Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
A Final Word
Thirty spokes share the wheel’s hub,
It is the centre hole that makes it useful.
Shape clay into a vessel,
It is the space within that makes it useful.
Cut doors and windows for a room,
It is the holes which make it useful.
Therefore profit comes from what is there,
Usefulness from what is not there.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Science Research & Development (WHAT a CONCEPT)
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama promised a new era of science and technology for the nation, telling the National Academy of Sciences on Monday that he wants to devote more funds to research and development.
America has fallen behind other countries in science, Obama said. “I believe it is not in our character, American character, to follow — but to lead. And it is time for us to lead once again. I am here today to set this goal: we will devote more than 3% of our gross domestic product to research and development,” Obama said in a speech at the annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences.
That 3% would amount to about $420 billion spread over 10 years. “We will not just meet but we will exceed the level achieved at the height of the space race,” he said. That pursuit of discovery a half century ago fueled the nation’s prosperity and success, Obama told the academy. “The commitment I am making today will fuel our success for another 50 years,” he said. “This work begins with” a historic commitment “to basic science and applied research.”
And he set forth a wish list including:
■ Solar cells as cheap as paint
■ Green buildings that produce all the energy they consume
■ Learning software that’s as effective as a personal tutor
■ Prosthetics so advanced that you could play the piano again
■ An expansion of the frontiers of human knowledge about ourselves and the world around us.
In recent years, he said, “scientific integrity has been undermined and scientific research politicized in an effort to advance predetermined ideological agendas.”
Obama said he plans to double the budget of key science agencies over a decade, including the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy Office of Science and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology. He also announced the launch of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy.
It is a new Department of Energy organization modeled after the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, that led in development of the Internet, stealth aircraft and other breakthroughs. And he said the Energy Department and the National Science Foundation will offer programs and scholarships to encourage American students to pursue careers in science, engineering and business related to clean energy.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
The Crucial Role of Design
Commentary
Why We're Still 'At Risk'
The Legacy of Five Faulty Assumptions
Our new president has looked into the abyss of our current economic, energy, environmental, and health-care policies and promises to challenge the fundamental assumptions on which they are based. He admonishes us to join him in thinking and acting boldly.
We can only hope he feels the same way about education policy.
After nearly 25 years of intensive effort, we have failed to fix our ailing public schools and stem the “rising tide of mediocrity” chronicled in 1983 in A Nation at Risk. This is mainly because the report misdiagnosed the problem, and because the major assumptions on which current education policy—and most reform efforts—have been based are either wrong or unrealistic.
Most of the people running our public education systems and leading the reform movement are knowledgeable, dedicated, and experienced. But they are so committed to a strategy of standards-based accountability that different ideas are marginalized or stifled completely.
One could write a book about each of the five major assumptions on which education policy rests, but in this limited space, a few brief paragraphs will have to suffice.
Assumption One: The best way to improve student performance and close achievement gaps is to establish rigorous content standards and a core curriculum for all schools—preferably on a national basis.
Standards-based accountability has been the national school reform strategy for nearly two decades. It is essentially a “get tough” strategy made tougher by the federal No Child Left Behind Act. By all measures, it has not lived up to its promise, and the reason is that it is based on the premise that if we demand high performance and educational excellence, schools, teachers, and students will somehow “just do it.” It is a strategy that basically expects schools to be highly structured institutions with uniform practices and policies, where a common version of education is delivered to all students.
Standardization and uniformity may work with cars and computers, but it doesn’t work with humans. Today’s student body is the most diverse in history. An education system that treats all students alike denies that reality.
The issue is not whether standards are necessary. Schools without standards are unacceptable. Society should indeed hold high expectations for all students, but those expectations should reflect the values of the family and society—doing one’s best, obeying the rules, and mutual respect—and not simply the archaic academic demands of college-admissions offices. We should be preparing young people for life, not just for college.
Standards don’t prepare students for anything; they are a framework of expectations and educational objectives. Without the organization and processes to achieve them, they are worthless. States have devoted nearly 20 years to formulating standards to be accomplished by a conventional school model that is incapable of meeting them. We will make real progress only when we realize that our problem in education is not one of performance but one of design.
Assumption Two: Standardized-test scores are an accurate measure of student learning and should be used to determine promotion and graduation.
The standards-based-accountability strategy, not surprisingly, has led to the alarming overuse of standardized tests, even in the opinion of some test-makers and psychometricians.
Some measures of accountability are necessary in any endeavor that spends public money and is responsible for an important societal mission. But is testing all students virtually every year really necessary to determine whether the system is working effectively and the money spent well? If test scores are the accepted indicator, schools have not been meeting the needs of students for the past couple of decades. So why spend more money and time on constant testing to tell us what we already know—especially when standardized tests do a poor job of measuring real learning, don’t assess most of the characteristics valued by parents and the larger society, and contribute almost nothing to the process of teaching and learning.
If the purpose of standardized testing is to measure student achievement so teachers can help individual students learn better, it fails miserably. Standardized-test scores tend, instead, to say more about a student’s socioeconomic status than about his or her abilities. If testing is to have a positive effect on student achievement, it should be formative testing that is an integral part of classroom teaching and learning.
