Wisconsin Public Television University Place Wisconsin Academy  Julie Underwood, "Wisconsin's Education Challenges"  March 22, 2011 UP568  cc >> ...the Alumni Research Foundation, the UW Madison Chancellor's Office, M&I Bank and Isthmus Publishing, and members of the Wisconsin Academy. Also who make this possible are the Wisconsin Academy Council, or board of directors for the Wisconsin Academy. There are several of them here tonight, and I hope you'll raise your hands. Millard Sussman, Pat Brady, John Ashley, and I think, President Jim Armstrong is here. A-ha! Wouldn't want to miss that one. (laughter) Welcome and thank you all for making these presentations possible here tonight and I know there are many of you that are members here tonight as well. If you've seen the yellow index cards as you come in, I hope that you've had an opportunity to fill those out to help us figure out how best to market these programs. And also, if you fill them out with your email address, we'd be glad to submit your name for a drawing for a free membership in the Wisconsin Academy. So we'd really appreciate your helping us with other ideas and speaker topics for next year. Your membership does support these Wisconsin Academy evening presentations, our quarterly magazine, I think I've got a copy here, so that you can see it. 

That's what your membership gets for you and the James Watrous Gallery on the third floor of the Overture Center here in Madison. So please join this wonderful community of the mind that is here tonight. All Academy Evenings this season are listed in our season schedule and if you don't have one of those, please feel free to take one on your way out and of course, they too have membership information in the back. So, we don't let you miss that. This evening's presentation is being streamed live on the Internet, and I'd like to thank Julie Underwood and the School of Education for making it possible to do this and we'd like to welcome the viewers that are online, for those that are online, questions can be sent to the panel by emailing questions at wisconsinacademy.org And there is one other person in the audience that I'd just like to introduce and that is state Senator Luther Olsen, who's Chairman of the Senate Education Committee. Luther, thank you for raising your hand. And thank you for being here. (applause) The Wisconsin Academy is dedicated to creating spaces for civil discourse and has been for 141 years now on Wisconsin's most urgent challenges. And we really appreciate that you're all here to participate in that civil discourse. I am now pleased to be able to welcome all of those that are maybe just joining us as part of our live video stream. 

I am Margaret Lewis, Executive Director of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters, and I'd like to welcome you all to tonight's panel entitled, "Getting to A+: Wisconsin's Education Challenges." And it is my pleasure to start by introducing Dean Julie Underwood of the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Education who will introduce our panelists and Julie is, as I mentioned, Dean of the School of Education of the UW-Madison, has been for the last five years and previously was employed for about seven years with the National School Board's Association as General Council. Thank you very much for joining us, Julie. (applause)  >> Thank you, Margaret. Thank you, Margaret and thank you to all of us, to all of you for joining us. I want to welcome you as Margaret did to this evening's presentation. This one's "Getting to A+." It's one of a series of lectures about education and I particularly want to thank the Academy for focusing on issues of public education. This is a very important time in public education. Personally, I believe that this is absolutely one of the most critical topics in our society today, K-12 education, and more specifically, the future of K-12 education. And I don't want to engage in hyperbole or sound alarmist but I do believe that we're at a watershed moment for American public schools. Certainly, the challenges in American public schools have been debated over the decades but right now, in the state, in the nation, and even in our own hometown, we have issues about public schools, policies that are being debated, changes that are going on, that I believe will impact the path of public schools if maybe not forever but for a very, very long time. 

And tonight of course we have with us some education leaders in our state who will address those issues. We have Dan Nerad, Joan Wade, and Mike Thompson. They're going to be discussing these issues, they're each going to take a bit of time themselves and then we're going to roll up that screen... (laughter) They're each going to make some comments themselves. Then we're going to have-- I'm going to ask them a couple questions. We encourage you all to ask questions as well and we'll be taking questions from those of you who are viewing at a distance and want to email in your questions. We'll take those as well. We hope to have a good conversation, a good exchange of ideas since that's the history and the tradition of the Academy here in Wisconsin. So first off, I want to do our introductions. I'm going to do them all to begin with, and then we'll take people in turn. 

So, on the far right, my far right is Mike Thompson, if you don't know him. Mike Thompson-- Oh wait, I want to make one disclaimer. Actually, one boast. All three of these individuals have degrees from the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Education. (applause)  Now, I could say that individually, so I could say that lots of time, but I will say that collectively. So Mike Thompson is the Deputy State Superintendent for the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. He's been at DPI for over ten years in a number of positions serving that institution well as the executive assistant to State Superintendent Libby Burmaster. He's also been the department's federal policy adviser and the director of student services. He has also been a teacher, an educator in various ways in our state before he went to DPI. Second, we have Joan Wade. 

Joan is currently the director of CESA 6. For those of you who don't know our CESA structure, CESA 6 is a collective of about 42 districts in the Oshkosh area. And she has been director of CESA 6 since 2001. Before that time, she served in the Wisconsin State Legislature as a representative for the 42nd district in the state of Wisconsin. Joan Wade. And finally we have Dan Nerad. Dan Nerad became Madison's metropolitan school district's superintendent or district administrator as we know them in the state of Wisconsin in 2008. Previously he was a superintendent for the Green Bay public schools, a position he held for about seven years and I believe that that is more than the average tenure for a superintendent in the United States. He served in a number of positions in Green Bay and we are pleased to have him join us in our community here in Madison. So, I'm going to first turn this over to Mike who's going to start with some opening comments. 

>> Mike Thompson: Thank you, Julie. Good evening, everyone. First of all, thanks to the Wisconsin Academy for inviting us to be here. It is a great pleasure to be on this panel and especially with these two panelists who I have had deep respect for over the years and what they've done in our Wisconsin schools, both at the regional level and the local level with Dan. And thanks to you, Julie. I know Julie as an instructor, as I told her at dinner, she was absolutely the best instructor I've had at the University of Wisconsin-Madison bar none. She was excellent and that was her first time around as they call it when I had her back then. As Julie said, I've been at the Department of Instruction not ten years, but 20 years. I used to have jet black hair and a wife and two kids. (laughter) I've still got the wife and two kids but education is a tough business, as you know. 

I'm just going to give you a couple comments to give you kind of a picture about a little about myself and about what I kind of see education in Wisconsin. See, I'm a proud consumer and product of our Wisconsin education system. I went through our K-12 system, our higher education system. My wife is a teacher, she went through the system. My kids went through the system. I, or my two kids have attended the University of UW-Stevens Point, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Whitewater, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Madison, MATC, and Winona. Now, I don't know how one of my kids crossed the border to Winona but he did. But all of those were excellent education systems in this particular state and I attribute our ability to do that in this particular state all the way back to our Constitution in 1848 when our Founding Fathers said, we're going guarantee every child in this state a free public education from age 4-20. We're going to guarantee that. They knew that was the way to prosperity in this particular state. 

And it was so important that in 1879, we said it was going to be compulsory. You have to go. We've had some great reform achievements in this particular state. 1859, we had the first kindergarten in the nation in Whitewater. 1973, we passed the first state law that required schools to serve children with disabilities. IDA is modeled after Wisconsin's law. We have just the largest, and the first state to implement the largest voucher program allowing private school students to attend private school students in Milwaukee. We have in this particular state, we've received from the federal government the largest charter school grant to expand charter schools in this state and we currently have 206 charter schools running throughout this particular state. We were the first state to develop and implement a tiered licensure system for our educators, and I can tell you from talking to people from other states when they call and say, I'm kind of curious about a teacher in our-- oh, wait a minute they're from Wisconsin, we're not worried about them at all. We have a really good system in our particular state. 

