After a long wait, the Washington State Senate released their budget proposal for the coming biennium. All said, the state's high education will take a $513 million cut.
Read the entire story from The Seattle Times here.
Here is an ensuing editorial from the Times as well.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Dietetics Program Bloated With Uncertainty
MICHAEL WALSH
Anthony Jorgenson’s path to graduation has been far from conventional. On Feb. 23, that path took another detour.
Jorgenson, in his third year at Washington State University, received an e-mail that evening telling him his major –the coordinated dietetics program –would be discontinued immediately at the Pullman campus. Monday night quickly turned to Tuesday morning as Jorgenson scrambled for answers.
The one-time mechanical engineering major now faced the possibility of seeking yet another career.
“I was discouraged in such a way that I considered other majors despite being so close to this one,” Jorgenson said.
Ultimately, the Medical Lake, Wash.-native chose to stay the course because he wants to be a dietician.
Now, in order to achieve that, Jorgenson, 20, has to make another life-changing decision.
The graduation track he started on when he became a dietetics major is known as the coordinated dietetics program; the other option for Pullman students majoring in dietetics is the general dietetics program.
In the coordinated program, students are placed in an internship upon graduation as part of the curriculum. In the general program, graduates are required to find an internship on their own.
With the change announced by the College of Pharmacy, the coordinated program will only be offered at the WSU Spokane campus.
“The university wants to move all health-related degrees to Spokane,” said Miriam Ballejos, associate professor of nutrition and exercise metabolism at WSU.
That leaves Jorgenson with two options. He can stay in Pullman for two more years to finish his degree in the general program; or he can finish the coordinated program in Spokane.
In order to enroll at Spokane he would first have to finish another year of prerequisites in Pullman. Then, the Spokane program requires two full years in addition to the internship.
The decision boils down to time, and thus money. If Jorgenson wants to continue in the coordinated program he will be in college an extra year than if he were to graduate from the general program.
He chose to stay in Pullman.
“It’s an astronomical amount of money,” Jorgenson said of deciding not to stay in school the extra year. “As a student, I didn’t want to be buried in student loans for the rest of my life.”
It is a decision Jorgenson thought he avoided.
This past October, the College of Pharmacy held a presentation to inform students of changes in the dietetics program. At that time, both programs were going to be moved to the Spokane campus.
After the forum, Ballejos said, students got involved and reached a compromise with the administration: every student who had started working towards their degree would be allowed ample time to finish their studies.
Still no announcement was made to the students, but rumors swirled. So, Jorgenson went on thinking the changes would not affect him.
While he was registering for classes and signing a lease to live in Pullman for the next year, a different plan was brewing for the dietetics program.
Ballejos said the need to make a change was largely a human resources issue. She also said the program will have to follow a new set of standards starting in November which will require an extensive report, and the department is stretched too thin to be able to meet the obligations without consolidating.
Even still, the timing of the announcement is perplexing to faculty and students alike. The decision was handed down after the deadline to apply to the coordinated program in Spokane for the 2009-10 academic year.
“I don’t know why it was announced at this point,” Ballejos said. “I wish it had been sooner.”
“It’s frustrating,” Jorgenson said. “There just seems to have been a major lack of communication.”
James Kehrer, dean of the College of Pharmacy, said the administration did everything it could.
“The announcement was made as soon as was possible given the progress of information regarding the new accreditation requirements and the budget reductions,” Kehrer said in an e-mail, Wednesday. “I do not consider the announcement late. It was made literally within a few days after we concluded this was the only option.”
For a number of students it was late enough, but Ballejos said there are options for those students who fell between the cracks.
“If there is anyone who wants to apply to Spokane but missed the deadline, we could work that out,” Ballejos said.
The amnesty offer does not apply to Jorgenson who has to take more classes before he is eligible to apply to Spokane. So for now, he just keeps taking classes and inching towards a degree.
“All I can do is try to stay informed,” Jorgenson said.
Anthony Jorgenson’s path to graduation has been far from conventional. On Feb. 23, that path took another detour.
Jorgenson, in his third year at Washington State University, received an e-mail that evening telling him his major –the coordinated dietetics program –would be discontinued immediately at the Pullman campus. Monday night quickly turned to Tuesday morning as Jorgenson scrambled for answers.
The one-time mechanical engineering major now faced the possibility of seeking yet another career.