The most disturbing aspect of today’s standardized testing grows out of the "get tough" strategy’s emphasis on high-risk tests. Using standardized-test scores to determine promotion and graduation is unconscionable. A recent Texas study confirms the negative impact of high-risk testing on students. The report notes that 135,000 high school students drop out each year, and that “the state’s high-stakes accountability system has a direct impact on the severity of the dropout problem.” Teachers complain that they are compelled to devote valuable instructional time to preparing students for the test. They argue that the demand of ubiquitous accountability testing tends to narrow the curriculum. And they say that by teaching to the test, as they are expected to do, they are forced to turn education into a game of Trivial Pursuit.
Except in school, people are judged by their work and their behavior. Few of the business and political leaders who advocate widespread use of standardized testing have taken a standardized test since leaving college. It is probably a safe bet that the majority of them, even after 16 years of formal education, could not pass the tests they require students to pass.
"But I took those courses years ago," they say. "I can’t remember all that stuff." Exactly.
A common justification for standardized testing is that it’s the best proxy for student achievement we have until something better comes along. The performance-based assessment used in many charter schools (and now statewide in Rhode Island and New Hampshire) is better.
Assumption Three: We need to put highly qualified teachers in every classroom to assure educational excellence.
A great idea! If we could do that, we’d be a long way to solving our education problem.
But it won’t happen for decades, if ever.
As a host of studies over the past 25 years have revealed, the teacher pipeline is broken at several points. We don’t attract enough of the brightest young people into teaching; we don’t prepare them well for the job; many find their working conditions and compensation unacceptable; and teachers are not treated as professionals.
Highly effective teachers are more crucial to the success of standards-based accountability than anything else. Without enough of them, the strategy can’t work. As any reasonable person would have anticipated, we missed the NCLB goal of having a highly qualified teacher in every classroom by 2006. Improving teaching is as difficult as improving student achievement.
More accountability is again seen as a major part of the solution: more-rigorous certification, tougher teacher evaluation, and higher teacher pay. But certification guarantees a high-quality teacher about as much as a driver’s license guarantees a good driver. Tougher evaluation would help get rid of ineffective teachers, but it’s hard to see how it would produce more good teachers. Higher pay is fine, but it is no more likely to improve teaching any time soon than raising pilots’ pay would make flying safer.
If we want effective teaching, we should change the ways schools are organized and operated, and shift the teacher’s primary role from an academic instructor to an adviser, someone who helps students manage their own education.
A rational system would redesign itself and make organizational and procedural changes that optimize the positive influence of good teachers and minimize the negatives. Creating opportunities for teachers to work together, to teach in teams, to share in professional development, and to be more involved in educational decisionmaking are ways to bring out the best in teachers.
Again, there are examples on the ground that such an approach works.
Assumption Four: The United States should require all students to take algebra in the 8th grade and higher-order math in high school in order to increase the number of scientists and engineers in this country and thus make us more competitive in the global economy.
This assumption has become almost an obsession in policymaking arenas today. Requiring every student to study higher-order math is a waste of resources and cruel and unusual punishment for legions of students. It diverts attention away from the real problem: our failure to help kids become proficient readers and master basic arithmetic.
The United States must indeed produce more scientists and engineers to compete in a global economy. But it is fallacious to assume that we can accomplish that by requiring every student to take algebra in the 8th grade and higher-order math through high school. It is like believing that by requiring high school students to take a few courses in painting, we will make them all artists.
Most young people who go into science and engineering are well on their way by the time they start high school, because they become hooked on science or math in the early grades and do well in mathematics in elementary and middle school. Some will go on to become scientists and engineers; others will not. To expect otherwise is unreasonable.
If the nation wants more scientists and engineers, then educators need to find ways to awaken and nourish a passion for those subjects well before high school, and then offer students every opportunity to pursue their interest as far as they wish.
Assumption Five: The student-dropout rate can be reduced by ending social promotion, funding dropout-prevention programs, and raising the mandatory attendance age.
Arguably, the dropout rate is the most telling evidence of public school failure. Nearly a third of entering high school freshmen drop out. The percentage is higher for blacks, Hispanics, and English-language learners. And in many urban districts, the dropout rate borders on the horrendous.
Most students drop out of school for legitimate reasons, and trying to talk them out of it with “just stay in” programs, or forcing them to attend for an additional year or two, makes no sense. The “get tough” strategy of high standards, rigorous curricula, and more testing has not lowered the dropout rate and, as the Texas study cited shows, probably increases it.
Dropping out of school is not an impulsive decision. The process begins long before high school, often by the 4th or 5th grade, when courses begin to be content-heavy and students can no longer get by with the ability to “decode” English, but must be able to understand what they read. If scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress are reliable measures, only about a quarter of 4th graders can read proficiently, and the percentage declines in the 8th and 12th grades.
Students who fail early and often come to accept failure as inevitable and are on the path to dropping out as soon as they can. Probably a third of students who plan to drop out have made up their minds by the 8th grade and mark time until they can legally leave school.
To reduce the dropout rate, we must first understand and accept why students choose to leave school. The reasons most often given are boredom, personal or family problems, and inability to understand and do the work required. A smaller percentage of students drop out because they find school to be a waste of time; these often are young people with the ability to succeed in school but who find that what is offered in the classroom doesn’t interest or challenge them. (Some years ago, a survey of students asked what word they would use to define school. “Boring” won hands down.)
