Learning Aloud

eSchool News reports that the federal budget support for the “Enhancing Education Through Technology” block grant program is to be cut by 200 million despite a 1.4 billion increase for education.

Earlier administration promises that technology support would be provided through block grants rather than more targeted programs (e.g., Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers To Use Technology – PT3) no longer appear valid. The argument for block grants is basically that states are allowed to apply funds as needed rather than as mandated at a higher level.

Funding priorities are heavily weighted toward NCLB initiatives.

Goals of administration technology policy can be found at Offices Educational Technology.

?? Individualize learning by personalizing instruction for each student???s unique needs.
?? Equip teachers with new tools to improve instruction.
?? Empower teachers, parents, and decision makers with the real-time data on student performance.
?? Expand access to the best resources and learning opportunities.
?? Engage students in their education in ways never before possible.

Perhaps the new secretary of education will update these goals.

A British study finds negative correlation between school use of computers and scores in math and reading. While the correlations with home use were positive, the relationship between performance and school use were negative. Computer availability is associated with more affluent schools providing more positive opportunities and when this connection is accounted for statistically a lack of positive benefits appears.

It will be interesting to see how these correlational results are interpreted as they gain greater attention.

Think computer games are cool and possibly the way to teach/learn? Interested in the reality of what it takes to create games?

Here is an interesting piece from the Dallas Observer describing the process of learning to be a game designer.

Edutopia, a component of the George Lucas Education Foundation, offers an analysis of the textbook industry. The analysis mostly concerns the many factors that combine to create a bland, but marketable product. I guess I can say that I now qualify as an insider and am possibly part of the problem. Still, it is not all “our” fault. There is a fine line between being creative and being ignored because those who make purchasing decisions (the educators who adopt a textbook) are concerned that the perspective taken does not fit with standards, standardized tests, and the “standard line.” How does one cover the basics, offer unique ideas, and also meet budgetary expectations that place a cap on how many pages you can offer or students are willing to read?

Perhaps you do what you have to to keep your work (the book) in front of learners and then use the web to offer other material for those who are searching for something more.

The Washington Post reports that the $400 million in frozen e-rate money is now being released. The backlog reaches as far back as 2003.

Google has released another useful tool. Google Scholar provides a search system for professional journals, conference papers, and other scholarly works. You cannot access the full-text articles, but this service can be useful for locating references. For example, I sometimes need to check a citation and this service will identify the citation in other reference lists.

Google Scholar also provides a way for scholars to see who is referencing their work. Just for kicks, I entered a couple of words from a paper I published based on my dissertation (in 1976) and my last name. Sure enough, the paper was referenced in 2002. This capability may not make sense to most Internet users, but researchers do like to know who is referencing them.

Bush picks Spellings for education secretary

Spellings was a key figure in drafting the president’s No Child Left Behind education initiative.

Here is a recent interview with the now Secretary of Education.

Trent, from Orange County, CA writes:
Hello, I am a high school student and I have served on two school boards. I am a big fan of the No Child Left Behind Act but I have a question about it. My question is; how does the No Child Left Behind Act help schools that are not meeting the the national standard in standardized testing? Thank you for your time.

Margaret Spellings
Thanks for your service on your local school boards and for your support of No Child Left Behind! Across the country, we are seeing positive results and student achievement is rising.

First, No Child Left Behind does not set a national standard for schools. Each state develops its own testing and accountability system that best meets their needs, but that ensures that all students will be proficient in reading and math in twelve years. The annual targets that schools must meet are set by each state according to their state assessments.

Each state, as part of its accountability plan, must also develop a system of sanctions and rewards for schools. When schools do not meet their annual targets for two straight years, the school must develop a school improvement plan and allow parents to transfer their child to a higher-performing public school if they so choose. If the school does not meet their targets for a third straight year, it must offer after-school tutoring to struggling students. Each state is also required to set aside 4% of its total Title I allocation (that would be over $500 million of the Federal 2005 education budget) to assist schools that are identified as needing improvement. This funding goes directly to these schools to assist in improving the school, implementing new curricula, hiring reading instructors, or addressing other needs of the school.

President Bush has also provided significant increases in funding for Title I schools across the country–those schools that serve the neediest students. Including the President’s 2005 budget, Title I funding has increased 52% since 2001, and overall K-12 funding has increased 49%.

Washington Post analysis of NCLB issues.