And, you know, even though we had a lot of successes in our state and I'm proud of them, proud when I go to national meetings to talk about where I am in Wisconsin, I feel we really haven't done enough to keep pace with the educational needs of our particular students. You know, right now, Tony Evers, our state superintendent, ran on of platform of every child to graduate. Every child to graduate, we graduate 90% of our students in this particular state. But when you disaggregate that data, we know that some populations, some subgroups of students aren't doing so well and that's not good enough. And it's not just good enough to graduate, you have to graduate ready. Like to say that every child that is born to say, you're going to get a free education and when you get done with it, you're going to be ready. You're going to be ready to go on to post secondary education and not have to take remedial coursework or you're going to be ready to go into the world of work and be able to function in that world of work and advance in a career and earn a respectable living. That's what we guarantee you the opportunity for and I don't think to the point that our education system has kept pace with that particular promise. We have to create learning systems in our state that really are meeting the needs of students where they are now. Let me tell you just about four points I think what part of that learning system needs to include and then we'll talk more about some of the specifics as what Joan and Dan are doing in their particular districts. 

But that learning system we have to have for all kids is one that has high expectations, high expectations for achievement. Now, were the first state to sign on to the national standard, the common course standard being language, arts, and mathematics. The first state, 47 other states followed suit. We have high academic standards that we're going to implement in this particular state, internationally bench-marked standards. We have to follow that up with a really solid and good curriculum to deliver those particular standards. And we are working with CESA's and others in this state to develop a really good curriculum around implementing those particular standards of high expectations for all kids at all grade levels. That's where it starts. We have to have the second piece, we have to have instructional designs and environments where kids can achieve and be engaged in this school system. And instructional designs that take kids at where they're at and move them forward. Personalized systems that allows all different types of learning, 24/7 learning in our school districts, bringing digital learning into the classroom, providing kids an opportunity in the high school to earn college credit, dual credit enrollments, early and middle-level colleges. 

We have to provide these opportunities for kids because they live in a different environment than they have before. And they're going to compete in a different environment. We have to really good account ability and assessment systems in our particular state. Fair accountability systems, accurate accountability systems that are based on data and we're moving rapidly in this state to develop a really good data system, student information system, so we'll have that data. And we're revising our state testing system to develop a better testing system that's online, adaptive, and gives people immediate results. Those are the types of things we need in our state to move forward. And we have to move forward with a sense of urgency. And finally, we have to be able to support and recognize the teachers, they're the most vital resource for our kids in this particular state. We have to be able to do that and at the state level, we have to create some flexibility in licensing. We have a really good licensing system that assures that we have high quality teachers in our particular state. 

We have to make sure that that license system is flexible to the changing nature of how kids take coursework in our schools. And we're working in that particular piece. And we have to have a system to effectively and fairly evaluate teachers in our particular state. Teachers and principals and we're working to that end as well. So we can not only look at where we need to improve in the area of teaching but recognize the tremendous strengths our teaching core in this particular state have. This state has a lot of things to build on, a lot of successes in our state particularly to build on. The big shift that I see in education, apart from, I think I agree with Julie, a watershed moment, is when I see districts come together to talk about education. A time ago, they used to come together to learn about what other people were doing and when states would come together at the national level, we'd all listen to what other states were doing. The shift is, districts are coming together to move together. And states are coming together to move together. 

And that's what's happening, both at the regional level and at local levels about how we're moving education forward. We're going to have common standards, we're going to have common curriculum, we're going to have common assessment systems and we're going to have common data systems that we all can draw from and I think those are all positive movements in education as we go forward. So, I appreciate the opportunity to be here and thanks to all of you for coming out on a rainy night. Appreciate that. I'm glad it's not Thursday, because that would be a rainy night plus the Badgers were playing so. (laughter) >> Thanks, Mike. Joan. >> Joan Wade: Well, good evening everyone and I would like to thank the invitation to be here. Julie, for facilitating and being a part of this panel is pretty awesome experience for me and I'm really happy to be here. I have been a CESA administrator for about ten years and prior to going into the legislature before that, I served as a teacher. 

I worked as an elementary teacher, I've worked as a library media specialist, I've worked with technology in school districts. We do in Wisconsin have a very proud history of education, we have a very proud history of cooperatives which is why I'm proud to say I'm at CESA, and part of that proud history that we have makes it difficult to change. We see ourselves right now in our state where we're really in a state of a crisis. But I firmly believe that within every crisis, there is opportunity. I can't think of a better time to be in education than right now. This is a critical time in our educational system and I think that public education is going to come through this financial crisis and they're going to be stronger and better than we've ever been in our past. In our region of the state, our superintendents had been talking about this crisis for about at least the last couple of years. Knowing that, there's a few things going on that we can't, we couldn't quite get our arms around. So we spent considerable enough time really studying some of the issues that we're facing in public education. And we created a mess map, we called it, and on our mess map, we had all kinds of things that were interrelated and really we called them wicked problems because they didn't really have an answer and they rated five top wicked problems that we really needed to deal with in our region. 

And those five problems, the first one is alienation of students. We're finding that in schools every day and it's hard, a lot of times, it's hard for educators, myself included, to admit that we are alienating students. But whether they are students that are failing or students that are A students, we find that they're bored, that they're oftentimes not being challenged like they'd like to be. And are we really meeting their needs? Not all students but we certainly aren't meeting the needs of some of the students. So, the superintendents in our region really looked at how are we alienating those kids. The second thing we looked at is if we're alienating kids, they have choices. And so let's look at the competition that we're facing in education and there's a lot of competition to public education. How are we going to deal with that as public schools? The third thing they looked at is all these technology challenges that are being thrown at us. There's a lot of changes with technology, kids will be in school and sometimes they will have their cell phone in their pocket and they'll be texting somebody on their cell phone but yet they're not able to use it to do things in class and so we need to get a different view on technology and how we're able to start multitasking with the kids and letting them use technology to drive their learning. So that was another wicked problem that we're trying to deal with. 

The fourth wicked problem was really the status quo. How do you change a system that is really comfortable where it's at? Because, as we said, we have a proud history in Wisconsin. Our public schools are really good and they are. We do good on test scores, we do good across the nation, so if you're doing good, how do you get better? And how do you beat that status quo? And then the fifth one which we're more aware of today than ever is an unsustainable financial model. Our superintendents talked a year and a half ago about the funding cliff that was right in front of us. What are we going to do when the federal stimulus money is gone, where many of our school districts are facing declining enrollment which means we are facing declining revenue. And how are we going to continue to educate our schools, or our students rather with that financial crisis down the path. We wrestled with those issues. And we decided that if we didn't plan for our future, somebody else would. And we probably wouldn't like the future that somebody else was going to plan for us. 

So, we took upon ourselves to redesign what we wanted to call public education for the future. We developed the next generation of learning initiative which The foresight of these school districts and some of the work that they did together is paying off dividends today because they've been thinking as school communities, school boards, superintendents, teachers, and even students coming into the dialogue about how do we change our education system to better meet the needs of our kids for 21st global society. How do we use technology better? How do we really customize the learning for the students? How do we change a system and how do we partner with DPI, in some cases, in higher ed in some cases, so that we can allow kids to get credit for, let's say, if they are participating in a community orchestra, why can't they get credit for band for that? If they're doing outside work, they should be able to, if they can meet competencies, get credit in school for some of those experiences. So, we're taking a look at that. How do we share programs across districts in a regional setting? How do we with students that are living in poverty or homeless, how do we assign a family advocate to those students so that they're ready to come to school to learn? How do we make sure that all students have a breakfast in the morning when they get to school so they're not thinking about how hungry they are? And so as we talked about those structures that we need to put into place, we've designed a regional learning center that six to eight schools could partner with to develop. Different learning experiences for kids, different teaching programs for teachers so they become actual teaching coaches, learning coaches rather than the traditional teacher in front of the classroom. We're in the process of developing a teacher and leader effectiveness center so that as seniority, if it goes away, we have something to take its place in school districts so you can look at teaching and know if teachers are being effective and how that works with student learning. We also have to put together a new business model and so we're looking at business models across the nation. How are schools doing business differently so that they can lower their expenses and still provide a world class education for students? So, I think we'll probably be talking about that a little bit more as we go through the night but I want to be able to pass it off to Dan so I'm really, really excited to be here and it is an honor to be on this panel. >> Thank you, Joan. 