“I was discouraged in such a way that I considered other majors despite being so close to this one,” Jorgenson said.
Ultimately, the Medical Lake, Wash.-native chose to stay the course because he wants to be a dietician.
Now, in order to achieve that, Jorgenson, 20, has to make another life-changing decision.
The graduation track he started on when he became a dietetics major is known as the coordinated dietetics program; the other option for Pullman students majoring in dietetics is the general dietetics program.
In the coordinated program, students are placed in an internship upon graduation as part of the curriculum. In the general program, graduates are required to find an internship on their own.
With the change announced by the College of Pharmacy, the coordinated program will only be offered at the WSU Spokane campus.
“The university wants to move all health-related degrees to Spokane,” said Miriam Ballejos, associate professor of nutrition and exercise metabolism at WSU.
That leaves Jorgenson with two options. He can stay in Pullman for two more years to finish his degree in the general program; or he can finish the coordinated program in Spokane.
In order to enroll at Spokane he would first have to finish another year of prerequisites in Pullman. Then, the Spokane program requires two full years in addition to the internship.
The decision boils down to time, and thus money. If Jorgenson wants to continue in the coordinated program he will be in college an extra year than if he were to graduate from the general program.
He chose to stay in Pullman.
“It’s an astronomical amount of money,” Jorgenson said of deciding not to stay in school the extra year. “As a student, I didn’t want to be buried in student loans for the rest of my life.”
It is a decision Jorgenson thought he avoided.
This past October, the College of Pharmacy held a presentation to inform students of changes in the dietetics program. At that time, both programs were going to be moved to the Spokane campus.
After the forum, Ballejos said, students got involved and reached a compromise with the administration: every student who had started working towards their degree would be allowed ample time to finish their studies.
Still no announcement was made to the students, but rumors swirled. So, Jorgenson went on thinking the changes would not affect him.
While he was registering for classes and signing a lease to live in Pullman for the next year, a different plan was brewing for the dietetics program.
Ballejos said the need to make a change was largely a human resources issue. She also said the program will have to follow a new set of standards starting in November which will require an extensive report, and the department is stretched too thin to be able to meet the obligations without consolidating.
Even still, the timing of the announcement is perplexing to faculty and students alike. The decision was handed down after the deadline to apply to the coordinated program in Spokane for the 2009-10 academic year.
“I don’t know why it was announced at this point,” Ballejos said. “I wish it had been sooner.”
“It’s frustrating,” Jorgenson said. “There just seems to have been a major lack of communication.”
James Kehrer, dean of the College of Pharmacy, said the administration did everything it could.
“The announcement was made as soon as was possible given the progress of information regarding the new accreditation requirements and the budget reductions,” Kehrer said in an e-mail, Wednesday. “I do not consider the announcement late. It was made literally within a few days after we concluded this was the only option.”
For a number of students it was late enough, but Ballejos said there are options for those students who fell between the cracks.
“If there is anyone who wants to apply to Spokane but missed the deadline, we could work that out,” Ballejos said.
The amnesty offer does not apply to Jorgenson who has to take more classes before he is eligible to apply to Spokane. So for now, he just keeps taking classes and inching towards a degree.
“All I can do is try to stay informed,” Jorgenson said.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Profile Ideas
Anthony Jorgenson: A dietetics major at Washington State University, Jorgenson has been pulled in a number of directions during the last year. The dietetics program has been overhauled, then restored, and changed again. Now the junior from Medical Lake, Wash., doesn’t know if he will be in Pullman or Spokane next year, or if he will be graduating in two or three years. Jorgenson is far from alone in his predicament.
Ronnie Wideman: Despite his busy schedule as the assistant director of operations for the WSU men’s basketball team, Wideman chose to go back to school and work towards his master’s degree. How important is a master’s degree in today’s job market? A lot of people are in graduate school, but is it an increase from years passed? What is the typical salary difference?
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Media and War
All is fair in love and war.
Or so the saying goes.
The age-old excuse for deception and trickery does not apply to journalists. It is the media’s duty to maintain a balanced and unbiased approach to news, even –and perhaps especially –in times of war.
During the current war in Iraq, much has been made of the mainstream media’s preconceived notions and agenda-driven reporting.
Retired Gen. Richard Sanchez spoke to a group of journalists in Oct. 2007, and addressed his concerns regarding media coverage of the war.
