Scott Oki was a top Microsoft VP in the early years. He left a millionaire and was able to get involved in education, including being a Regent at the University of Washington and more.
Oki combined his experience and knowledge in a book - Outrageous Learning. He is a fascinating guy; hear him/ meet him:
Tuesday June 16 - 5 pm to 7 pm
Four Seasons Hotel Seattle - 99 Union St. (at First Ave.)
Refreshments
By reservation
Update:
Liv Finne of Washington Policy Institute recommends "Beware the Easy School Fix" by Jay Mathews in the Washington Post on Prof. William G. Ouchi of UCLA. His research on school leadership finds that when the principal controls the school resources he/she makes things different and better:
... they tend to make changes in staffing, curriculum and scheduling that sharply reduce TSL, the number of students each of their teachers is responsible for. Some urban districts have TSLs approaching 200 kids per teacher. But after principals get budgeting power, the load drops sharply, sometimes to as low as 80 kids per instructor. When that happens, the portion of students scoring "proficient" on state tests climbs. A group of New York schools had a surge of 11 percentage points after they reduced average TSL by 25 students per teacher.I don't know if they can have that control in this state. But in other states it's been tried and tested and found to work. Posted by Ron Hebron at June 12, 2009 10:43 AM | Email This... "When a district has too few classroom teachers," Ouchi writes in his chapter, "student loads per teacher rise to the point where teachers can no longer know their students well enough to establish a bond of trust with them. Without this trust, a teacher can neither establish an orderly classroom nor push a student to do his or her best, and the teacher's job often becomes frustrating and constantly stressful."
Ouchi says good principals understand this. Once they have the power to use their budgets the way they think best, they cut non-teaching positions, increase the number of teachers and reduce their TSLs. "One school, for example, may not need or want security guards or professional-development staff, while another may not want attendance clerks or registrars," he says. Principals, unlike central office managers, know which jobs have been rendered obsolete by new technology and which jobs exist simply because they have always existed. Changing curriculum, such as combining English and social studies classes, or revising schedules can also reduce TSL.
As far as I see it, the only way to reform education is to bankrupt the union out of it. That's just me, though.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on June 12, 2009 12:05 PMA ghost written book that keeps our eye off the key problem of parental responsibility and the key solution of speaking life into parents is Not the answer! Parents must demand and create an educational system that humbles itself to raising up the next generation and not shuffling them along for the money. It is incredible that current educational darkness taken to the outcome of what it teaches says the kids of now as adults will euthanize their retired teachers because of the costs! The teachers and the parents reaping what they sow.
We must support parents in the critical place of household authority and instruction to lead the house, the education of their children and then reformation will follow. Parents will destroy the dark schooling of today and replace it with hope that drives children to their destiny and not squander their futures on learning through feelings, entitlement, self discipline, actualization, pity, coddling, fear and intimidation.
Platitudes such as create excellence are void of the 'what'; excellence in what?!! Spend money as if it were your own...would if we could but government has no faith in us (surprise??!!). More time more time teaching what?? Excellence in spending others money on pensions????
Government has been taken over by a tyranny mindset that fears everything...where is the money coming from? how do I get more? How do I say no to those that got me here? What if I am found out for what I am doing? How do we pay them more and get away with out results?
I know we raise the budget for next year by 8% get 5% more and call it a cut! Create the WASL so that no one can see the slide relative to other kids from around the country! Intimidate the parents at all levels and elect a Superintendent handpicked by the union. Lastly call it all good regardless of the Gates Foundation Study (someone send L+I over there and find few problems for me we'll get that report fixed right up!)
But I read this post and I looked at the links, and I didn't see what these 11 foundational ideas are. It sure sounds interesting. And you have to respect someone like Oki.
But anyone know what he's actually saying? What are these great new 11 key ideas?
It's hard to evaluate whether they are worth anything, until someone says what they are.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on June 12, 2009 07:24 PM1.Put the principal in charge
2. Give parents choice among public schools
3. Let teachers teach
4. Double teacher pay
5. Replace the WASL with another standard
6. Create no-excuses schools
7. Transparency - put school budgets and teacher qualifications online
8. Make the Superintendent of Public Instruction an appointed office
To continue the conversation, here's my reactions:
1. yes.
2. mmm I prefer neighborhood schools.
3. yes.
4. what, that would take a lot of new taxes! increase pay but only for some teachers.
5. Agnostic, not well informed on this. There should be some standards.
6. This is a nice slogan and approach. Everyone can learn.
7, Yes. Indeed, why not stream the classes on the web? Parents and citizens could then know what's being taught and get a window into the class rooms.