>> Dan Nerad: Thank you very much and I would too express it's a great honor to be here this evening and join my colleagues. I have great respect for the work that they're doing both at the DPI and CESA. I also want to extend my thanks to the academy for gathering people together tonight for an important conversation about education. In my very strong bias, there's no more important conversation that needs to take place across this entire country and in particular in our community about how we educate children and what's at stake if we fail to do so. Well, and I also want to thank Dean Underwood for her commitment to gather partners together for these kinds of conversations and for other types of partnership work that the district is doing with the University of Wisconsin School of Education. You know, as with other times in our history, today we are facing challenges as an educational community. And I would suggest that we are facing unprecedented challenges. These include the public's perception of how well we are educating our children, the fact that we have children that aren't meeting curricular standards, and we aren't able to really offer plausible explanations why these achievement gaps continue, that we have competing educational outcomes that create mixed signals about the quality and value of public education, and I also believe there's an unwillingness to commit to the discussion about how important resources are related to public education today. Questions like, how much does it really cost to educate a child in our community and in our state and second, how much does it cost when we fail to do so well? Those are important public policy discussions that I believe must occur all across the state of Wisconsin if we are to advance a more productive agenda around our children. I believe there is much at stake in this conversation about public education and about the individual school districts or organizations that we represent. 

I'd like to be able to take a few minutes to focus on the key challenges that we face as a larger urban school district. And in fact, we are proud as a public institution about our history of accomplishment in service of our young people. But I also must tell you that we are an institution today that can no longer claim the kind of success that has been more universally available in the past. Who we are as a public district in fact is inseparable from the issues of who we serve as a public school district. I want to begin by stating that we continue to have many, many students in our district with incredible patterns of academic achievement. Our students continue, for example, to surpass their state peers in the percentage scoring in the highest performance category. We have more than six times the national merit scholars semi-finalists than a district our size would have on average. Who are these students? They are not only learned but are amazing in terms of their work around issues of social responsibility and giving back to community. And having had a chance to meet and interact with many of them, I've been so impressed not only about their academic accomplishments but how much they care about community and how much they're willing to engage in issues that have dearly affect community. And most often, these students are also characterized by having significant support in their personal lives, especially as it relates to creating additional opportunities to learn, beyond which we can provide as a school district. 

But I'll tell you in my opening remarks this evening that these students, however, do not tell the whole tale of the Madison Metropolitan School District. In many ways we are a tale today of two school districts. And so let me share the rest of the tale in, regarding some important statistics. Our district is a very language-rich school district. Today, we have students representing 70 different language groups and I'll be the first to tell you that they're not all large groups of students but some of them are very large groups of students. Our English language learner population today represents 17% of our 25,000 students and this compares to a 6% rate across the entire state of Wisconsin. So we have very language-rich environments and we have challenges that go with the fact that many of our kids, English is not their native language. 53% of our kids today are students today are students of color and now we have to be very careful about we literally use the term minority as we convey information about our student population. From a statistical point of view, our students of color in the aggregate are in fact no longer a minority. And I would urge us to recognize that the greatest disequalizer for our kids is their family income status. 

Now, in the Madison Metropolitan School District, 51% of our student population qualify for free or reduced lunch, the majority qualify for free lunch which is a lower family income level. And today, 18 of our 32 elementary schools have 50% or more low income children, resulting literally in poverty density issues within our schools in particular at the elementary level. And this still doesn't tell the whole story because these groups of children also represent in fact our groups of kids who are furthest away from meeting the academic standards that Mike Thompson referenced in his opening remarks. And they oftentimes lack the personal resources in their personal lives that would allow them to have better educational outcomes. They come to school behind, not meeting standards and literally our commitment over the years has to be to narrow those achievement gaps that they're experiencing and those gap reduction strategies are not oftentimes easy. They are as a group of students experiencing what we literally call today achievement gap issues. So what I'd like to do is just to summarize what I see as I look across our school district and as what I hear as I listen to people within our community about key challenges that we're now facing as a school district. I believe that we must ensure a focus on the improvement of learning for all kids. This cannot be a zero sum game. And I mentioned that because oftentimes I hear zero sum language in our community that if we're helping this group of kids, we're not helping this group of kids. 

And I understand why that conversation at times exists because there have been real decisions that have been made about real programs in our school district that people feel disaffected by. But we have to get to a better conversation around how we meet the needs of all groups of kids. If you're meeting standards, the standards again that Mike Thompson referred to, the end of learning isn't there. We have to advance learning for our highest achievement kids as well within our school district. And as an institution, people are expecting us to meet the needs of those kids. We did a survey a couple years ago and one of the things that we learned from parents that are exercising choices other than ours, they continue to live in our school district but they opt for other things is a belief that we're not focusing enough on the needs of advanced learners in our school district. So how is it that we can continue to commit, we must, to meeting the needs of all learners, whether you're meeting needs or not, to advance them, all kids to their next level of learning? And at the same time, our second challenge must be to eliminate these notable and I would assert grotesque achievement gaps that are very hard to explain to people why they need to exist. We know nothing that would tell, everything that we know tells us there should not be a relationship between race and achievement, between family income and achievement, between language and achievement but the reality is that relationship does exist today. And we see lower performance from certain groups of kids and in fact, there are certain groups of kids that are most rapidly increasing populations of kids in our school district. That poverty measure that I told you about is a relatively recent phenomenon in the Madison Metropolitan School District where we have more and more kids that live with family income levels that cause them to have challenges often tied with their learning. 

And then finally, I personally would be remiss if I did not mention a third key challenge and it has been mentioned throughout the evening tonight and I did mention it earlier and that is the need to ensure that we have adequate resources to educate our children. In education, I would assert that resources do matter and that we're in a very, we are a very human resource intensive proposition. You know, we do need to engage with technology but using that term a little differently, I would assert that our technology's adults-- And that everything that good and just that happens to children in a school district happens by what adults do in terms of their quality interactions with young people. And those adults as well today, I think the time we're in, will tell us that they need nurturing as well. So in education, resources do matter and I believe we have a moral obligation to elevate the conversation within this community about the fact that resources do matter in education. Teachers matter, materials matter, professional development matter, early learning opportunities matter and I'm proud to say next year we are going to be able to implement a four year old kindergarten and now be one of the 85% of the districts in this state that have that portal available for our youngest kids at the age four. Curriculum matters, the quality of curriculum that was discussed earlier, and in fact today, in terms of this issue about resources, we do face unprecedented challenges. A year ago we had a 15% cut in state aid. This year an 8% cut in state aid and the governor's budget proposal is a 5.5% reduction in the revenue cap formula for all school districts but for ours, it creates a $15 million shortfall for next year along with an additional shortfall of $5 million in the fixed cost areas totaling a shortfall of $20 million. I know that we are in a tough time economically and we are sensitive to try to balance the needs of our kids with the needs of our taxpayers. 

But I would assert this continued financial challenge we face is unacceptable. And we do have to have a conversation about this whole notion about what does it properly cost to educate children and again, what does it cost when we in fact fail to do so well. My view is that education is an investment and so we need to elevate the public policy discussion knowing that laws don't change overnight and funding formulas don't change overnight. And we can't wait for a better economy to begin this conversation, it has to begin now because I'm describing to you an unprecedented challenge but having come into the school district near three years ago, I also have to tell you that this school district has been facing these kind of reductions under the current funding formula for 15 years. And real decisions have had to be made about cutting programs, reducing commitments to kids, and just as Wisconsin needs to be open for business, and I don't mean to be trite about this, Wisconsin needs to be open for education. And there's a relationship between good educational outcomes and the better educational outcomes that we need to have for our kids and the state and this community remaining a strong community. If we don't do well, if we don't do better by our kids, this community will not remain as strong as it has been. So I would urge us to elevate this conversation about the resources that are needed to educate our children well. And thank you very much. (applause)  >> Underwood: So, thank you Mike, Joan, and Dan. 