“My assessment is that your profession, to some extent, has strayed from (its) ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, what they read in our newspapers and what they see on the web,” Sanchez said. “For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own preconceived notions, biases and agendas.”
Sanchez’ point was hammered home the next morning when many media outlets failed to report on that portion of his speech. Rather, they focused on the second half of his lecture –a criticism of the Bush administration’s policy and performance in the Iraq war.
Lt. Col. Craig Whiteside expressed similar apprehensions about journalists embedded with his unit.
“Reporters show up looking for a story,” Whiteside said, “not the one you are offering. If they see it, don’t even stand in their way. Just start damage control.”
Recently, those stories are focusing on unpopular decisions and actions by the military, leading to claims of sensationalism and an anti-war bias. The media takes a lot of blame for hampering the nation’s morale and turning many American’s against the war; ironic, because before the war began, reporters were criticized for being too patriotic.
Journalists are human too. When the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 occurred, every American was affected psychologically, even journalists. However, those personal sentiments sometimes leaked into newspaper stories, radio spots and news broadcasts. The unbalanced stories that hinged on propaganda caught the attention of international media outlets.
Nick Higham wrote for BBC in Nov. 2001: “No conflict since World War II has so engaged the American people, whose horror at the destruction of the Twin Towers and loathing of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden have been assiduously stoked by President Bush's morale-boosting speeches. That makes it difficult for news organisations committed in theory to objective, dispassionate reporting.”
Now, nearly six years after the war began, the media is taking heat for backing off their original position.
Michael Ryan of the Houston Chronicle wrote about the irresponsibility of the media in an Aug. 2005 column: “The news media are failing to acknowledge their own responsibility for the invasion of Iraq, even as they report with glee Cindy Sheehan's antiwar protest outside George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford. Americans are told all about Sheehan's son, Casey, a soldier killed in Iraq, and her call for the president to explain his reasons for invading Iraq and to outline his plan to leave. But the news media ought to explain why they broke their moral covenant with the American people to provide complete, balanced, fair and accurate information about the charge to war.”
Ryan said the media was caught up in the Bush administration’s highly-promoted strategy and propaganda. Some of the nation’s most prominent newspapers, Ryan said, looked back on their coverage and realized where they went wrong.
“The (New York) Times acknowledged that it relied too heavily on self-interested sources who were committed to regime change in Iraq, and that stories about dire claims got prominent display, while follow-up stories did not,” Ryan explained. “Howard Kurtz, who analyzed The Washington Post's coverage, reports that his newspaper seldom published on the front page stories that challenged the Bush administration. The result was coverage that ‘in hindsight looks strikingly one-sided at times'.”
Hindsight, however, did not reach back far enough to stop the unethical practices in Iraq before they started.
The concern of a media bias is not unique to the Iraq war. Donald Kirk, a correspondent in both Vietnam and Korea, said the criticism of the current war pales in comparison to Vietnam, and there is nowhere near the same anti-war passion on the home front.
“Vietnam was a very strange and difficult war to cover,” Kirk said. “The media was never really behind the war. It seemed being critical was almost fashionable.”
Since when is news supposed to be trend-setting?
No part of the pursuit of fair and balanced coverage should make a detour for unfounded and unsubstantiated reporting.
So, why are journalists letting ethical and moral considerations become obsolete?
Sanchez and Whiteside acknowledge the increasing pressure on reporters to produce stories people will read, and produce them quickly. That is still not an excuse for false or misleading news.
“For some, it seems that as long as you get a front page story there is little or no regard for the ‘collateral damage’ you will cause,” Sanchez said. “Personal reputations have no value and you report with total impunity and are rarely held accountable for unethical conduct.”
The reckless abandon with which journalists, according to Sanchez, pursue front-page stories is amplified with the technology of the day.
Sanchez recognizes the ability and near-necessity to publish information immediately via the internet, makes complete reporting more difficult than ever. He also sees the standard for journalists slipping in exchange for quick headlines.
“Given the near instantaneous ability to report actions on the ground,” Sanchez said, “the responsibility to accurately and truthfully report takes on an unprecedented importance. The speculative and often uninformed initial reporting that characterizes our media appears to be rapidly becoming the standard of the industry.”
Whiteside also spoke to the capabilities journalists have today. He said a photographer who traveled with his unit would use a satellite phone to upload his pictures from the most rural corners of Iraq. Photos of the day’s events could run in U.S. newspapers by morning.
