By Mark
When some new idea surfaces in education, it gets acronymized. A general rule: if you want to make a project die, give it a clunky acronym. When the acronym makes a word, it can have subtle positive power (I think of CSTP which comes out as "See-Step"… I look, I move forward) or less subtle negative power (as in the HSPEs–"his pees"–with which everyone has to deal eventually, as opposed to the opposite pronoun which it is best to avoid.) With Common Core on the way the HSPE's expiration date is already set.
That rumination aside, the U.S. Department of Education has released details of its RESPECT initiative which is ostensibly aimed at cultivating teacher leadership, collaboration and potential in an effort to transform the profession and therefore schools themselves. RESPECT is an acronym/acrostic built of the phrases Recognizing Educational Success, Professional Excellence, and Collaborative Teaching. Cute, a touch contrived, but that's only if you're cynical (which I apparently am, this Saturday morning before coffee).
Let's look at the meat of it. The opening line, "Every child in America deserves a high quality education…" reminded me of the "Don't you care about kids?" question I used to get when I'd vocally oppose our administration's newest trendy initiative. My cynicism started to wear off around page four, and by the end, my gears were turning.
I see some potential in this. My interest is piqued but any gelling optimism is necessarily cautious. Take a read if you haven't already, (it looks like a 30 page .pdf, but skip the propaganda at the beginning and start around section II…the photos, citations and text boxes bulk up the pagination, so it is actually a fairly quick read).
What do you think? Like my students, I always learn more from the conversation.
I think it’s a great idea, both philosophically and practically.
I hope it gets funded. Right now we’re not even funding basic education for students, so the idea of funding professional communities seems pretty far-fetched.
On the other hand, teachers are finding ways to have professional communities without it meaning they sit down in a room, look forward to their boxed lunch, and have a facilitator guide them through some sticky-note-using activities. Online communities are making collaboration easier and more cost and time effective.
A lot of interesting ideas in the RESPECT proposal, and some clear evidence of teacher input–as you and Tom both note, however, the big question is if any of it will be funded.
The high price tag, is a problem. My first thoughts were about all the things that a little grant money could do for my building and district in terms of facilitating collaboration, and these were quickly dashed when read the details of the grant competition.
However, the statements made about teachers and teaching could the foundation for some philosophical shifts. (Dreaming?) I see many, many parallel concepts and similar potential in the way that we are tacking TPEP in my district and in many districts across the state–and frankly, at the state level as well. Focusing on what we control, namely quality teaching that is collaborative and responsive to all those not-in-our-control factors that kids walk in with, is the best way we can improve student learning.
I like it too. For me it’s a wish list of every good education reform idea ever imagined. There’s only one catch:
It’s expensive, somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 billion, which means it’s probably doomed.
I can be cynical, too, Mark. RESPECT is one of those initiatives that everyone wants but no one wants to pay for, even though, in the long run, it will more than pay for itself in terms of increased productivity, etc. The long run, however, is far longer than any politician’s term of office.
So there it is, a great plan that probably won’t get funded.