And now I don't know about the rest of you but I have about 50 questions that I'd like to ask. (laughter) And I won't ask them all, I won't dominate this time but they've laid lots of issues on the table, proud history and the juxtaposition of a proud history and a need to change, issues of technology, privatization, social issues, social issues as they affect our K-12 community and children's learning, four year old kindergarten, early childhood opportunities, English language learning, and of course, we ended with a question about finance. So, I'm going to start there. Joan talked about a new business model and about creating some sustainable financial model for public education in the state. Let me go back to Mike since Mike led off. Mike, there's been lots of conversation about funding of schools and trying to figure out, Dan asked us to look at how much does it really cost to educate a child well and what is the important cost of not educating a child well into the future. Can you think about that and kind of bring us into a Wisconsin perspective? >> Sure, that's a good one. (laughter) We all know that resources are limited but I guess I will say this to start out and I don't know if you'll agree with this or not. But Congress had it right during the second economic recession with what they said when they put forth stabilization, whether you agreed with this federal money coming or not, the rhetoric, I think was in the right place. With stabilization money going into school districts, say, we have to stabilize our education systems during our tough economic times. 

We cannot afford to let this institution deteriorate during tough economic times. We're going to stabilize it. It wasn't to advance it, it wasn't to grow it, it was to stabilize it. During the toughest economic times, the way out of tough economic times is through supporting your education system. That's what will get us out of these times, supporting. That's what our Founding Fathers in the state saw, to say how we're going to advance prosperity, that's true now. And when we said in our Constitution, all kids, regardless of condition, when we passed that law in 1973, regardless of handicap and condition. Prior to 1973, the state reimbursed school districts for providing special education because it was not required. At 70%, now it's down to 26%. We simply know that kids more, some kids, but agree all kids can learn. 

Some kids need more time. Some kids need more intensity, and some kids need a different environment to do it. And if you believe it, and if we believe that's what we have to provide kids, we have to do that. That was our commitment to them. And now, in this area of funding, we have to look at and the state superintendent back in the summer, last summer, felt that the time to look at how we fund education in the state is now, when we have limited resources. It's a discussion to have now when there aren't new resources and he put forward a proposal about a fair funding proposal. How do you distribute the limited resources we have in the state to provide to education? How do you distribute in a fair and equitable and sustainable way to the state? It's a discussion I still think we need to have in this state. The resources are limited, how do we move forward? And he proposed a model called fair funding, how do you create something that's fair? And he's proposed that we put funding behind every child in this state. There is not state funding behind every child in this state now. Got to have funding behind every child and a fair system we ought to account not only for property wealth but we ought to account for income wealth as well. 

We have a lot of districts in this state that are property wealth and people poor and there ought to be a mechanism to provide an equitable distribution of that limited resources around that particular piece. To keep the funding system fair, we need to have a funding system that's sustainable. School districts, I don't believe, can fund learning systems on a year to year basis. We're okay this year, we're not sure about next year, we're not even thinking about the third year. We have to be able to fund things that are sustainable. They have to know what resources they're getting over time. And that's not only true and in my opinion at the state level, it's true at the federal level. The most consistent foundational funding at the federal level and just so you know my feeling on this, education is a state function, locally directed and supported by the federal government. Now, the federal government had two hallmark programs in the early 70's, IDA, special education funding, and Title I funding. It was the funding source that districts could count on over the years based on their poverty rate. 

And our poverty rate in this particular state continues to climb. We had the fifth highest increase nationally based on the census adjustment this year in poverty in this state. So that's school districts, kids eligible for free lunch, it's going up in every single district in this particular state, not just isolated ones. But we have to have this consistent, sustainable amount of funding so people can plan long-term. And we have to have transparency and funding, that's the other piece that Tony has in his particular plan, and make sure we're clear on how much money school aids is actually going into schools. And he suggested that the property that our levy credit. Thank you, Dan, which is $900 million a year that shows up in our property tax bills and relief, it's counted as a school aid, it doesn't go into schools. It ought to go into schools. People feel strongly about supporting our education but we have to do it in a fair way, we have to do it in a sustainable way and we have to do it a way that's transparent so people understand it. >> Thank you. 

>> Can I? >> Yes. >> Okay, I just want to, I would agree with everything Mike said about the fair funding proposal. I think it's a really good proposal. I wish that in the state of Wisconsin we had enough funding to fund it. And I'm not going to take a side on whether we really are broke as a state or we're not broke as a state because I'm sure people have various opinions about that but what I'd really like us to do is take some time under this, at this fiscal crisis to really think about what could we do differently to become more efficient. For instance, could we look at moving kids on when they're ready? Why do we have kids stay together as third graders, fourth graders, fifth graders, when if you've taught those grades, you know that some kids are ready to move on sooner and some kids need more help. It's the same in the high school years. If kids can meet the standards when they're 16 or 17 years old, why do we keep them in high school? Why don't we let them move on and go on to their next level of learning whether that's a technical college or a four year college or into the workforce if that's where they want to be? We just seem to pigeon hole into the same system structure because we don't think about doing business differently and I really hope that as we go through this financial crisis, we'll take a look at some of those different ways of teaching and learning. Again, I think technology can really help us through some of this as well. Could we get some of the content online? Can school districts, some of the school districts up by us are pretty close together geographically? Could they share some of their staff? And they're looking at that right now for how they're going to get through this. 

I don't know that we all need to have a business office in the 42 school districts in my region. Is there a way that some of them can share some of that organizational kind of structure? Do we need to have 42 different hot lunch menus? Could we share some of them instead of having somebody reinvent that in every place? So those are some of the things that I think if we cooperate and share and, again, as being in a CESA, that's what we do. We cooperate and share. Could we lower our cost and change that financial model a little bit? I think we could make quite a big bit of a difference. >> Thank you. So let me ask one more question before we kick it out to everybody. Or at least raise one topic. Dan, you were talking about, actually, we had mention of data about our achievement gaps from various places, but you were talking about achievement gaps within Madison and of course within the state as a whole. You were also talking about English language learners, Mike just mentioned the new data that have come out about the number of low-income students in our state. Can, we also have issues of charter schools; can you think about out loud with us, what particular programs do you think best address those needs to close achievement gaps? >> Well I think that that's a question that's on all of our minds. 

>> That's a real easy one, isn't it? (laughter) >> Well, none of them are easy. Just as Mike had darker hair, I used to be 6'5" too. (laughter) But, you know, that's what we're here for, to have conversations about these big challenges. You know, first and foremost, I would say that we must as a country face these achievement gaps if we're going to remain strong. I know I'm being redundant with that but there's a tie between educational outcomes and community and economic development and workforce development outcomes. So there's a lot at stake here, meaning that this is not an academic issue only. I mean, this is a real issue that has to happen around the real lives of kids. I've come to the view that there's no silver bullets with the achievement gaps issues. And I believe that we have to have the courage to look at a lot of things that need to be in place if we're really going to have a sustained focus over time and in fact eliminate these gaps. I would also assert that first and foremost, that we have to be about ensuring the highest quality instruction in all of our classrooms, the highest quality curricular experience for young people and contemporary ways to assess learning. 

So what I'm saying is that part of the solution, relative to the achievement gap, in good part is based on best practice. And so what we do to support teachers in their ongoing professional development needs to ensure that we are implementing instructional practices that are consistent with what we know works better than other things in instruction. That's not to say that there aren't a lot of things that teachers can choose from but there's been good research now about, you know, some instruction makes more of a difference than other instruction. And so part of my belief is that it needs to be about best practices, more intensely provided. I also believe that we have to have good quality programs in place that support kids who need intervention that aren't meeting standards but I also am of the view that we have to think in non-traditional ways about that as well. And here's what I mean there and that is that the traditional way, I'm generalizing now, to address the needs of kids who aren't meeting standards is to give kids less slower. It's based on a traditional remedial framework. And it's oftentimes based on a view that these kids are experiencing learning deficits and they need something less than what other kids might need. I believe that we have to turn that thinking really on its head. Literally upside down. 

