lab schools, large schools, small schools and home school with optional support programs. I think that what is happening is exactly what is needed. It is very chaotic right now, but I believe that this is the future. Every school should be opened up as a choice for students in the area. Home schoolers should have more options to partner with public schools and public schools should have more options to partner with colleges.

pearlgirl

Fri, Jan 28, 2011 : 5:16 p.m.

These options may be available to upper middle class families; however, our democracy will only remain vital and strong if a sound education is available to all children regardless of family income. The distinction or separation between the upper and lower socioeconomic classes in America is alarming. Two parent or single parent working families usually do not have the option of home schooling or driving their children to charter schools or schools of choice. It is imperative the problems within the public school system be resolved so all children have the equal opportunities promised in our Constitution.

Diagenes

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.

Mr. Watkins is right. Our education system is a 19th century model. We replaced slate and chalk with paper and pencil and thats about it. The growth in home schooling and private schools are clearly a result of the lack of confidence in the system as it is currently structured. The public education industry can change or it will be left behind.

sh1

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:48 p.m.

"We replaced slate and chalk with paper and pencil and thats about it." Please list the schools you've spent time in that prove this assertion.

Charley Sullivan

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 4:23 a.m.

Want better schools? How about classes of no more than 15 students, higher paid teachers that draw from the people currently trying to be doctors, lawyers, etc., fewer layers of administration and national standards but teachers empowered to actually teach? Oh, and no stupid fill in the bubble and true-and-false tests. Every kid writes every day, and writing and analysis and thinking happen in every class. You'll just have to gag the parents who don't want their kids taught to think, particularly since that runs the risk of having kids disagree with their families . . . But, kids will be more involved, and you'll have enough data on each kid not to have to worry about IEPs . . .

stunhsif

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 3:19 a.m.

Mr. Watkins, What you propose be done using an IEP is exactly what has been used by "home schoolers" for the past 20 years in Michigan and across this entire country. Kids get tested for a baseline each fall and from there are coached/taught with the proper amount of guidance and followup. Brighter, smarter and more energized ( AKA--motivated students) need less mentoring/tutoring and take off on their own, riding a faster horse. Those that are not as gifted/talented would still gallop faster than under the old school model. Not suprinsing most posters here on this thread are negative Nellie's, they have never been exposed to this kind of thinking outside the box or smokestack factory. Their thinking is , "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Well, it is broke and it needs to be fixed but their isn't any money to fix it. The IEP model will reduce costs, not raise them for the public schools.

eastsidemom

Sat, Jan 29, 2011 : 11:36 a.m.

of course homeschoolers do not have 15 to 30 students to account for...

sh1

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:47 p.m.

Please explain your assertion that the IEP model will reduce costs. How will you pay for the required extra staff?

Dirtgrain

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:53 a.m.

Michigan state superintendent of schools? Really? So many politicians preach about education when they have little idea about what is involved in teaching. Vision, leadership, technology--glittering generalities repeated in this letter to make it seem nifty, yet there are few details proposed. "Clearly, there are islands of excellences and educational pioneers who are pushing the envelope for change, but they are the exception, not the rule." That is an assumption, and you should quantify it before making such a claim. "We must break away from an educational system that has morphed into protecting adults at the expense of kids and our collective futures." Make a case to support the assumption that our system has changed into one that protects adults at the expense of students. You write the following: "New research and technology exists today to improve learning." And you later write this: "Until we can demonstrate how additional investments in education will help teachers teach and children learn, gaining 21st century skills and knowledge, there should be no additional money for the educational system." Why don't you show how technology improves learning? Prove it. Then explain where you will come up with money for it all (shuffle the money around that is already allocated to the system? Specify how you would break this down). ""Our Kids, Our Future" must be our collective mantra." That sounds good, but it has nothing to do with the little that you proposed in the letter.

limmy

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:21 p.m.

I agree. There is a lot of the same generalizations that we hear over and over. There is no real plan for change.

say it plain

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:19 a.m.

Commenters are missing the point of the writer's use of IEP, I believe. I don't think Mr. Watson can possibly mean IEP in the same way people are taking it--as the same IEP kids get when there are diagnosed 'problems' for them, e.g. therapy needs. He indicates in his other statements that he envisions *kid-centered* learning, with less of a focus on the teacher as a leader for all-the-class and more as a facilitator of individual kids in the same space, having their educational trajectories, working on the next step *for each child* in terms of acquiring important competencies. That *would* be a radical change...but people are instead seeming to interpret his suggestion as the mere addition of statements about how to 'fix' Johnnie and Janie for each and every child in the room--it's sort of the exact *opposite* of what I think he might be suggesting ;-)

say it plain

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:23 a.m.