The key to graduating is learning; the key to learning is motivation. There are innovative public schools that graduate most of their students because they personalize education, encourage students to pursue their interests and build on that enthusiasm, and offer multiple opportunities to learn instead of a one-size-fits-all education.
President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan should open a second front in this war on mediocrity and failure.
We need to continue making every effort to improve the existing public schools. They will enroll most of our young people for many years to come.
Simultaneously, we should pursue a parallel strategy of creating new, innovative schools and giving them the autonomy and resources to explore new ideas. These new schools can be a much-needed research-and-development sector for the conventional system.
Secretary Duncan should support a national effort patterned after Renaissance 2010, the program he launched in Chicago to replace failing schools with new, diverse models different from conventional schools and from each other.
It is neither wise nor necessary to bet the future on a single reform strategy, especially when hundreds, perhaps thousands, of schools are demonstrating every day that there are other and more successful ways to help children learn and succeed.
But we can pursue two strategies only if we act to assure that the dominant strategy does not smother the fledgling movement in its crib.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
SETDA Report
http://www.setda.org/web/guest/reports
SETDA / STEM Education
http://www.setda.org/web/guest/2020/stem-education
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
NSF ITEST Grant Partners / Oakland Schools
OAKLAND PRESS
Schools expand virtual design, manufacturing training
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
From staff reports
AUBURN HILLS — Dassault Systèmes, a world leader in 3D and Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) solutions, has announced that it provided an additional 400 seats of its PLM software to Oakland Schools through an academic partnership program.
This relationship with the intermediate school district, which began in 2002, provided Oakland County’s 28 school districts access to CATIA, a top virtual product design solution, as well as its digital manufacturing software counterpart DELMIA. Instructors at each of the 23 facilities taking advantage of the program have been trained in the software.
“The goal of this program is to fill the gap between education and industry by exposing students to the same high-tech tools employed by the leading aerospace, medical, consumer product, and automotive companies of the world,” says Bill Williams, Oakland Schools’ Career Focused Education consultant. “For example, more than 80 percent of new vehicles launched today are designed in CATIA, making training in this software a must for any would-be automotive engineer. We encourage every high school to take advantage of this offering and make 3D virtual design and digital manufacturing courses available to all of their students.”
Williams notes that manufacturing offers excellent career opportunities with typical wages and benefits being about 25 percent higher than other occupations. The other benefit is the anticipated growth in the application of digital manufacturing.
“We commend Mr. Williams and Oakland Schools for their efforts in this area,” says Roy Smolky, DELMIA Worldwide Academic Relations, Dassault Systèmes. “We believe programs like this are vital in helping not only Oakland County, but the U.S. in maintaining its role as the world's technology leader.”
The Dassault Systèmes solutions available through Oakland Schools are used to educate students in virtual product development where all product design and manufacturing processes are created, simulated and optimized in a virtual 3D computer environment, prior to being built in the real world. Companies using these technologies shorten development cycles and reduce production errors.
“We know from experience that students who are trained in these sophisticated tools are better prepared to enter university level programs, as well as the workforce,” adds Vickie L. Markavitch, superintendent, Oakland Schools. “It’s crucial that we tap students’ interest early on, encouraging them to acquire appropriate skill sets and pursue available careers in science and manufacturing.”
Monday, April 6, 2009
Pontiac Northern High School CAPTURES MICHIGAN STEM-FOCUSED CROWN!
 |
| Robots crash and bang into the corner at Saturday's FIRST Robotics competition at EMU |
Posted: Saturday, 04 April 2009 5:27PM
Pontiac Northern, Milford, Utica Win FIRST Robotics Michigan
A coalition of teams from Pontiac Northern, Milford and Utica high schools won the FIRST Robotics state championship at Eastern Michigan University Saturday afternoon, earning the right to represent the Great Lakes State at the FIRST world championships April 16-18 in Atlanta, Ga.
They bested a coalition of teams from Fremont, Berkley and Grand Rapids Creston high schools.
Around 4,000 students, mentors, teachers, family members and volunters crowded EMU's Convocation Center for the raucous finals, complete with team mascots, flags, slogans, pounding music and big-screen video.
Teams that made the quarterfinals but didn’t advance to the semis were Auburn Hills Notre Dame Prep, Belding, Bloomfield Hills Andover, Bloomfield Hills International Academy, Madison Heights Bishop Foley, Pontiac Oakland County Schools, Romulus, Saginaw Career Complex, Southgate Anderson, Troy, Ypsilanti Willow Run and a combined team of Zeeland East and West high schools.
FIRST, an acronym for For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology, was established in the late 1980s by inventor Dean Kamen as a way to get American high school students as interested in science and engineering as they are in sports. The robotics competitions borrow a great deal of their style from big-time sporting events, as teams of robots work together to accomplish specific tasks in a game that changes every year.
From Feb. 27 through March 28, FIRST in Michigan operated seven district events to determine which teams would qualify for the state finals. The 2009 season in Michigan has seen an entirely new competition format that is serving as a pilot program for FIRST, with smaller "district" competitions restricted to Michigan teams replacing larger, more involved "regional" events in the state that were open to teams from anywhere. The idea was to cut travel and other expenses for the teams to make FIRST more affordable.