And what has to happen in terms of achievement gap issues within the regular school environment is we do have to accelerate instruction; we have to provide systems of intervention that target kids early and in some cases would actually advance their learning outside of what traditional remedial models would allow for. And so here's what I really mean by that: we should never lower the standards. I believe Mike referred to some kids need more time. So we need to create systems for some people that some kids that provide more time. Quality after school programming that has an academic orientation, quality summer school programming that doesn't, again, doesn't lower the standard but it gives kids more time. I also believe in systems that would create double learning opportunities for kids. Again, it's not lowering the standards but let's say at the high school level and I know there's some controversy associated with this but we have to think about big ideas as giving some young people double doses of the same language arts course. It may not be the same course two periods, it would vary by period, but it's giving them a double experience in language arts and mathematics. Again, not lowering the standards but advancing, accelerated pace of learning. Because the goal needs to be to get all kids to the standards. 

And so, you know, unless we're advancing an agenda of improvement that allows that happen, we're going to have some kids meeting standards and other kids maybe moving along but they still aren't meeting standards. And then finally, I do believe that we're advantage by the earlier the better. And that is that this whole notion of early learning and early intervention with kids especially those that have not had early opportunity to learn, they come into kindergarten with a much lower vocabulary level than kids that have been read to and taken to museums and taken to different places to, you know, to have that type of learning exposure. So four year old kindergarten is not a nice thing, it's a necessary thing. And it's also necessary that communities have birth to four year old programming that is the community's commitment to advanced development from zero to age four so it's not just a school piece but it's a community piece as well. So in total I guess what I'm saying is we have to be about a lot of things and we also have to think and behave counter intuitively. It can't be for a lot of these kids less slower, it has to be an accelerated pace of learning in order to get these kids to the standards. >> More and faster. >> Right. >> Oh, more, earlier, and faster. 

Joan or Mike, you want to add anything to that or? >> I'll just add that I can't agree more with what Dan said, if you asked me to pick one thing, I'd say three things. Early, early, early. Get kids early. >> I did ask one thing. >> If you think of early, and if you think of a first grader and you provide them with the core instruction and you differentiate because they don't quite get it in the core and then you go, we still need to do more so we intervene. You do an intervention and you have data determinants that work and if it doesn't work, you do something different. And if that doesn't work you do something different. It's where districts go, we don't have anything else to do, we can't do, we don't have any more resources to do something. Then the child stays there until they move them along, well, they might fourth and fifth grade, I guess they're a child that should be identified for a disability. And this intervention early, it's intervening early, it's getting resources to those kids, and as Dan said, moving them along faster. 

And it can be done but it takes resources. I just want to, you should, there's a lot of what CESA 6 is doing at the regional level that's worth looking at on their website and as Joan talks about, some of those innovations, and Joan talks about that. I look at them as the right things to do for kids and they could save us money. But they're not done to save money, you don't start with let's save some money, what can we do? You start doing the right things and they can, those things can save money. And that's why I believe it's very difficult and districts don't have a sustainable fund source, they can't think out, they got to think about, oh what are we going to, what can we do with less now? And so they can't think about some of these innovations because they're always thinking about what can we do with, what can we do less with. And so that's a problem, in my opinion, about funding that you can't count on, you can't plan over a years time when you don't know where, what you're going to have. >> Mike, I don't know if you would agree or disagree, so I'm going to kind of ask you as long as I'm here, was some of these ideas like moving kids on when they're ready so they're not necessarily with their same age group, letting them get out of high school when they're ready to get out of high school because they've met the standards, letting them get credit for out of school experience if they can meet the standard in the school, those things are against the status quo. They're against the norm of what we're used to doing in schools and so I don't see those things really being taken very serious until you have a financial crisis like we're seeing now. And now our schools are really, okay how can we do this, how fast can we get this off the ground? And that's I think where we're really focused on individual student learning and customizing that to make sure that students get the highest quality education we can possibly give them in public schools and trying to meet their needs. I totally agree with what Dan said about these kids that are living in poverty, how do we help these families so that they come to school ready to learn? How do we make sure that when they get to school they have breakfast so that again, they can focus and concentrate? So it's a very dynamic, very complicated how you fix this problem. 

And is funding an issue? Absolutely is funding an issue. Do we have a problem right now? We do, we need to put our very smartest people to work at these problems and we got them. We've got them here in Wisconsin. We've got them in our schools, we've got them in our school boards, we've got them in our communities that are working on them to problem solve together so I think our future's going to be great but we've got to look outside the box. We can't stay traditional or it's not going to work. >> Thank you, Joan. I think that I've heard a couple things that resonate. One certainly is thinking about the status quo as a problem and how we can think about doing things differently while we still tackle the past of having previous success and a proud history of education because it's quite easy to become complacent. I also, what's the saying, you don't want a good crisis to go to waste? (laughter) So we may be in that position as well. I know people have questions so Ronny has a mic, and I'm going to ask people to ask questions but we have some ground rules. 

Since we are taping, we need to have you actually ask your question into the mic and then Jason I believe, will be giving us questions from our distance audience as well. Hi. >> Hi my name's Nancy Young and I have a very short question but it's a very deep one. And you've proposed many things, many questions you're asking, how do we do this, how do we do that. And I think it's time to move toward your ideas about solutions and the audience's ideas about solutions if we could now.  >> Joan, you want to give your 30 second kind of framework for your next generation? >> I would give a plug. >> We'll give you a minute, not just 30 seconds. >> Okay, so I can get my plug in. If you Google Next Generation of Schools, you would get to our website where we do have some of those solutions. Typically, I give an hour presentation to community groups and school boards on what next generation of learning looks like. 

So it's really hard to describe these solutions in a minute or 30 seconds but I'll try on some of them. For the student experience, we really think that it's important that students from birth, before they even get to school, to have the resources they need so that they're ready to learn when they get to school. How many years have we heard that boy, if we could just decide who's a parent and who isn't because some kids just aren't ready to learn when they get to us and so then what do we do with them? So that's where we are looking at family advocates being assigned to families when children are born. Now some of those families are going to need a lot of time with their family advocates, some of them aren't going to need anything. So once they get to school then, those family advocates become learning coaches and make sure that the students are again, having breakfast, they're ready to learn, they move on when they're ready, so some kids as they are going through school will get through it faster, they might not get to middle school until they're 13, they might get to middle school when they're 9. It just depends on how quickly they can get through the learning cycle. Once they get into that middle school section, we really see these learning coaches being able to use data to really take a look at how kids learn. What kind of learning styles they have, what is it that they're interested in learning and having the students start directing their own learning and the teachers coaching them along the way. The structure for the teacher would change because some of them might be face to face teachers, some of them might be online teachers so that they're able to teach to more kids, some of them will be truly learning coaches working directly with kids. The school year structure would change, do we have to just go 180 days, I don't think so, maybe we don't need to take 12 weeks off in the summer or however long the summer is. 

We could compress that so the school year is different. The school day might be different for some kids. Maybe some kids learn better in the morning, maybe some kids learn better in the afternoon. So we'd really structure it to best meet the kids and their family. I've already talked about getting credit for things that they learn outside of the classroom. I've already talked about kids being able to get out of high school and into the next level of learning when they're ready. So those are some of the-- >> Also, Joan, collaborative administrative structures. >> Yeah, and we've talked about collaborative, that's absolutely right. Structures within a school that could be shared. their business practices, their business structures, their hot lunch programs that they can share regionally between six to eight school districts. Maybe in a region of four to six school districts, one school's going to really focus on an international baccalaureate, one school district's going to focus more on career technical ed, one school might have a different focus and so kids might go to a different school that's not necessarily in their community. 

And every time we present that, the first thing that people ask us is, well what about sports? Because of course, people get really concerned, you know, people don't ask the question about what if we have a failing student in our school? What are we going to do? But boy if you have a failing football season or a failing baseball season or a basketball season, that can sometimes rile up communities. But, so what if really restructured or thought differently about our community sports program and rather than having the high school football team be the high school football team, what if it belongs to the community? And so no matter where you go to school, whether you're home schooled or parochial schooled or charter school or public school, you're still being able to participate on that local sports team. Those are some of the things that our communities are really looking at doing differently. >> Thank you. Mike, can you think about some of the innovative practices that you know of in this state? >> Well I don't know about that sports thing, Joan but-- (laughter) I like the other ideas. >> Well, we all know Joan's a radical. >> What I see from school districts across the state is I think and I talked about schools that some kids need more of this time, intensity, and environments. I see school districts trying to put in programs or strategies to meet those particular needs. As I mentioned, we have 206 charter schools in this particular state, you can go down that list of charter schools and look at some of the innovations that they're implementing in their districts. At least 40 of them are really engaged in personalized learning, many of them are engaged in project-based learning, giving kids connections to what they're doing in their classrooms. 