I get the sense that I'm supposed to find this guy offensive before I even consider what he's saying. Or, elsewise, that discussion in these parts can be mainly an exercise in naysaying. Or, perhaps, we all like editing most of all. Ah, well, such is online life lol! I can just get back on the bandwagon then... hey...man! An IEP for every kid?! Who will pay for such a thing? Will it come out of a special education budget? Are we going to have to hire even *more* of them OTs and suchlike? ! The more interesting question, now that I look to check what Mr. Watkins' described-at-bottom-of-piece background is, is whether this sort of plan will mean that some or one educational technology provider will win bigtime, as the sole provider of "math" instruction programs, for instance? Or that one consultant company will drive anew a program of 'individualized' instruction, that's really just a series of if-then statements for teachers to follow with kids based on how they do on periodic assessments? I'd like more details on his suggestion, just like the rest of ya ;-) I just don't need to hear him say how he doesn't mean IEP as in the trademarked federally-precise term is all....

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:18 a.m.

This is the former state Superintendent of Education. He knows what an IEP is. If he means something other than the conventional meaning, he needs to explain it. But I doubt he does, and for all of the reasons cited above, this is simply silliness on his part. Maybe why he got fired as the Supe? Good Night and Good Luck

sh1

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 1:11 a.m.

He actually uses the term Individualized Education Plan, which is the federal term for the legal IEP document. If he meant something else, he still needs to explain how to pay for it and who would be in charge of seeing that the plans are legally accommodated.

say it plain

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:59 a.m.

I'd love to see Watkins (not Watson) explain lol, just thought that it was clear from what he'd written that he didn't mean "IEP" in the traditional way. I haven't been tracking the cooking and religion section and the women who write there (is it truly only they?!), but I too would like to see more interactive responding from the 'geniuses' in the editorials ;-) Are the geniuses all men to boot ?!

David Briegel

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:52 a.m.

Then let him explain! Please. I see the women in the cooking and the reiligous sections respond all the time. Never the Geniuses on the "News and Editorial" side!

limmy

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:18 a.m.

There is a lot of what you don't like in this article, but not much info about what you would do to replace it. I see you are proposing that teachers coach students through their personalized programs via technology. But, what else? I kind of like our schools and I like the summer vacation. That is actually where a lot of personalized learning does take place. Of course, we have the time, money, and desire to do interesting and educational things with our kids during the summer. I think summer is a good time for specialized learning --- music, art, technology -- areas of study that there is no time for during the school year. Of course, that requires money.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Mon, Jan 24, 2011 : 12:15 a.m.

Hasn't the new governor given Mr. Watkins a job yet? Apparently not. Good Night and Good Luck

eom

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 11:29 p.m.

While teachers are in all of the IEP meetings they would be required to attend, who is actually teaching the class? Clearly the writer has never had to attend an IEP, let alone 24-30.

AMOC

Fri, Jan 28, 2011 : 10:52 p.m.

The simplest solution to this, and several other problems with our current school operations is to schedule IEP meetings and other parent-teacher conferences outside normal school hours.

AMOC

Fri, Jan 28, 2011 : 10:49 p.m.

I think it would be entirely feasible, and better for the parents in almost every case if IEP meetings, parent-teacher conferences, etc. were routinely held outside of normal school and work hours. Thus, less need for subs, much better continuity for the students, and much more possibility that parents can truly be involved.

David Briegel

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 11:29 p.m.

Ralph, We aren't allowed to speak of the "genius" of the Bush years. Just don't tell the Conservatives that they can no longer blame Jenny! We will see where Slick Rick and his overtaxed billionaire buddies get us.

Ralph

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 11:17 p.m.

It's time to stop mentioning Gov. Granholm!

braggslaw

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.

Well said, Reform will be tough. We have some of the highest paid teachers in the country and we are one of the poorest states. We have over 500 school districts each with its own set of bureacrats. Those with entrenched interests will fight reform. But Jenny is no longer around and fiscally reasonable people are now in office. I have hope.

David Briegel

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 11:26 p.m.

Yeah, your "fiscally responsible" genuises were in charge for 12 yrs before Jenny. Look what that got us!! 500 Supers, HR Dir's, Fin Dr's, Curriculum Dir's. all for the failed Repub/Conservative mantra of "local control". Such Lunacy!! More students per class with underpaid teachers. That is our future and that is our destiny. Failure. Like "trickle down"!

sh1

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 11:24 p.m.

How do you propose that this reform be funded? It will call for huge staff increases and money for improved technology.

local

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 10:05 p.m.

Mr. Watkins, you need to take the time to go back and spend some time in a classroom sir. I think you clearly are out of touch with the reality of daily life in a school. What I find the most interesting is listening to consultants and former school personal who haven't been in a classroom ever, or for over a decade or more. IEPs for every student, really. When was the last IEP that you were part of? With that many IEPs, how do you afford more social workers, OTs, school psychologist, etc... to help implement these plans and to collect the proper data for each of these children? Thinking outside the box is great, but consulting with those living/working in a classroom daily might be important as well.

sh1

Sun, Jan 23, 2011 : 9:18 p.m.

An IEP for every student? So, a teacher with a class of 30 students will be pulled out a minimum of 30 times a year for legally mandated meetings, not to mention that any parent can request more than one meeting a year. And who would be caseworker for these students, taking care of all the paperwork and updates? I think there are better ways to spend money in our schools.