Michigan added 16 new rookie teams this year and how has 134 total, trailing only California in the number of participating schools.
This year's game, called "Lunacy," saw robots designed to pick up and dump 9-inch game balls into goals hitched to their opponents' roobts for points during a two-minute, 15-second match. Additional points are awarded for scoring a special game ball, the Super Cell, in the last 20 seconds of the match. Teams can also score by tossing balls into their opponents' trailers from designated points around the competition floor -- meaning that many teams this year recruited basketball or baseball players who could throw the balls accurately for long distances. A first this year was a low-friction competition floor and low-friction tires, which made the robots slip and slide and piloting more diffiicult.
The state's top 64 teams qualified for a chance to compete in the state championship. A day and a half of seeding matches whittled that down to the top eight teams. Those teams got to choose two alliance partners each -- teams they thought offered robots that could complement their own. Thus, eight three-team alliances competed in best-of-three elimination rounds in quarterfinals and semifinals before a thrilling finals showdown that offered all the drama and surprises of a state championship athletic match.
More at www.firstinmichigan.org.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Our Work with URC continues to yield benefits
Michigan Tops $1.3 billion In NSF Grants Since 2000
Michigan researchers brought more than $1.3 billion in National Science Foundation grants into the state between 2000 and 2008, more than their counterparts in bigger states like Florida and Ohio, according to a new NSF tally.
The vast majority of the federal grants, an average of $147.5 million per year, were generated by Michigan’s University Research Corridor institutions, the University of Michigan, Michigan State University and Wayne State University.
In 2008, for example, the three research universities received more than $130 million, or 83 percent of more than $156 million in grants awarded in the state last year.
“Important advancements and technologies have been developed because of NSF support,’’ said Steve Forrest, UM vice president for research. “In addition to a multitude of important individual investigator grants, NSF has also funded our large and transformative efforts such as the Engineering Research Center for Wireless Integrated MicroSystems and the U-M Engineering Research Center for Reconfigurable Manufacturing. NSF backing also allows our state to participate in the National Nano Infrastructure Network which links the Lurie Nanofabrication Facility to other advanced resources around the U.S.’’
When academic research grants from all sources are totaled, the URC institutions receive more than 94 percent of academic research dollars coming into Michigan.
“MSU researchers receive substantial support from NSF, and we appreciate the recognition of our research capabilities that this level of funding provides,” said Ian Gray, MSU’s vice president for research and graduate studies. “NSF funding supports the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory and much of the research conducted in our top-ranked College of Education, where faculty are studying ways to improve K-12 education, particularly in math and science. Our nationally ranked plant sciences research is also well supported by NSF.”
Michigan ranked ninth in the nation for NSF funding with $1.3 billion, just behind the much nation’s second-most populous state of Texas, which brought in $1.5 billion to rank eighth. Florida, the fourth-most populous state, ranked 11th, attracting $1.1 billion in grants over the same period.
Among neighboring Great Lakes states, Ohio ranked 18th for NSF funding with $800 million in grants, while Indiana ranked 19th, bringing in $771 million. The states receiving the most NSF grants were California, New York, Massachusetts, Virginia, Colorado, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Texas. Arizona rounded out the top 10 behind Michigan.
“Wayne State University looks to the National Science Foundation for support in many critical areas,” said Hilary Ratner, Wayne State vice president for research. “Their funding supports many of our critical research activities. Examples of projects include the development of novel technology for extending highway bridge life through controllable suspension components based on smart fluid technology, and development of intelligent textile technology that will be used as a respiratory sound monitoring device. These and other important projects will help drive the economic future of Michigan and the nation.”
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency created by Congress in 1950 "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense…" With an annual budget of about $6.06 billion, NSF funds about 20 percent of all federally supported basic research conducted by America's colleges and universities.
For the complete list, visit: www.cnsfweb.org/AllStates.Alpha.2000-2008.pdf.
For more on the URC, visit www.urcmich.org.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Our Macomb, Math, Science & Technology Center Students are Winners!
I believe CONGRATULATIONS are in order in that Ms. Lyndsey Reich and Mr. Tamim Shaker have recently won the Detroit Science and Engineering Fair / Team Competition 2009. They will be traveling to Reno, Nevada in May to compete and extend their winning ways. Kudos!
*Can't remember who we know in Reno..........ten-point toss-up to anyone?
Connected in more ways then one (Congratulations to Nadine Stallworth-Tibbs)
 |
| Their competition done and trophies awaiting presentation, some FIRSTers relax with a line dance |
Posted: Sunday, 22 March 2009 12:13PM
Ypsi, Detroit, Warren Win FIRST District Event
A coalition of Willow Run High School, Detroit Osborn University High School and the Warren Consolidated Schools took first place Satuday at the Detroit District tournament of the FIRST Robotics competition.
Two days of 80 seeding matches among 40 teams led to best-of-three-match quarterfinals involving eight three-team coalitions. The survivng four coalitions moved on to best-of-three-match semifinals. Winners there moved on to the best-of-three-match final.
The competing teams packed Wayne State University's Matthaei Center 2,000-seat gymnasium for the competiton and used its practice gyms for the pit area.
The winning coalition bested a three-team group from Madison Heights Bishop Foley High School, the Redford Township-based Michigan Technical Academy and Southgate Anderson High School.