We have started a state-wide initiative and Dan talked a little bit about the structure of it but it's called response to intervention. How do you create a system in your school to meet the needs of kids by being able to intervene and having data to make sure that the intervention works and having other interventions if it doesn't work? It's a major shift in how schools operate around serving kids. Change is difficult, change is hard for people, you know the little story of a family woke up, the only thing they could recognize is the schools. You know, things that it's hard to change but you have to create a culture of change and I believe in Joan's CESA, they created a culture of change. They've been talking about it for a couple of years. This didn't happen because of the budget situation, they've been talking about it for years, they have a culture of change. And I'm like, have at it. I don't see a lot of that's currently in state in federal law that prevents those districts from doing those types of things to move forward and do them on a regional level like that. I mean, that's to me the pieces of looking at where these innovations happen, moving forward with these innovations and see if they work. And you can bet, I mean, I find there's one thing I know for sure, it's the only thing I know for sure, is that all kids are different. 

Nothing works. There's no magic bullet that's going to work for everybody. So you've got to provide a variety of opportunities and create systems that do it. And I think people are looking at those systems, I think people are aggressive at looking at those systems. I know CESA 6 is, I know CESA 1 regionally is, and I know school districts individually are looking at ways to do things differently to meet the needs of kids. And that's a positive. I mean that and I think we'll see a lot of those innovations. I think we have a state where school districts have the ability to innovate, if they choose to. Some people are reluctant to because it makes people uncomfortable. And it's hard to change, so they go, oh no we can't because we have all these regulations or whatever and they're like, what are the regulations? Well, you know, there's a lot of them but when we get down to it, people have to have this will and you have to create the culture and I think that's what you've done in CESA 6 and to your credit and I think more people will look at that and try to follow suit. 

>> Dan, do you want to give in? >> Yeah, this whole notion of innovation, it strikes me, it's a very difficult thing to balance and I'm obviously biased given the work that I do that we have to make our schools as strong as they can be. In other words, it's about how we build better capacity to provide the best education in all of our schools and have strong schools and we have school improvement plans for all of our schools. And we're monitoring progress and we're adjusting those goals and we're providing support to ensure that good outcomes, better outcomes come for kids. But having said that, I know that we're in a time where people are looking for different ideas around you know, the best ways to educate kids. And it's been a difficult conversation because in this resource constrained time, you know, do you really focus on your own schools making them stronger or do you look at these very innovative models and you know, I've come to believe that we need to find a balance in that conversation. Recognizing that the data, referencing charter schools that I'm aware of which say that there are quality charter schools, there are quality public schools, there are poor charter schools, there are poor public schools as well. And so to look at that as the magic bullet I think is wrong. So where we've kind of come down on this issue around these charters and innovative programs is that we need to have an open mind and an open eye to them and the way right now, if you want to just look at charters, there are three charters in the Madison Metropolitan School District, one is new, opening this fall, Badger Rock Middle School and one is, an additional one is under study right now, you know the program that the Urban League has asked us to work with them and to consider as a program for male students. So that conversation is happening but one of the things that we decided to do as a result of our strategic plan is that we have now formed a committee to study innovative and alternative models. Because what we're finding ourselves and I don't think it'll ever end because people from outside have some ideas that they want us to consider but we're in a reactive mode only so what we're trying to do is to move more toward a proactive mode. 

So how many innovative and alternative designs should we be looking at? What should they be? Should there be more charters, should there be magnets, should there be schools within schools that, you know, that offer more specialized learning? And that's going to take about a year to do that study. And we want to take the time to do that study well and we have a very large committee of school and community people working with us on this. So I think through that, I think we can get to an answer for ourselves, how should we innovate in the Madison Metropolitan School District, as opposed to just intervene in a reactive mode and I know that there are some perceptions that we haven't been as open as we should be to these other ideas and what we're trying to do is to be open to the ideas that we think will advance learning for kids in our school district. >> I have a question over here. >> Hi my name is Kristin Laclair. I teach K-1. And Superintendent Nerad mentioned nurturing teachers, I'm just not feeling the love right now. (laughter) (applause) Thanks. Hi. Saw them on the square. 

I think one of the issues that I'd really like you to address is this charter school and there's a bill tomorrow, ten o'clock, I hope some people will be there. And I know, Senator Olson, I know you're here and listening and I think this is a very interesting dialogue, to get very specific. You talk about charter schools, really where are we on charter schools? And I know there's people that know a lot more than I do. I came from Connecticut where I got my master's degree. I looked at a lot of charter schools and I looked how it pulled away, for example, at the Bridgeport community, how it stripped them of their tax money yet left their schools high and dry with a higher percentage, 80% poverty and maybe 200 kids benefited. So you know, I don't see the plus, honestly. And I don't see the plus in having a student being taught by somebody without a BA and without any kind of education. (applause)  Where are you guys on that? >> Well, I mean, I've tried to respond in terms of we're taking the time to really decide where should we innovate, what types of programs are acceptable to the district and what types of programs aren't acceptable to the district. And I believe that they're staying the same, if you have charters, the same standards should apply, including teacher licensers. So that's where I'm at with that issue. 

You know, and I also believe that in terms of this, we have to be very careful that it doesn't result in reduced resources to our schools. That's a tough dynamic and I think that that's what caused me to be more supportive of what's called instrumentality charters. If we're going to have them, they should be instrumentalities of the school district, parcel of the district so that we can have that conversation about are we balancing the right things? Are we taking away from our own schools and creating a charter because I think that's problematic in doing that. And the other thing, and I do intend, if time permits it on the schedule is I'm very concerned, to testify tomorrow. I'm very concerned about this notion of an independent chartering and board. Because I believe that we have to place the trust in local school boards, that's why they're elected to make these kinds of decisions. (applause) And I think that particular nuance of the bill is problematic. And so those are some of my responses to that. >> Thank you. >> But at the same time, I don't think we can afford to not be part of a conversation. 

We have to figure out where we land with that conversation, but it can't be a closed mind on innovative and alternative programs for young people. >> But you are looking at tomorrow, I mean, you're looking at that bill and you're saying, oh my heavens, look at this? >> That's correct. >> You know, who's going to make, who's going to be that nine member? >> Right. >> The Governor's going to pick three? The head of the Senate's going to pick three and the head of representative's going to pick three. There's your nine right there. Is that going to represent me or any school board I'm a part of? Sorry, I just asked. >> We have another question. >> That was not a question, sorry. >> It's okay. We have another question back here. 

I also want to mind people who are watching this as an Internet stream to send their questions as an email to questions@wisconsinacademy.org >> So my name is John Wright and I wanted to tie together these ideas of innovation and the idea that you brought up earlier of keeping challenges there for everyone. And as I look at that, it seems to me the best approach is to increase the amount of what Fred Newmann called authentic learning in schools and if you ask, how is that actually going to happen, how are those kinds of innovations going to take place? Seems to be that that comes from the grassroots of the teachers themselves. So it seems like there needs to be a way of empowering the teachers to exert more, to be able to exert more innovations in the ways that they try to address the needs of the individual people in the classes. Because right now, it seems there is a fetter on them that is there because their need to try to address particular standards for the other things that are required by them. So I'd like you to comment on those ideas. >> To just comment, so you're asking for comments on the issue of empowering teacher's innovations? >> That's right. And you know, starting at the grassroots rather than top down. >> Let's see. Joan, do you want to take that first? >> I would. I think that that is absolutely spot on. 