8. mmm yes, sometimes I think we have too many elective offices so that voters don't even know who's who...maybe a strong governor is a better model? Not sure. Would require a constitutional change so ain't gonna happen.
Let's see if the new 11 principles include these 8, or if they are a new departure.
1. De-certify the WEA and NEA. Unions have no place in public education. Teachers work for (and are ultimately responsible to) the taxpayers and their respective school districts, not union officials.
2. Adopt historically-proven, fact-based math curriculum. Concepts are fine, but out in the real world, employers want solutions, not feel-good theories.
3. Recruit teachers who can teach math/science and pay them
accordingly. Engineers earn more than fry cooks, credentialed/capable math teachers should earn more than gym or art teachers.
4. Teach all classes in English. We already have enough lettuce pickers and fast-food cooks.
5. Provide public school education to legal Americans ONLY. That is, citizens and legal immigrants. No exceptions.
6. Enough with the 'multiculturism' baloney. This is America. If you're hung up on where you came from, dream on your own time. Or better yet, return there and see how good you had it in America.
7. Teach American history, with no apologies to anyone. We live in the greatest nation in the history of the world, why we should cower or offer explanation to the likes of Iran, Venezuela or Cuba is beyond me.
8. Return to A-F grading system. Johnny (and his parents) would be better off knowing he has difficulty with math when he is seven than when he is 17.
9. Drill English into students; parts of speech, spelling, diagramming, sentence structure, composition, public speaking, etc. At least 80% of the applications I reviewed, as Administrator of a Dept. of Defense apprentice program, were prepared by functional illiterates.
10. Emphasize practical problem solving and critical thinking. America needs innovators, not sheeple.
11. Re-institute the concept of discipline. If this is not possible in a society where children have the 'right' to disrupt a classroom by texting, eating, socializing, I guess it's time to privatize our entire K-12 education system.
Posted by: Saltherring on June 13, 2009 07:51 AM
Oki says we’ve shifted from a decentralized education system to one that is totally centralized. “Students learn differently and at different paces. None of that can happen well if you centralize the thing,” he says. “And,” he continues, “it’s parents not doing what they have to do; it’s the lack of building character and a value system; it’s having a school system that ties principals’ and teachers’ hands; the lack of choice for parents is a huge problem. The lack of choice for teachers is just as big a problem. If you wanted to go from 180 days to 243 days of school, you couldn’t because of collective bargaining.”
Oki wants a new, grassroots approach to reform education. “I’m not convinced it requires more money ... just using it more efficiently,” he says. “And we need a common agreement of what the problem is.”
Oki doesn’t mince words. “We need a teachers’ union that doesn’t create more socialism. We need to get the school district out of the business of transportation, food service, security, health care and janitorial. And we’ve just made it too easy for parents to opt out of parenting and for schools to opt out of teaching as their main business.”
Posted by: Liv Finne on June 13, 2009 08:15 AMYour comments are excellent.
You should write your own book.
This is a non sequitur. Teaching different students differently does not necessarily mean running different schools differently. Every school has a wide variety of students. There are arguments to be made for decentralization; this is not one.
What CEO do you know who controls only 5 percent of their budget?
This is a poor analogy. Schools are parts of a larger organization just like a department in Microsoft is part of a larger company. Not every middle manager, or principal, has the skills to be a great CEO. While I agree that principals should have more power than they do, there is value to having some functions and decisions centralized, which means limiting principals' autonomy.
Posted by: Bruce on June 13, 2009 10:54 AMPrincipals with the power to control their budgets are achieving huge gains for students in other states and other school districts. See "Beware the Easy School Fix" by Jay Mathews of the Washington Post, who describes the research findings of Professor William Ouchi of UCLA Anderson School of Management, an expert in school finance and management structures: that principals with budget control reallocate staff and schedule to reduce Total Student Loads on teachers, which results in remarkable student learning gains. Google the article. See for yourself how decentralizing decision-making to the local school manager, the principal, is working in other states.
Posted by: Liv Finne on June 13, 2009 11:20 AMthanks for posting Mr. oki's ideas.
Ok here's some comments on them:
Plank One: Let Local Leaders Lead -- sounds good but is it referring to leaders in the schools or in local govt.?'
Plank Two: Insanely Great Teachers -- very much like this idea. I had some insanely great teachers.
Plank Three: The Freedom to Choose --
as noted think I prefer neighborhood schools. I don't like the Seattle choice plans where there's a big process to try to scramle all the kids over the whole school district.
Plank Four: More Time Spent Educating
Yes.