Whiteside said it was amazing to see the possibilities technology had to offer, but also frightening. He shuttered at the thought of a dead soldier being pictured in a newspaper or on the internet before his family could be notified.
Sanchez also let the audience think about how their stories affect, and potentially compromise,
the military’s goals. “Your assessments become conventional wisdom and nearly impossible to change,” he said.
Despite all of the poor journalism practices, Whiteside said there is one group the reporters have not affected: the soldiers.
Sources:
Lt. Col. Craig Whiteside, guest speaker
Donald Kirk, guest speaker
Gen. Richard Sanchez, http://www.aina.org/news/20071016110235.htm
http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.html
Nick Higham, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1654062.stm
Michael Ryan, http://www.aina.org/news/20050829112757.htm
Or so the saying goes.
The age-old excuse for deception and trickery does not apply to journalists. It is the media’s duty to maintain a balanced and unbiased approach to news, even –and perhaps especially –in times of war.
During the current war in Iraq, much has been made of the mainstream media’s preconceived notions and agenda-driven reporting.
Retired Gen. Richard Sanchez spoke to a group of journalists in Oct. 2007, and addressed his concerns regarding media coverage of the war.
“My assessment is that your profession, to some extent, has strayed from (its) ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, what they read in our newspapers and what they see on the web,” Sanchez said. “For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own preconceived notions, biases and agendas.”
Sanchez’ point was hammered home the next morning when many media outlets failed to report on that portion of his speech. Rather, they focused on the second half of his lecture –a criticism of the Bush administration’s policy and performance in the Iraq war.
Lt. Col. Craig Whiteside expressed similar apprehensions about journalists embedded with his unit.
“Reporters show up looking for a story,” Whiteside said, “not the one you are offering. If they see it, don’t even stand in their way. Just start damage control.”
Recently, those stories are focusing on unpopular decisions and actions by the military, leading to claims of sensationalism and an anti-war bias. The media takes a lot of blame for hampering the nation’s morale and turning many American’s against the war; ironic, because before the war began, reporters were criticized for being too patriotic.
Journalists are human too. When the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 occurred, every American was affected psychologically, even journalists. However, those personal sentiments sometimes leaked into newspaper stories, radio spots and news broadcasts. The unbalanced stories that hinged on propaganda caught the attention of international media outlets.
Nick Higham wrote for BBC in Nov. 2001: “No conflict since World War II has so engaged the American people, whose horror at the destruction of the Twin Towers and loathing of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden have been assiduously stoked by President Bush's morale-boosting speeches. That makes it difficult for news organisations committed in theory to objective, dispassionate reporting.”
Now, nearly six years after the war began, the media is taking heat for backing off their original position.
Michael Ryan of the Houston Chronicle wrote about the irresponsibility of the media in an Aug. 2005 column: “The news media are failing to acknowledge their own responsibility for the invasion of Iraq, even as they report with glee Cindy Sheehan's antiwar protest outside George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford. Americans are told all about Sheehan's son, Casey, a soldier killed in Iraq, and her call for the president to explain his reasons for invading Iraq and to outline his plan to leave. But the news media ought to explain why they broke their moral covenant with the American people to provide complete, balanced, fair and accurate information about the charge to war.”
Ryan said the media was caught up in the Bush administration’s highly-promoted strategy and propaganda. Some of the nation’s most prominent newspapers, Ryan said, looked back on their coverage and realized where they went wrong.
“The (New York) Times acknowledged that it relied too heavily on self-interested sources who were committed to regime change in Iraq, and that stories about dire claims got prominent display, while follow-up stories did not,” Ryan explained. “Howard Kurtz, who analyzed The Washington Post's coverage, reports that his newspaper seldom published on the front page stories that challenged the Bush administration. The result was coverage that ‘in hindsight looks strikingly one-sided at times'.”
Hindsight, however, did not reach back far enough to stop the unethical practices in Iraq before they started.
The concern of a media bias is not unique to the Iraq war. Donald Kirk, a correspondent in both Vietnam and Korea, said the criticism of the current war pales in comparison to Vietnam, and there is nowhere near the same anti-war passion on the home front.
“Vietnam was a very strange and difficult war to cover,” Kirk said. “The media was never really behind the war. It seemed being critical was almost fashionable.”