The team from Willow Run also won the top non-competition award, the Regional Chairman's Award. This award is generally considered the most prestigious in FIRST and deals mainly with spreading passion about science and technology to the winner's community and school. The Regional Engineering Inspiration Award went to Team 440, the Cody High School team.
The national FIRST organization is experimenting this year with a new competition structure in Michigan, featuring a larger number of district competitions that are restricted to Michigan teams only, district competition that draw a relatively smaller number of competitors than FIRST's traditional regional competition that are open to teams from virtually anywhere. The idea is to cut travel expenses and give teams a chance to compete in more events closer to home. All of the teams competing Saturday hailed from within a half hour's drive of Wayne State.
The FIRST Michigan competition continues with district events Friday and Saturday in Troy and Grand Rapids, followed by the state championships April 2-4 at Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti.
FIRST (For Inspriation and Recognition of Science and Technology) was established in the late 1980s by New Hampshire inventor Dean Kamen, creator of the Segway scooter. The competition involves teams of mentors (corporate employees, teachers, or college students) and high school students who collaborate to design and build a robot in six weeks. This robot is designed to play a game, which is designed by a FIRST committee and changes from year to year. This game is announced at a nationally simulcast kickoff event in January.
This year's game involves robots towing trailers -- robots designed to pick up balls and place the balls in the trailer of a competitor's robot. Team members are also allowed to toss balls into competitors' trailers from designated spots around the competition field. The balls have different point values depending on their color and when in the competition they're placed in the competitor's trailer.
Yours truly had the privilege of serving as master of ceremonies for Saturday's event.
Also, I wanted to mention that you FIRST Robotics fans can now vote for FIRST Teacher of the Year at www.wwj.com/pages/1843943.php. The poll allows voting once per day, and voting ends at 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday, March 25. We'll present the Teacher of the Year award in April.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Diversification!
Southeast Michigan Diversification Summit
Date: 4/15/2009Time: 9:00 am - 4:00 pm
Location:
University of Michigan Dearborn
4901 Evergreen Road, 1500 Social Science Building
Dearborn, MI 48128
Cost: $30.00
REGISTER NOW
This Summit will sell-out – early registration is recommended.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Automotive Diversification is an invitation only multi-part event where experts from four growing industry sectors will provide insight into manufacturing opportunities in those markets. Understand the components of a diversification strategy and be aware of the barriers to market entry.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND?
Manufacturers with resources and/or a capacity to diversify. This is not an appropriate event for service providers and is intended specifically for suppliers, targeting NAICS codes beginning with 31, 32, and 33. Two representatives from each company are invited.
WHY ATTEND?
Manufacturers continue to experience challenges in the automotive industry. Regional manufacturers have world class capabilities that other industry sectors are currently seeking. The Michigan Economic Development Corporation has retained speakers who are experts in the respective fields.
Come and discover what it takes to break into new markets such as: alternative energy, aerospace and defense, government contracting and medical devices.
Click here for a map to the event
AGENDA
9:00 – 9:15am
Opening Remarks:
Wayne County Executive Robert A. Ficano
9:15 – 9:45am
Market Diversification Presentation
Mike Coast, Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center
9:45 – 10:30am
Medical Devices
Christophe Sevrain, CJPS Enterprises
10:45 – 11:30am
Aerospace
Craig Wolf, Michigan Aerospace Manufacturers Association
11:30 – 11:45
“Surviving to Thriving”
John Antos, University of Michigan
1:00 – 1:45pm
Government Contracting and Defense
Major General Bradley M. Lott (ret.), MEDC Defense Contract Coordination Center
1:45 – 2:30pm
Alternative Energy
Pedro J. Guillen, NextEnergy
2:30 – 3:30pm
Case Studies
TNT-EDM
W Industries
3:30 – 4:00pm
Next Steps / Closing Remarks
Kelly Rogers, MEDC
Hosted by Ann Arbor SPARK, Detroit Economic Growth Corp., MEDC, Monroe County Industrial Development Corp. and Wayne County
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Lessons from the field: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Many of the small schools that we invested in did not improve students’ achievement in any significant way. These tended to be schools that did not take radical steps to change the culture, such as allowing the principal to pick the team of teachers or change the curriculum. We had less success trying to change an existing school than helping to create a new school.
He goes on to state:
But a few of the schools that we funded achieved something amazing. They replaced schools with low expectations and low results with ones that have high expectations and high results. Almost all of these schools are charter schools that have significantly longer school days than other schools. The hope and promise of our traditional school districts lies with their ability to replicate the strategies and results of the schools that have done “something amazing” in high poverty communities.
That is the foundation upon which the Greater Detroit Education Venture Fund is based. We have learned from the work of the Gates Foundation and will invest in schools that have relentless leaders with autonomy and accountability for the programs, people and budgets in their building. We know that we need to increase our capacity within the schools and have already brought in proven national leaders like First Things First and the Institute for Student Achievement. We are courting Teach for America to return to our region as a source of teachers from a pool of some of the best and brightest college grads from around the nation. Finally, we are investing strategically in clusters of schools representing all three counties so that we can collaborate and compete to improve student achievement in the most dramatic ways.