Plank Five: Early Learning Rigor;Optional High School.
Well, early learning rigor but folks need high school IMO. In fact, we should require a year of post high school (technical or vocation or college).
Plank Six: Muster an Army of volunteers
Yes.
Plank Seven:Standardized Curriculum...Not
Not sure ... not well informed on this. I pretty much got the classics and the old math...seems to have worked pretty well.
Except they really did keep quiet about the bad sides of the USA's history too much.
Plank Eight: Early Intervention and Specialized Instruction
Well to a point. Not sure if spending $200,000 in special ed to bring a 6th grader up from the 1st grade level to the 2d grade level is worth it.
Plank Nine: Spend Money as Though It Were Your Own
Yes.
Plank Ten: Plant the Seeds of Success in Life: Values, Character, Leadership
Very much yes. There's far too much irresponsibility, lying, cheating and greed in too much of our society, high and low.
Plank Eleven: Establish a Culture of Excellence
This is the key. Support this 1,000%.
Well that's pretty good. Of course the debating starts when you get into specifics and implementation.
Thanks again.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on June 13, 2009 03:29 PMMr. saltherring, you said "Teach American history, with no apologies to anyone. We live in the greatest nation in the history of the world, why we should cower or offer explanation to the likes of Iran, Venezuela or Cuba is beyond me."
Don't you mean our schools should teach American and other nation's history, too?
On that apology thing, don't you think that wherever a criticism is just, it should be made, whether it's directed at the USA or any other nation?
I mean look at Great Britain. shouldn't they get criticized for the way they treated the American colonies?
On the other hand, they ended slavery before the USA did. Shouldn't we teach that slavery was wrong? That the USA was in some sense wrong?
There's a great story there about how the USA constitution had these wonderful/horrible compromises...like allowing slavery....how can you really teach the full picture without indicating at some level that slavery was wrong?
And don't you agree that if for example, the CIA ousted a democratic government in Iran in 1954, that should be taught, too?
Maybe you think we might need to oust another democratic government some time. Maybe you think it was right. Maybe you think it was wrong. But are you saying we shouldn't teach it?
You're not saying we should falsify history out of a sense that America can do not wrong, are you?
Wouldn't that be the sin of pride, or the sin of dishonesty?
Here's another example. The Al Qaeda network was growing prior to 9-11....do you really think the USA did all that should have been done to deal with that threat? Well if we didn't, then at some level, the USA didn't do the right thing or the best thing. And we should criticize ourselves, right?
When I think of those 3000 folks who died on 9-11 I do feel kind of sorry for that. You can call that an apology maybe. shouldn't we feel sorry?
and here's another one. I think we have officially apologized to the Japanese Americans who were put in camps in WW2. Was that wrong, to apologize?
In fact if you want a return to basic moral values, doesn't that mean if we were wrong on anything, we should apologize?
there seems to be a contradiction in there somewhere.
Enjoy the sunshine.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on June 13, 2009 03:41 PMOki understands how big organizations must be structured if they are going to be successful: the local manager must have the tools and flexibility he or she needs to meet the needs on the ground, in the case of schools, the needs of the students. The local manager is the only one who knows the names of the teachers, the names and needs of the kids. That manager must be given the tools he needs to succeed.
Posted by: Liv Finne on June 13, 2009 06:52 PMGee, if you really hate America that much, why do you live here?
And I didn't say America's history wasn't without blemish, only that I grow weary of the apologies. How many times do we have to apologize for the injustice of slavery? ....or the internment of Japanese Americans?
America has fought to free more conquered and enslaved people in the last century than the rest of the world's nations combined. Japan, China, The Phillipines, Burma, Indonesia, Germany, France, Italy, The Netherlands, Belgium, South Korea, Egypt, Morocco, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Afghanistan, Iraq, all defended or freed by Americans. And how many of these nations have we conquered and kept as territories?
People like you make me want to puke.
Posted by: Saltherring on June 13, 2009 07:38 PMOne example: insanely good teachers. He recommends that we remove them from the classroom. Yes, he wants them to teach other teachers. I want them to teach our students. Which do you think is a better use of their time?
Oki wants a new layer of management at the school - a board of directors, made up of local whoever. What universe is he living in?
It must be the same one where he wants teachers and principals to call upon the army of volunteers just waiting to help in the schools. Only someone who has only experienced private schools would suggest this. Yes, rich public schools have armies of volunteers. Poor schools don't. What planet is he living on?
Scott, join the debate. You aren't so much smarter than the rest of us who are working on this subject. Please get off your soap box. You might hurt yourself.