Since when is news supposed to be trend-setting?
No part of the pursuit of fair and balanced coverage should make a detour for unfounded and unsubstantiated reporting.
So, why are journalists letting ethical and moral considerations become obsolete?
Sanchez and Whiteside acknowledge the increasing pressure on reporters to produce stories people will read, and produce them quickly. That is still not an excuse for false or misleading news.
“For some, it seems that as long as you get a front page story there is little or no regard for the ‘collateral damage’ you will cause,” Sanchez said. “Personal reputations have no value and you report with total impunity and are rarely held accountable for unethical conduct.”
The reckless abandon with which journalists, according to Sanchez, pursue front-page stories is amplified with the technology of the day.
Sanchez recognizes the ability and near-necessity to publish information immediately via the internet, makes complete reporting more difficult than ever. He also sees the standard for journalists slipping in exchange for quick headlines.
“Given the near instantaneous ability to report actions on the ground,” Sanchez said, “the responsibility to accurately and truthfully report takes on an unprecedented importance. The speculative and often uninformed initial reporting that characterizes our media appears to be rapidly becoming the standard of the industry.”
Whiteside also spoke to the capabilities journalists have today. He said a photographer who traveled with his unit would use a satellite phone to upload his pictures from the most rural corners of Iraq. Photos of the day’s events could run in U.S. newspapers by morning.
Whiteside said it was amazing to see the possibilities technology had to offer, but also frightening. He shuttered at the thought of a dead soldier being pictured in a newspaper or on the internet before his family could be notified.
Sanchez also let the audience think about how their stories affect, and potentially compromise,
the military’s goals. “Your assessments become conventional wisdom and nearly impossible to change,” he said.
Despite all of the poor journalism practices, Whiteside said there is one group the reporters have not affected: the soldiers.
Sources:
Lt. Col. Craig Whiteside, guest speaker
Donald Kirk, guest speaker
Gen. Richard Sanchez, http://www.aina.org/news/20071016110235.htm
http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.html
Nick Higham, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1654062.stm
Michael Ryan, http://www.aina.org/news/20050829112757.htm
Time for Change
Kelly Munn and Frank Ordway from The Bellingham Herald have an opinion about the what has happened to the state's education system. They say something, better yet everything needs to change.
Time is now for education reform
KELLY MUNN and FRANK ORDWAY
The Bellingham Herald
Textbooks? Computers? Teachers? Librarians? School counselors? Safety officers? Today's schools should not have to choose between basic needs, yet that is exactly what is happening as school administrators make plans to cut their budgets.
Educators, parents and students across Washington state all have their own personal stories about the challenges facing our public schools. They tell us we need to fix how we pay for education. The education finance system is outdated. It was designed before the invention of the personal computer and by anyone's standards, it's broken. The state with "the paramount duty to make ample provision for the education of all children" does not pay for the full cost of anything, whether it is a teacher, a principal or a utility bill. That's why all the school districts in this region have to run large levies to meet the basic education requirements that the state is not funding.
This year could be a turning point for the future of our state's public schools. Parents who've been involved for years in helping their local schools realize fixing our education system is not just about adequate funding. Besides more money, they want reforms so when our national and state economies recover, we will have a system that works better to increase academic achievement for all of our students.
For the past six weeks, the education community was caught up in a vigorous, and often contentious, debate about two pairs of education reform bills before state lawmakers. Last week, our education leaders in Olympia decided it was best to hit the "reset button" and start over. They have introduced Senate Bill 6048 and House Bill 2261, which declare the Legislature's intent to revise the definition of basic education and develop the plan to fully fund it.
These bills wipe the chalkboard clean. They were intentionally written without specific details because they want our help in developing legislation we can all agree on.
As parents, educators and students, our focus for the next two months should be pressuring the State Legislature to remain committed to fixing our education system. And remember, kids should be our priority. Often, we talk about adult issues in education. The only way we will get improvements in the system is if we talk about how changes will affect kids.
Join us in supporting these changes to get our kids ready life:
Every child should graduate high school ready for college or university, career or technical education, apprenticeship or work. To achieve this for kids, we should redefine basic education to include the Washington State Board of Education's CORE 24 high school graduation requirements. This will ensure kids take more math, science and art classes so they will be ready to pursue their dreams after high school. By including stronger graduation requirements in basic education, the state would be required to pay for a longer school day and other needed investments.