But these are just some pieces of the puzzle. And while gains are made in some areas, we fall short of the finish line in others. When new principals were brought on last year to lead three failing Detroit public high schools whose teaching staffs had been reconstituted in keeping with No Child Left Behind, they soon learned that they would only be able to hire teachers from the very same schools that had been reconstituted. So teachers were rotated from one school to another, with the expectation of different results.
Principals must be able to hire the very best teachers for kids who need them the most. Our school leaders and teachers can accomplish that within the context of their collective bargaining agreement in ways that are consistent with measurable improvements in student achievement. But if they are unable to change, as Bill Gates has learned, they may be soon be replaced by schools whose leaders are able to cross that hurdle in order to do something amazing.
Michael Tenbush, United Way for Southeastern Michigan
The Pontiac Promise (Informs OUR Understanding)
Lawmaker seeks support for Promise Zone
By RANDAL YAKEY
Of The Oakland Press
PONTIAC — An opportunity for a partial or fully paid college education for students of the Pontiac school district is at hand.
Now, it’s up to the surrounding community to help them seize that opportunity.
State Rep. Tim Melton, D-Auburn Hills, told a community forum Monday at City Hall that all the kids who work hard and graduate will be eligible for part or all of their college education to be paid for through the Promise Zone program.
But it won’t be easy.
So, Melton has called upon businesses, educators and citizens to donate time and money to a cause that will benefit the entire Pontiac community.
“We need to tap into our faith-based community,” Melton said. We need to tap into our business community like The Palace of Auburn Hills.”
Melton said he believes the $750,000 to get the program started can be raised and that he has already been getting “generous donations,” but there is still much to be done.
The Michigan Promise Zone Act allows communities to create funding mechanisms to increase college education opportunities for graduates of Michigan’s K-12 school system by providing free college tuition to in-state schools.
Up to 10 Promise Zones will be authorized throughout the state in areas that have a combination of low rates of educational attainment and high rates of poverty and unemployment. Funds must be raised by the community for two years before a percentage of growth in state education tax dollars will be added to the pot to provide scholarships to Pontiac students.
Under the plan, the school board would create a Promise Zone Authority board and appoint nine of the 11 members. The other two would be appointed by the speaker of the House and the leader of the Senate majority. The authority would cover full tuition to any public school in Michigan and a capped amount to any more expensive private Michigan college.
“The business community will benefit because now you have a higher density of post secondary educated kids who they are able to hire,” said Melton. “People always ask me to bring jobs to our community. Well, who are they going to hire? Let’s make sure we are preparing our kids for the jobs in the new economy.”
The Promise Zone Authority board would set the criteria for the scholarships and would be responsible for raising money in the private sector to fund them. No school board members would be on the authority.
In the third year, after two years of fund raising, the state would authorize the district to keep a percentage of funds generated by property tax growth to put toward scholarships. Children in all the cities and townships in the district would benefit, not just those who live in Pontiac. And the fund would reap revenue from growth in property taxes from all the entities in the school district.
Pontiac school district graduates, whether low-income or not, will be eligible for funds that make up the difference between what a student can obtain in scholarships and grants and the full tuition at a public Michigan college or university or a similar capped amount for a private college.
FYI
Call Melton’s office at (888) MELTON-4 or e-mail timmelton@house.mi.gov.
Monday, March 16, 2009
21st Century Digital Learning Environments (Unable to Attend / Working Meeting on Pontiac Promise)
FI3T Project PIs Meeting
March 16., 2009
5:00 – 7:00 pm
SOE Conference Room 251
University of Michigan-Dearborn
AGENDA
1.0 Welcome
2.0 Winter Activities
2.1 Student Attendance
2.2 Parent Involvement
2.3 Corporate Partners
2.4 Winter PI Meetings
3.0 Summer Camp
3.1 Schedule
3.2 The Henry Ford Museum visit
4.0 Second Cohort Preparation
5.0 Others
6.0 Adjourn
FI3T Project PIs Meeting
March 16, 2009
5:00 – 7:00 pm
SOE Conference Room 251
University of Michigan-Dearborn
AGENDA
1.0 Welcome
Attendees: Margret Hoft, Mesut Duran, Brahim Medjahed, Elsayed Orady, Caroline Beyer, Shedrick Ward, Sharon Holloway, Silas Willams, Ermelda Polk, Mark Jenness
2.0 Winter Activities
2.1 Student Attendance
· Joshua Brandly & Antonio Dudet are not returning. Ebony Ellis’s case is not clear. SAMPI will prepare an exit interview form and conduct interviews with not returning students.
2.2 Parent Involvement (differed)
2.3 Corporate Partners (differed)
2.4 Winter PI Meetings
· Scheduled for April 20 from 5-7 in SOE Conference Room 251.
3.0 Summer Camp
3.1 Schedule
· The first week (4 days) of the Summer camp is tentatively scheduled for the week of June 15 and the second week of the camp will be held in the last week of August (week of 24, 4 days).
· Dr. Duran will start a VLT discussion on this issue to finalize decisions for this matter. Students will be informed about the summer camp schedule by March 28 workshop.
3.2 Structure
· The structure of the summer camp will be discussed in detail at the upcoming PI meeting but it will involve a whole-group trip to the
4.0 Second Cohort Preparation
4.1 Pontiac Schools
· Due to plan for mass teacher layoffs at the Pontiac Schools at the end of the school year, the second cohort of the program will involve DPS only.