Posted by: janet s on June 13, 2009 08:51 PMScott - sorry you don't like a standardized curriculum. Do you prefer that ever school in a district teach whatever they want, at whatever pace they want? Why do you think AP is so popular? It is a standardized curriculum, and parents are flocking to it because it is measurable and accountable. I bet the fancy private school your children are in are tracked to take AP classes and tests.
I respect Ross Hunter a lot more than Scott Oki. His children are in the public schools, and he is an active participant in the education discussion. He helps pass levies, and he fights for the changes to make education better.
Oki is a member of the peanut gallery.
Posted by: janet s on June 13, 2009 09:03 PMSo, if a parent wants small class size, they should get it! If someone wants year-round school, they should get it! If parents want a school with only the smart kids, then so be it!
I guess everyone else, those who want large class rooms, 9 month calendars, and a cross section of students, will also be able to get what they want.
There aren't enough dollars to pay for the utopia that Oki wants. Everyone wants small class sizes. That is why he pays over $20,000 per year to get his children into exclusive private schools. He can afford it. As a state, we can't. Was he living under a rock during the last legislative session? The money isn't there.
Liv Finne - please explain this to me, you seem to be the great apologist.
Posted by: janet s on June 13, 2009 09:16 PMScott does think that schools should fulfill their paramount duty to educate our students.
The public school system in Washington, according to two State of Washington reports (Washington Learns and a publication of the Higher Education Coordinating Board), is producing a generation of students which is less educated than their parents. Fifty-two percent of students who attend community college must take remedial courses in math, reading and writing. Thirty-seven percent of students who attend four-year universities must do the same. Washington State ranks 37th in the nation in graduation rates.
The public school system offers a litany of excuses, and takes no responsibility for these failures. Instead,we hear the same tired chorus of "we need more money" from our education establishment.
When less than half of public school employees in Washington are elementary or secondary classroom teachers, it is obvious that it is not a question of a lack of money (80% of the operating budget goes to salaries). As Scott says, our school districts need to get out of the businesses of transportation, food services, security, health care and janitorial. Schools need to refocus on their mission: to educate.
Yes, Scott thinks schools can be structured so that parents get what they need for their children. Is that such a radical notion? The education of a child can and should be individualized to the needs of the child.
Scott has analysed the management structure of the public school system and found that local school principals control less than 5% of their budgets, and little control over which teachers are assigned to their schools. He points out that with such little control, school leaders cannot possibly provide an education which meets the needs of the individualized student.
Scott would have school budgets created by the exercise of parent choice, so that money would follow the child to the school selected by parents, not by central bureaucrats. No longer would underperforming schools receive a budget year in and year out. Principals with such budgetary power would be able to act as instructional leaders to give teachers and parents and students the vision, focus, and encouragement to perform the hard work that is education, which our schools so desperately need.
Scott Oki is a progressive, out-of-the-box thinker, who has studied this problem in depth and is selflessly serving as a catalyst for this much-needed discussion: how to we reorganize our school system so that our students have the tools they need to take the best jobs.
I am the author of "Eight Practical Ways To Reverse the Decline of Public Education," and the Director for Education at the Washington Policy Center. We are the publisher of Scott's book, Outrageous Learning, and we are proud to be associated with such a forward-thinker as Scott Oki.
Posted by: Liv Finne on June 14, 2009 09:52 AMHis solutions are, frankly, simplistic. Yes, wouldn't it be nice if the school district didn't have to worry about maintaining buildings, getting students to schools, feeding them lunch, dealing with emergencies, and call a parent when a child is sick. Who do you suggest do those things? And who is going to pay them? I guess in Scott's world, the fire alarm never goes off, the floors never get dirty, the children magically appear in their classroom at the beginning of the day. Like I said, what planet does he live on?
Wouldn't it be just terrific if parents had 100% choice over the education setting for their child. I would like a classroom of 5 students each, with a PhD teaching each core subject, and a fabulous gymnasium with a swimming pool. But I'm sure that will be balanced out by the parent who wants crappy teachers with 40 students each, in a building that's falling down. Charters and magnet schools are already out there. They need to be expanded on, but there are reasons there aren't more of them. Does Scott have any idea what those reasons are?
Did you notice what has happened in the last month or two, where districts all over the state are laying off teachers? Did you notice that Seattle had to shut down their speciality programs? Did you hear that librarians in Bellevue are being moved to the classroom to keep class size from skyrocketing? There was a bit of a funding crisis. But I bet Scott has a magic answer for that, as well. Too bad he didn't go to Olympia and share it with anyone.
