NECC Candor from the DOE

Posted by David Parish, Ph.D., CEO Calypso Systems
Tuesday July 7th, 2009 | 0 Comments

Though it required an early wake-up to make the 7am SIIA Education Division breakfast last Wednesday morning at NECC, it was worth the effort. Tucked into a small room at the Renaissance Hotel across from the DC Convention Center, the group consisted of SIIA leadership, various education software publishers, several varieties of industry consultants and one ed tech hardware exec. The speaker that morning was Jim Shelton, the DOE's Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement, where he oversees the Department's competitive teacher quality, school choice and learning technology programs.

Jim's topic was billed as a "Discussion of the Obama Administration's education innovation agenda with emphasis on technology, implementation of the ARRA, and the role of the private sector". Jim is a thoughtful, articulate and engaging speaker, able to make his points extemporaneously and casually and his talk was a well-organized stream of consciousness presentation. Most importantly, he did not shy away from criticizing the industry to which he was speaking, educators to whom we sell our products, or the inefficiencies within his own department. True to President Obama's campaign pledge, the agenda was honest and transparent. Some of the more intriguing comments included:

• Make It Apple Easy. Right out of the box, Secretary Shelton criticized the industry for making products that are unnecessarily complex and which lack an element of "cool". I believe his point was that low adoption and effectiveness of ed tech products can be partially blamed on product designs that emphasize functionality rather than usability. He implored the industry, including the two Intel reps in the room, to make it "Apple Easy". The groan was audible and there may have been a hiss or two. Still, while his point is well-taken, he was intentionally overlooking the business realities of designing, building, deploying and supporting next-generation products to an industry that focuses first and foremost on cost savings and value. Schools don't have much of a budget for "cool".

• Ed Tech Viewed as "Part of the Problem". OK - these are my words, not his. More accurately what Jim said was that end users "... do not view ed tech vendors as part of a solution to their basic problems". I suspect he was referring more so to main stream teachers who struggle with classroom technology adoption while also confronting growing class sizes, fewer resources and changing performance criteria, and not to administrative and instructional technology folks. The district technology leadership we interact having the luxury of stepping away from the fray and envisioning the world they're trying to create. For the most part, they are very supportive of the our efforts to deliver effective and relevant products. Teachers, on the other hand, don't have that luxury and it's easy to imagine their frustration with "yet another change". If I were to corner Jim, this is one topic I would want to explore further.

• E2T2 Funding Cut. For years we've railed as an industry about the prior administration's hypocracy in creating this vastly under-funded mandate within NCLB. To me it was the one moment in the morning's discussion where Jim seemed a bit embarrassed, offering the party politico-speak that E2T2 funding will return when there is "a clear plan with demonstrated effectiveness". Sorry. That bird doesn't fly. There are far too many classrooms without the basic infrastructure required to have a conversation about 21st century teaching. No matter how the details evolve down the road, classrooms with adequate computer and rich-media presentation technologies improve learning outcomes right here and right now. The evidence surrounding the importance of classroom sound reinforcement by itself is overwhelming.

• Mythical Stimulus Money. It was no surprise that stimulus funds was a hot topic at NECC. More to the point, everybody was trying to understand if and when dollars would actually reach targeted districts. Though I'm guessing Jim would deny saying it, when pressed on this topic he clearly stated that the reason stimulus funds are not yet flowing to districts is that " ... states are playing games with the stimulus money". In other words, funds are flowing to the states, but getting redirected to address more pressing needs. He's frustrated, we're frustrated, schools are frustrated, etc. Personally, I've yet to speak with a district anywhere in the country that has actually received IDEA Part B funds.

As an industry, we have strong advocates for effective, proven investments in education technology currently DC. The type of candor shown at the SIIA breakfast meeting last week was an important step towards turning potential into results. We didn't necessarily hear what we wanted to hear, but we did hear (mostly) the truth. What's next? It's up to us.

Related Links