The teachers in the classrooms are the ones that know the students the best, they have access to the data, I think that if we listen to them, we would find a whole lot of innovative things that they would like to put into practice across classrooms all across Wisconsin. I think that we have to give them the flexibility, however, so that they're able to do the innovating within their classroom and within their schools. And I fear sometimes that their hands are tied, maybe that's just my opinion, but I fear that if we don't loosen up some of the work rules that they find themselves tied to, that it makes it difficult to be innovative even within their own schools. So, I think that absolutely, the teachers are the professionals that know the kids the best and they know their data the best and they know how to read that data and if they have the tools at their hands, some of that technology tools, they would be able to customize learning for their kids. >> Thank you. There's another question back here. >> My name is Melanie Schmidt and am I biased to be up front about it because I think there's a necessary partnership that occurs between the schools and between the community in order to have that student success. And I'm curious for each of you since you represent different perspectives on the issue, what do you see as the call to action for the business leaders, the parents, the community leaders leaders who are here who clearly have an interest and believe that there's a necessary need for some action, what's your call to action for all of us? >> Call to action. Mike. >> Why am I always first? >> There you are, you're called on. 

There's your call to action. >> Always the tough ones. This is what I would say and it goes back to my belief that when a child enters into our system, a first grader, a kindergartner, we're saying to them, you're going to read and you're going to learn to do math, and we are going to help you as the teacher, our system, the principal, our community, your mom and dad, it's everybody. And we always look at whose to blame when kids don't succeed? Well I would turn it around and say, who to we attribute when kids do succeed? We attribute that to the parents, to the community, to the environment that they're in and to the school and so that's who has to take ownership in this particular piece. We all know this. There are kids that come into school that never have been read to. Now they're in school and there are some kids that come to school, they've been read to every single day. It starts when a child is born and it starts in the care of the physician talking to the parent about what's in the best interest of your child educationally all the way up. And if our kids in a community succeed, in a community that does succeed with all kids, then you can bet there's a lot of people to thank for that. And when kids don't succeed, there's a lot of people that are at blame. 

You get into this, people will go well, I can't do anything because look at the way they came to my classroom. They're in your classroom, you can do something with them. Every kid can move along and should move along in your classroom, but its everybody's job. I always would like too line up kids across a football field and say to them your going to run down from this end of the football field to the other end and your all going to make it and we're all going to help you do it. We're all going to help you move down that line. It's going to be the pharmacist then the street then it's going to be the business person. We're all going to help you get to that line because you're all going to graduate. That's kind of an ownership of education that we have to have I believe in our communities. It's an ownership and everybody plays a role. Getting kids to school, keeping them in school, rewarding them, getting them involved in business partnerships, but it is this belief that everybody plays a role and everybody should celebrate in the success when kids achieve, everybody should. 

In turn, they should all take a little bit of the blame when we have kids that fail. >> Thank you. >> Just quickly, I think that there are some real partnerships that ought to be happening in every community with the business sector, the school board, and the teachers and the educational leaders in the school community. It ought to be around those authentic learning experiences for students that we were talking about earlier. We'd like to see students, especially at that high school level be offered experiences in some of those businesses. That's just one small example of a partnership that could happen and should happen. So that kids have those experiences while they're still in high school. There's a whole lot of other places where businesses and industry could really invest volunteer time, finances for venture capital so some of this innovation that these classroom teachers would like to do if they had the resources to do it. There's all those kind of partnerships, the list would just go on and on. I think that's really, really important. 

>> Thank You. I know Ronny's got lots of people queued up and Ronny you've got lots of people who-- more people who want to be up here. >> My name is Karen and I'll give you the call to action that you're asking for. If you don't pay to educate your going to pay to incarcerate. The state of Wisconsin spends over $40,000 per year, per inmate to keep people behind bars. Dr. Nerad do you get $40,000 a year per pupil? >> No, we don't. >> Dan, can you just do that a little louder? >> No we don't. Clearly we don't. (laughter) >> I just wanted to make sure everyone heard that. >> Don't you see the problem here? >> I don't want to be subtle about that. 

I mean where do we want to invest is your point. The point that I would urge us is it's so important to invest in kids and we need to have these conversations about what is the appropriate way to do that. >> What's the penalty we pay when we don't do it well. >> The common core standards were mentioned at the beginning. Now the mathematics standards have parts of them that are significantly different than what has gone on before. Similar to what's being done in a number of countries, mathematics will be easier to learn if the standards are taught well. The problem is that many of the teachers don't know the material because they've never had it. So there's massive professional development that's going to be needed. Content professional development, what's being planned for that? >> Dan do you want to give some examples? >> I certainly agree with that, in particular the point around professional development. We are working with the university on a project. 

>> That was my plug. >> What's that? Maybe you should explain it. >> No, no, no. >> It's a wonderful effort that obviously we need to stay at for a good number of years that provide that content knowledge to our middle level educators. That's where we're starting in terms of ensuring a better understanding of those standards. As well as a kind of professional development to be able to teach to those standards. That's a good example of what I meant earlier around building greater capacity within our system to teach as well as we can possibly teach. >> Thank you. >> I have a question. Most of what I've heard here is addressing the needs. 

>> Could you tell us your name? >> My name is Adrianne. What I have heard here is much attention being paid to children that need a great deal of help and the assumption is how can we help those children? What happens if you take children who, you've got some third graders who could barely read. You've got some third graders that only get their books out of the young adults or higher section of the library. What would happen if you're going to give two extra sessions to the very bottom, what would happen if you gave that to the top? What is happening if all of education is one of trying to meet the needs of those at the bottom what your doing essentially is putting a lid on the top or encouraging, by not doing something else, your students or their parents to place them into private schools if they can afford it. >> Can we take this answer in two parts? Dan you'd mentioned that one of the issues in the Madison metropolitan school district was the need of high achieving students. Then maybe Mike can give us a perspective of some of the things that are happening state wide. >> This is not an either or issue. It's a both and issue. That's why we committed as a district to revitalize our talented and gifted plan in the school district. We have a lot of work to do on that frankly, I'll be the first to admit that to be able to implement that plan is going to take time and take additional resources. 

First and foremost, it's going to take commitment from people like me to ensure that we're meeting the commitments of that plan. I really want to underscore this is not an either or thing. We want to at times frame it up that way, it has to be about advancing kids who are meeting standards. It also has to be about eliminating achievement gaps. I will also tell you that in the time we're in we are making real choices about where we place our resources because they are very limited today. My assurance is that we're going to keep our eyes focused on the needs of all of our kids and obviously the community will judge over time how well we are doing that. Frankly, we do need some help that's another partnership issue. We do need help around how we can come together more as a community to ensure that we are focusing on all kids. Kids that are meeting standards, as well as kids who aren't meeting standards. It's not either or it's both. 

>> I'd agree with Dan, what you say, and both. When I talked about a response intervention system. Response intervention system runs for the continuum of kids. From the kids that come into 1st grade, who are not reading at their 1st grade level, interventions are necessary for them. To the child whose reading at the 5th grade level you don't say to that person, Anna you better slow down a little bit so everybody else catches up. Right? You've got to be able to move her down the road as well. That's what a response intervention is. To intervene when a child is behind and to intervene when a child needs more to move ahead. It's systematic. It's not just we'll give them a little extra homework, it's a systematic approach to serving those needs. 

That's what the response intervention system is. That's why it's a systems change model that takes a lot of work to implement into a school district, but it's both ends of the continuum. >> There's a question over here. >> My name's Carol. I taught for a lot of years. Before that, I want to mention that you might be overlooking some of your most readily available and cheapest resources in those smart students. Those smart students can tutor other students when those smart students are sitting there wasting time because they're finished with the assignment or whatever. They could be helping this kid over here who is having trouble learning to read or learning to do the math or whatever, to understand it better. In fact, I did that years ago, way back when so that's not an innovative idea actually. >> Thank you. 

>> I certainly support this whole notion of cross age tutoring. On the other hand,asking advanced learners to do that and have that be their education plan isn't fair either. It's using cross age tutoring where it makes sense, but that shouldn't be a replacement for what these advanced learners need in the classroom that will advance their learning. >> Thanks. I think Jason has a question from our online audience. >> This is a question from Emily who is an elementary ed student at UW Madison. Rachel writes, can you please address any of the specific changes you propose in making the testing we currently use to evaluate successful in the district. How do you evaluate success vis-a-vis testing, I think is the question. >> How do you evaluate success vis-a-vis testing. Standardized testing and I assume we may be talking about testing as it relates to students or are we talking about assessment as it relates to teachers? So I'll let you all take a hand at that. 