4.2 DPS
· DPS will identify 16 new teachers and financially support them to participate in a series of IT/STEM workshops that will be offered during the weeks of June 22 & 29 (tentative).
· Ideally, new teachers will be recruited from the current teachers’ schools to develop better connection and collaboration between the current teachers and the new teachers.
· Teacher Info page will be revised accordingly and posted on the VLT for questions and comments and later will be distributed to the prospective new teachers.
· Each STEM area will offer 2 half-day (4 hour each) workshop to the new coming teachers in team teaching format—Current content faculty and K-12 teacher teaching their related workshop together (knowledge transfer from current lead teachers to new teachers in training)
· At the end of the workshop series, in collaboration with current teachers, the project will identify and invite 4-5 new teachers to participate in the second cohort.
5.0 Others
· Cohort one summary package for Year 1 should be prepared and distributed to DPS administrators
· Interviews with students, faculty, and teachers for the Year 1 activities will be conducted by the Evaluation team.
· Student work displays (out put) in the school and on campus are needed by the Evaluation team.
6.0 Adjourn
Saturday, March 14, 2009
REFORM tied to the DOLLARS! (MAKES CENTS)
By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 11, 2009; A01
President Obama sharply criticized the nation's public schools yesterday, calling for changes that would reward good teachers and replace bad ones, increase spending, and establish uniform academic achievement standards in American education.
In a speech to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Obama called on teachers unions, state officials and parents to end the "relative decline of American education," which he said "is untenable for our economy, unsustainable for our democracy and unacceptable for our children." The speech, delivered in a venue meant to underscore the changing demographics of the nation's public education system and its long-term priorities, sought to bring a bipartisan approach to education reform by spreading blame across party lines for recent failures.
"For decades, Washington has been trapped in the same stale debates that have paralyzed progress and perpetuated our educational decline," Obama said. "Too many supporters of my party have resisted the idea of rewarding excellence in teaching with extra pay, even though it can make a difference in the classroom. Too many in the Republican Party have opposed new investments in early education, despite compelling evidence of its importance."
Obama's speech, his first as president devoted to education, struck a tone of urgency at a time when public education is slated to receive about $100 billion in new federal money under the recently passed economic stimulus package. The money may give Obama and his education secretary, Arne Duncan, more influence in reshaping a public education system traditionally guided by state governments and local school districts.
"The resources come with a bow tied around them that says 'Reform,' " Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, said in a telephone interview. "Our basic premise is that the status quo and political constituencies can no longer determine how we proceed on public education reform in this country."
Although Obama proposed many of the ideas on the campaign trail, he used the speech to link those prescriptions to the future success of the ailing U.S. economy. He encouraged experimentation in the public school system, including proposals to extend the school day -- to bring the United States in line with some Asian countries whose students are scoring higher on tests -- and to eliminate limits on the number of charter schools.
"A number of these things are simply encouragements to the states on matters that the federal government has little authority over," said Jack Jennings, president of the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy. "But with this stimulus money comes the ability to talk more about these issues. And that is very powerful in itself."
The president signaled a willingness to take on influential Democratic constituencies, including teachers unions, which have been skeptical of merit-pay proposals. He said he intends to treat teachers "like the professionals they are while also holding them more accountable."
Good teachers will receive pay raises if students succeed, Obama said, and will "be asked to accept more responsibility for lifting up their schools." But, he said, states and school districts must be "taking steps to move bad teachers out of the classroom."
"If a teacher is given a chance but still does not improve, there is no excuse for that person to continue teaching," he said. "I reject a system that rewards failure and protects a person from its consequences."
Obama's support for ideas such as merit pay and toughened accountability for teachers is similar in tone to proposals placed on the table by D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee in contract negotiations with the Washington Teachers' Union.
Rhee, a Democrat, said last year that voting for Obama was "a very hard decision" because of the party's traditional reluctance to take on influential teachers unions. A spokeswoman said last night that Rhee had no immediate comment on the president's speech.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, a union with more than 1 million members, said in a statement that "as with any public policy, the devil is in the details. And it is important that teachers' voices are heard as we implement the president's vision."
Obama's call for states to adopt uniform academic achievement standards is likely to anger conservatives, who generally favor giving local school districts the authority to design curriculum and grading criteria. To make his point, the president said: "Today's system of 50 different sets of benchmarks for academic success means fourth-grade readers in Mississippi are scoring nearly 70 points lower than students in Wyoming -- and getting the same grade."
To encourage classroom innovation, Obama said, he wants the District and the 26 states that now limit the number of permitted charter schools to lift those caps. Such schools, founded by parents, teachers and civic groups, receive public money but are allowed to experiment broadly with curriculum. The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools says 365,000 students are on waiting lists for charter schools.
Obama chose to deliver his remarks at the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, senior administration officials said, to emphasize the growing proportion of Latinos entering the public school system. He said a quarter of kindergartners in public schools are Latino, adding that they "are less likely to be enrolled in early education programs than anyone else." He said the stimulus plan includes $5 billion to expand the Early Head Start and Head Start programs.
The president also noted that Latino students are "dropping out faster than just about anyone else," a national problem that cuts across ethnic lines. He noted that "just 2,000 high schools in cities like Detroit, Los Angeles and Philadelphia produce over 50 percent of America's dropouts."