When Scott wants to join the discussion with other bright thinkers, maybe his voice will be heard, and he can listen. I have sat through many discussions on education. What Scott presents in his book was covered in the first ten minutes of the discussion. The real challenge, which he completely leaves out, is how to get there, and how to get the money for his plans.
Scott isn't thinking out of the box. None of his ideas are new. If he chose to be a part of the process, maybe he would realize it, and maybe gain a touch of humility.
Posted by: janet s on June 14, 2009 01:46 PMThere are studies out there that have prove what he says.
And guess what? It was right out of the Basic Education Task Force recommendation to the legislature this year. If Oki is trying to claim this idea as original, he is either kidding himself or plagiarizing.
The Task Force was made of people like Fred Jarrett, Skip Priest, Glenn Anderson, and Ross Hunter. The ideas were explored and discussed with various groups, including PTA. Many of these ended up as law in 2261, which was a new way to fund education.
This is just one example of where Oki's ideas are neither new or necessarily workable.
Posted by: janet s on June 14, 2009 04:11 PMIt's not like these guys aren't bright and don't have something to offer. But when they make it sound like well, run education like a business and it'll all be good. You can't - education does need to be well-managed and well-run but it's not a business. We've tried that and big surprise! it doesn't work.
Principals probably should have more discretion at their schools just like parents should get to have more input. But principals have so many facets to their jobs that many of them are not good at most of them. The number one job of a principal is to be the academic leader for the teachers. Really, it's true. How much time do they get to do that? How hamstrung are they by their district over getting rid of ineffective teachers? But then you have principals that aren't good with budgets or are petty tyrants who act like they rule a kingdom.
He needs to define some of his terms. What's a culture of excellence?
FYI, there is Latin being taught and in public schools.
Posted by: westello on June 14, 2009 11:27 PMIt's not like these guys aren't bright and don't have something to offer. But when they make it sound like well, run education like a business and it'll all be good. You can't - education does need to be well-managed and well-run but it's not a business. We've tried that and big surprise! it doesn't work.
Principals probably should have more discretion at their schools just like parents should get to have more input. But principals have so many facets to their jobs that many of them are not good at most of them. The number one job of a principal is to be the academic leader for the teachers. Really, it's true. How much time do they get to do that? How hamstrung are they by their district over getting rid of ineffective teachers? But then you have principals that aren't good with budgets or are petty tyrants who act like they rule a kingdom.
He needs to define some of his terms. What's a culture of excellence?
FYI, there is Latin being taught and in public schools.
Posted by: westello on June 14, 2009 11:27 PMWhy require a year of 'post high school'? Why not just make HS 5 years long? Why not incorporate those subjects into the 4 years of HS? Goodness knows, American HS is not especially demanding in terms of work load, study habit acquisition, or number of subjects covered at a time.
I went to a private HS - a college-prep school - in Mexico in 1984-85. The kids there were tracked, and each track took a different number of classes depending on what they intended to do in college #and they were all college-bound#. The kids in the uppermost track took 10 classes at a time, and were graded on a scale of 1-10, not 1-4 as in the USA. I knew kids who were getting straight 10's in all 10 classes. I came home and listened to my former classmates whining about how awful their 4 classes were. I was not impressed.
Posted by: Angela in Bothell on June 15, 2009 08:58 PMWhy require a year of 'post high school'? Why not just make HS 5 years long? Why not incorporate those subjects into the 4 years of HS? Goodness knows, American HS is not especially demanding in terms of work load, study habit acquisition, or number of subjects covered at a time.
I went to a private HS - a college-prep school - in Mexico in 1984-85. The kids there were tracked, and each track took a different number of classes depending on what they intended to do in college #and they were all college-bound#. The kids in the uppermost track took 10 classes at a time, and were graded on a scale of 1-10, not 1-4 as in the USA. I knew kids who were getting straight 10's in all 10 classes. I came home and listened to my former classmates whining about how awful their 4 classes were. I was not impressed.
Posted by: Angela in Bothell on June 15, 2009 08:59 PMIf you take the richest and smartest in a society, and put them into a school together, I bet they all end up going to college. Not a particularly significant accomplishment. But take a cross section of demographics, and put them in a challenging situation, then those who make it college are accomplishing something. Societies outside of the US don't understand that concept.
A prime example of a demonstrably envious arrogant and self-righteous liberal twit (probably a teacher)
accusing another of arrogance and self-righteousness.
Ya gotta love it.
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on June 16, 2009 09:13 AMDont be sad - be happy))
Posted by: ggstarling on June 19, 2009 07:39 PM