(laughter) You can do either one, this is an either or. >> I'll just start. With our next generation of learning we do see the importance of standardized testing for students so that you can still show that they're meeting those standards that are set by our state. We'd also like students to have electronic portfolios because we really believe that there's more ways to show that students have mastered their learning other than just test scores. Quite frankly, we're missing a whole lot of the picture of a students school career if we don't have another way to show that. We're building electronic portfolios for kids so when they go onto the next level of learning they can show some of the activities that they've participated in schools. With teachers, we are putting together and rolling out in April a teacher-- I just lost it. What was I going to say about teacher competencies? Kind of the value add motto that UW Madison has been pushing is one proponent of it. Teacher competencies so that you know when teachers are expert teachers so that it's not just the testing of the teachers when they get through the Praxis test to make sure that they're qualified. You're able to move teachers into the next level from an initial educator to a master educator to a professional. 

We're trying to set up those structures so that you can evaluate and mentor teachers as well. >> We have another question from a viewer. I appreciate your thoughts on letting students learn at their own pace instead of mandating all students sticking together through each grade level. Over the last 30 years we have added at least two years of education to the front end of our students educational career. First kindergarten now 4K and some have early childhood preschool etc. Are there any studies or states who are considering graduating student at age 16 so that the education process is 12 years long instead of 14 or 15? >> That's definitely an issue that's been discussed and I'm not sure who wants to start that one off. Or who wants to answer that one and maybe we can take one more after that question. >> From my perspective I understand the need around focus on individual learners as some kids are ready to move on. We should have our systems be more responsive. As a general response I'm concerned that we don't have enough time in our school day in this country and we don't enough time in our school year. 

To what extent do we want to shorten that, to compromise overall what young kids are going to be able to know and be able to do through their experience with us. I can get to that point around the needs of individual learners, but I have a problem looking at it from a point of view as total system design. Because I don't think we have enough time right now. >> Joan as part of your proposals, isn't there some transition into community colleges and higher education as well? >> Right. I was just trying to think of the states that we looked at when we pulled that together and there are five states that participated in a study where you could move on when you were ready and the kids could get out of high school at age 16 and 17 and go onto another level of learning. (inaudible) >> Well I have another question here. >> Wait a second, 'cause Mike wants to say something about this issue. >> In this issue, if a kid, if a child, a student is ready. They're ready to go on college, they're ready to go onto the world of work we ought to have options for kids to be able to test out. Or we ought to have options for kids to be able to take college courses in their high school. 

They ought to be dual enrollment credits, transcripted credits so those kids can continue to advance and not just be sitting around in a high school when they're ready to move on. We ought to have those options and Joan talked about some of those. >> We have our last question. >> I'm Connie, I was one of those precocious readers who was told to slow down when I was probably in 3rd grade so that my peers could catch up with me. I'm also a former employee of the Madison Metropolitan school district, a teacher. I would like to ask you, well I'll just say that having been a teacher for quite some time I always felt that innovation was lagging. Particularly in a school district as large as MMSD, it's hard to keep up with new trends and yet teachers are really the feet on the ground in terms of what's going on for teachers. In the context of what's happened in our city, in our state in the last month, six weeks, what would you say to people who are considering being teachers right now? How can you encourage maybe me, to return to the classroom? >> How can you encourage people who know that the need is there, but they're really struggling with why, oh why, oh why would I do that? >> I think that's a wonderful question. If we could take each one of our panelists as kind of our closing comments. Why would you encourage somebody to go into, stay in, or return to teaching or education as a field? Dan do you want to start? >> Even before this crisis, I've been personally worried about that. 

Trying to think about the minds of 19-year-olds, you could pick an 18-year-old or a 20-year-old. What would compel them to look at teaching as a profession of first choice? You know I'm very much worried about that because teaching and public service in total need to be fields of first choice, not fields of second choice. We need people that really have this interest and that it's in their heart and in their belly to be public servants and to be teachers. What I'm worried about in the now and the time that we're in, we have even more messages about are these fields that I want to go into? I hope in fact we can settle this down at some point fairly soon because there's not only a lot at stake around teachers still in the field and not feeling the love as was mentioned earlier. There's also a lot at stake in terms of ensuring that young people say, that's what I want to do, I can serve and I want to do this work. I'm very worried that we are creating messages of undervaluing even if we're not intending to do that. That becomes the outcome here and I think we have to have our eye on that issue very, very carefully. I'm hoping and I know this is a contentious time, but I'm hoping we can find a way to settle things down in a way that can return our schools. Our schools are filled with tension now as well. Whether this should have happened or that should have happened I can't get into that argument as superintendent because I have to deal with the fact that there's tension there that now exists. 

We have a responsibility to nurture our staff, to have the right kind of conversations that allow them to feel valued and that we move on in support of our people. I don't have all the ideas around that, but I do believe that that's what has to happen. >> Thank you Dan. Joan? >> I always encourage high school students going into college and second career people that are thinking about getting into education. When they say to me, why would I want to go into education now? The kids are so hard and it's so difficult being in the teaching situation. It's a noble profession. It's a place where you really make a difference of the lives of kids every single day. It's a profession where it's changing and it needs to change. Technology can be used differently, students can be taught in many different, there's so many different resources available to you. Content resources on the web, things that you can bring into the classroom that you never could before. 

You have to be creative and you've got to look for different ways of doing the business. I think it's more exciting time to be in education than it ever has been in the past. I really look forward to the day when our kids are teachers because they're the natives with this technology. They' know how to use it so differently than we do. We don't get it. Sorry, I use it everyday and I don't get it, but my kids get it. When they can teach other kids how to use technology on how to find things using technology it's amazing. >> Thank you Joan. Mike? >> When I graduated from college and went into teaching and I was looking for an apartment in this community. I said, wow I wonder if I'll be able to find an apartment? Somebody said to me, you'll find an apartment, you're a teacher. 

You're a pillar of this community. That's what they said to me and I was like I am? Made me feel pretty good. Here a fact, countries that we're always compared too that are doing well, that do well, we always compare to those countries. Here's a commonality of those countries. They hold their teachers in high esteem and those teachers are supported within their systems. We have to get back to that. We have to make teaching the profession that is deserves to be and this didn't happen because of a budget debate. This is a drum beat that's been going on for time, it builds. We all can't let that happen because you all know teachers, many of you are teachers, all you need to do as I always say to people, take a pair of handcuffs hook yourself to a good teacher for three days and then tell me what you think of them. They'll tell you, they're wonderful. 

Right? That's all you need to do. (applause)  >> Thank you panelists. Thank you all for your questions. I'm going to turn this back over to Margaret. >> For just a second, thank all for you thanking our panel and especially Julie for keeping us on task and on time. We really appreciate that belief in the Wisconsin idea that we know Dean Underwood has and expresses by being here tonight and reaching out to the community across this state. Thank you again to all of our panelists. If I could just remind the audience of two upcoming events really quickly and to thank again Dean Underwood and the School of Education who are making the possibility of this being streamed live tonight because we really do appreciate being able to reach a statewide audience. There are two events coming up: next Tuesday, March 29 at 7:00 right here is the final of the three-part Education is Fundamental series. This is a talk by Adam Gamoran, Professor of Sociology and Education Policy studies at UW-Madison and director of the Wisconsin's Center on Education Research. 

I hope you'll join us then. Mark your calendars for April 12 you're invited to this season's last Academy Evening. When two leading researchers on water, Rebecca Klapper from UW Milwaukee and her research on Great Lakes water and UW LaCrosse's, Mark Sandheinrich's is talking about river quality. This program is called Water Course: A Conversation on the Health of Wisconsin's Lakes and Rivers. We hope can join us for the next two presentations that are coming up. Thank you again all of you for coming and we hope you'll all become members of the Wisconsin Academy. (applause)