Every child should be able to read by third grade. To achieve this for kids, we should capitalize on studies that show investing in early learning can change the trajectory of a child's life by providing early learning opportunities to better prepare them for kindergarten.
Every child should have an excellent teacher in the classroom. To encourage more people, especially diverse candidates, to consider the teaching profession, we need to invest in more support and mentoring for beginning teachers. We also need a new compensation system for the next generation of teachers based on responsibilities and demonstrated skills in the classroom.
Our educators and school leaders are doing their best with the resources they have been given. As a result, Washington's students are making steady progress: reading and writing WASL scores have improved; and we're outperforming the national average on the SAT, NAEP and AP exams. Just think how many more lives could be turned around if we paired new education money with the kinds of reforms that common sense and research tells us will make the most difference for kids.
We are determined, more than ever, to move education reform forward. But change is difficult and some days it feels like we are pushing a boulder uphill.
We need your help to reach the top of the mountain - join the movement at http://www.educationvoters.org/.
With your help, we'll be able to change the outcome of children's lives across our state by providing the education they deserve to succeed in life.
Time is now for education reform
KELLY MUNN and FRANK ORDWAY
The Bellingham Herald
Textbooks? Computers? Teachers? Librarians? School counselors? Safety officers? Today's schools should not have to choose between basic needs, yet that is exactly what is happening as school administrators make plans to cut their budgets.
Educators, parents and students across Washington state all have their own personal stories about the challenges facing our public schools. They tell us we need to fix how we pay for education. The education finance system is outdated. It was designed before the invention of the personal computer and by anyone's standards, it's broken. The state with "the paramount duty to make ample provision for the education of all children" does not pay for the full cost of anything, whether it is a teacher, a principal or a utility bill. That's why all the school districts in this region have to run large levies to meet the basic education requirements that the state is not funding.
This year could be a turning point for the future of our state's public schools. Parents who've been involved for years in helping their local schools realize fixing our education system is not just about adequate funding. Besides more money, they want reforms so when our national and state economies recover, we will have a system that works better to increase academic achievement for all of our students.
For the past six weeks, the education community was caught up in a vigorous, and often contentious, debate about two pairs of education reform bills before state lawmakers. Last week, our education leaders in Olympia decided it was best to hit the "reset button" and start over. They have introduced Senate Bill 6048 and House Bill 2261, which declare the Legislature's intent to revise the definition of basic education and develop the plan to fully fund it.
These bills wipe the chalkboard clean. They were intentionally written without specific details because they want our help in developing legislation we can all agree on.
As parents, educators and students, our focus for the next two months should be pressuring the State Legislature to remain committed to fixing our education system. And remember, kids should be our priority. Often, we talk about adult issues in education. The only way we will get improvements in the system is if we talk about how changes will affect kids.
Join us in supporting these changes to get our kids ready life:
Every child should graduate high school ready for college or university, career or technical education, apprenticeship or work. To achieve this for kids, we should redefine basic education to include the Washington State Board of Education's CORE 24 high school graduation requirements. This will ensure kids take more math, science and art classes so they will be ready to pursue their dreams after high school. By including stronger graduation requirements in basic education, the state would be required to pay for a longer school day and other needed investments.
Every child should be able to read by third grade. To achieve this for kids, we should capitalize on studies that show investing in early learning can change the trajectory of a child's life by providing early learning opportunities to better prepare them for kindergarten.
Every child should have an excellent teacher in the classroom. To encourage more people, especially diverse candidates, to consider the teaching profession, we need to invest in more support and mentoring for beginning teachers. We also need a new compensation system for the next generation of teachers based on responsibilities and demonstrated skills in the classroom.
Our educators and school leaders are doing their best with the resources they have been given. As a result, Washington's students are making steady progress: reading and writing WASL scores have improved; and we're outperforming the national average on the SAT, NAEP and AP exams. Just think how many more lives could be turned around if we paired new education money with the kinds of reforms that common sense and research tells us will make the most difference for kids.
We are determined, more than ever, to move education reform forward. But change is difficult and some days it feels like we are pushing a boulder uphill.
We need your help to reach the top of the mountain - join the movement at http://www.educationvoters.org/.
With your help, we'll be able to change the outcome of children's lives across our state by providing the education they deserve to succeed in life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)