Regarding higher education, Obama said he plans to expand several federal grant programs, including increasing the maximum amount of a Pell grant and allowing it to rise with inflation, and ending "wasteful student loan subsidies." The goal, he said, is to make college "affordable for 7 million more students."
"So, yes, we need more money. Yes, we need more reform. Yes, we need to hold ourselves accountable for every dollar we spend," Obama said. "But there is one more ingredient I want to talk about. The bottom line is that no government policies will make any difference unless we also hold ourselves more accountable as parents."
By the Numbers
Declining Michigan Birth Rate Threatens Future Of State Colleges
LANSING - Michigan's birth rate has been on a continuous decline since 1990 and could have a major effect on the number of students entering the state's public universities if the percentage of high school seniors entering college does not increase, so concludes a paper published by the Senate Fiscal Agency. The children born in the state in 1990, 153,080 of them, were 2008's freshman class in the state's universities, the paper said. But a constant decline in births since the 1990s could mean a significant decline in the number of college freshmen in Michigan if the current percentages of students attending school remain constant. However, the state's continuing economic difficulties could mean more high school students seeking out college educations, which could counter the raw decline in young people in the state, the paper said. From the 153,080 babies born in Michigan in 1990, the number dropped by 13 percent by 1996, to 133,231 infants born in the state. In 2008, there were 126,380 students in high school's 12th grade, the paper said. By 2014, if other factors stay constant, the lower 1996 birth total could mean a 12th grade population in 2014 of 106,585. Going forward even further, the picture does not change. While the paper looked at statistics just through 1996, U.S. Census Bureau data showed than 2005 there were 127,706 live births in Michigan. That fell to 127,476 live births in 2006. The percentage of Michigan 12th graders who enter college as freshmen has varied since 2000, the paper said, ranging from 50.7 percent of the class of 2001, or 51,612 freshmen college students, to 43.6 percent of the class of 2007, or 50,574 college freshmen.<;P> In 2008, 47.5 percent of the 12th graders went on to college, 59,999. The paper postulates that if that percentage of 12th graders going to college remains at the 2008 level, then in 2014 the number of freshmen entering college would total 50,601. What could change that, the paper said, is the current economic situation. "Due to the deterioration of the auto industry in Michigan, it is possible that more students will see the need to seek postsecondary education in order to secure a job. This may actually bolster the rather low percentage of 12th graders who enroll at Michigan's universities," the paper said. But the paper also concluded that while it is a goal of the state to double the number of college graduates, it "will be both more important and more difficult in the face of a declining number of Michigan high school graduates."
Bottom UP!
Published: March 11, 2009
There was an impressive breadth of knowledge and a welcome dose of candor in President Obama’s first big speech on education, in which he served up an informed analysis of the educational system from top to bottom. What really mattered was that Mr. Obama did not wring his hands or speak in abstract about states that have failed to raise their educational standards. Instead, he made it clear that he was not afraid to embarrass the laggards — by naming them — and that he would use a $100 billion education stimulus fund to create the changes the country so desperately needs.
"Testing is not the answer, as the most disadvantaged children are then penalized... as their teachers spend the entire year teaching to the test. "
Susan Josephs, Bethel, Conn.
Mr. Obama signaled that he would take the case for reform directly to the voters, instead of limiting the discussion to mandarins, lobbyists and specialists huddled in Washington. Unlike his predecessor, who promised to leave no child behind but did not deliver, this president is clearly ready to use his political clout on education.
Mr. Obama spoke in terms that everyone could understand when he noted that only a third of 13- and 14-year-olds read as well as they should and that this country’s curriculum for eighth graders is two full years behind other top-performing nations. Part of the problem, he said, is that this nation’s schools have recently been engaged in “a race to the bottom” — most states have adopted abysmally low standards and weak tests so that students who are performing poorly in objective terms can look like high achievers come test time.
The nation has a patchwork of standards that vary widely from state to state and a system under which he said “fourth-grade readers in Mississippi are scoring nearly 70 points lower than students in Wyoming — and they’re getting the same grade.” In addition, Mr. Obama said, several states have standards so low that students could end up on par with the bottom 40 percent of students around the globe.
This is a recipe for economic disaster. Mr. Obama and Arne Duncan, the education secretary, have rightly made clear that states that draw money from the stimulus fund will have to create sorely needed data collection systems that show how students are performing over time. They will also need to raise standards and replace weak, fill-in-the-bubble tests with sophisticated examinations that better measure problem-solving and critical thinking.
Mr. Obama understands that standards and tests alone won’t solve this problem. He also called for incentive pay for teachers who work in shortage areas like math and science and merit pay for teachers who are shown to produce the largest achievement gains over time. At the same time, the president called for removing underperforming teachers from the classroom.
In an effort to broaden innovation, the president called for lifting state and city caps on charter schools. This could be a good thing, but only if the new charter schools are run by groups with a proven record of excellence. Once charter schools have opened, it becomes politically difficult to close them, even in cases where they are bad or worse than their traditional counterparts.
The stimulus package can jump-start the reforms that Mr. Obama laid out in his speech. But Congress will need to broaden and sustain those reforms in the upcoming reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act. Only Congress can fully replace the race to the bottom with a race to the top.