Category: Educational Leadership

  • Why in-building coverage is a lifeline for school safety

    Why in-building coverage is a lifeline for school safety

    Key points:

    During a school emergency, every minute that passes is crucial, but in those moments, a reliable connection can mean the difference between confusion and coordinated response. Yet, across the country, there is an unseen danger confronting school staff, students, and emergency personnel. This is inadequate communication connectivity within school buildings.

    For years, schools have implemented fortified doors, cameras, and lockdown exercises. This is because communication is the unseen link that connects each safety measure. However, communication can weaken once someone enters a structure composed of concrete, steel, and reinforced glass. This is unacceptable during a time when almost every call to 9-1-1 is generated by a cell phone.

    The changing face of emergency response

    More than 75 percent of emergency calls now come from wireless phones, according to the Federal Communications Commission. When something goes wrong in a classroom or gym, the first instinct isn’t to reach for a landline–it’s to pull out a smartphone.

    But what happens when that signal can’t get out?

    This problem becomes even more pressing as the nation moves toward Next-Generation 9-1-1 (NG911), a major upgrade that allows dispatchers to receive text messages, images, and even live video. These new capabilities give first responders eyes and ears inside the building before they arrive–but only if the network works indoors.

    At the same time, new laws are raising the bar. Alyssa’s Law, named after Alyssa Alhadeff, a student killed in the 2018 Parkland school shooting, requires schools in several states to install silent panic alarms directly linked to law enforcement. Similar legislation is spreading nationwide. These systems rely on strong, reliable indoor wireless coverage–the very thing many older buildings lack.

    When walls become barriers

    School buildings weren’t designed for today’s communications reality. Thick concrete walls, metal framing, energy-efficient glass, and sprawling multi-story layouts often block or weaken wireless signals. During an active-shooter event or a tornado warning, students may shelter in basements, cafeterias, or interior hallways–places where signal strength is weakest.

    After several high-profile incidents, post-incident reports have revealed the same pattern: first responders losing radio contact as they entered, dispatchers unable to locate or communicate with callers, and delays caused by poor in-building connectivity. These breakdowns aren’t just technical–they’re human. They affect how quickly students are found, how fast responders can coordinate, and how well lives can be protected.

    Technology that saves seconds–and lives

    Fortunately, there are solutions available, and they are becoming more accessible.

    The Emergency Responder Radio Coverage Systems (ERRCS) can also be referred to as Distributed Antennas Systems (DAS) within a public safety setting. The technology is responsible for extending radio communication coverage within building infrastructures. ERRCS are required within schools due to measures put into place within fire regulations.

    For communication and safety needs, cellular DAS, also known as small cells, are required to expand cellular coverage on a campus. These enable students, faculty, and staff to make calls, send texts, and exchange vital multimedia messages to 9-1-1 dispatchers, which is crucial during the NG911 era.

    Despite such technologies, smaller schools on more limited budgets can still leverage signal boosters and repeaters to fill coverage gaps within gyms, cafeterias, and other similar areas. At the same time, newer managed Wi-Fi solutions that offer E911 functionality can serve as a backup safety net that can transmit multimedia messages over secure Internet communications when cellular connectivity is no longer available.

    Best practices for schools

    Start with a coverage assessment. A comparison of where signals are dropping, not only for public safety communications but generally across each of the main cellular providers, will provide school administration with information on where to make improvements.

    Schools should then coordinate with the fire departments, the office of emergency management, and wireless service providers prior to implementing any system. This will ensure that they comply with local regulations and interoperability with first responders.

    Finally, maintenance and functionality are just as important as final installation. Communication systems should receive periodic tests, preferably during safety drills to verify that they work well under stress.

    Bridging the funding gap

    Improving in-building communications infrastructure can sound costly, but several funding pathways exist. Some states offer school-safety grants or federal assistance programs that cover technology investments tied to life safety. Districts can also explore partnerships with local governments or leverage E-rate-style funding for eligible network upgrades.

    Beyond compliance or funding, though, this is an equity issue. Every student, teacher, and responder deserves the same chance to communicate in a crisis–whether in a small-town elementary school or a large urban high school.

    A call to action

    A school is more than its classrooms and hallways, it is also a community of individuals each relying on others during times of fear and uncertainty. Perhaps one of the most straightforward ways to make this community more resilient is to provide a strong indoor building communication environment, both for public safety communications and cellular devices.

    The time has come to make connectivity a vital safety component rather than a luxury, because silence is simply not an option when seconds are at stake.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Why K-12 educators need data literacy, not just data

    Why K-12 educators need data literacy, not just data

    Key points:

    Walk into any data meeting at a K-12 school today, and you’ll likely see a familiar scene: educators huddled around printed reports, highlighters in hand, trying to make sense of student data spread across multiple dashboards. If you’ve ever left one of these meetings feeling mentally exhausted without clear next steps, you’re not alone. The problem isn’t that we lack data in education, but rather that most dashboards show us the past–not the path ahead. It’s like trying to drive while only looking in the rearview mirror.

    The education sector sits on massive amounts of student data, yet most schools lack data maturity. They’ve committed to using data and may even have systems that centralize records. But they haven’t embraced what’s possible when we move from having data to using it well; from describing what happened to predicting what’s likely to happen if nothing changes.

    We have dashboards–now what?

    Every district has dashboards. We can see attendance rates, assessment scores, and demographic breakdowns. These tools tell us what happened, which is useful–but increasingly insufficient for the challenges facing K-12 schools. By the time we’re reacting to chronic absenteeism or declining grades, we’re already behind. And, when does an educator have time to sit down, pull up multiple dashboards, and interpret what they say about each student?

    The power of any data dashboard isn’t in the dashboard itself. It’s in the conversations that happen around it. This is where data literacy becomes essential, and it goes far beyond simply reading a chart or calculating an average.

    Data literacy means asking better questions and approaching data with curiosity. It requires recognizing that the answers we get are entirely driven by the questions we ask. A teacher who asks, “Which students failed the last assessment?” will get very different insights than one who asks, “Which students showed growth but still haven’t reached proficiency, and what patterns exist among them?”

    We must also acknowledge the emotional dimension of data in schools. Some educators have been burned when data was used punitively instead of for improvement. That resistance is understandable, but not sustainable. The solution isn’t to check professional expertise at the door. It’s to approach data with both curiosity and courage, questioning it in healthy ways while embracing it as a tool for problem-solving.

    From descriptive to predictive: What’s possible

    Let’s distinguish between types of analytics. Descriptive analytics tell us what happened: Jorge was absent 15 days last semester. Diagnostic analytics tell us why: Jorge lives in a household without reliable transportation, and his absences cluster on Mondays and Fridays.

    Now we get to the game-changers: predictive and prescriptive analytics. Predictive analytics use historical patterns to forecast what’s likely to happen: Based on current trends, Jorge is at 80 percent risk of chronic absenteeism by year’s end. Prescriptive analytics go further by helping the educator understand what they should do to intervene. If we connect Jorge’s family with transportation support and assign a mentor for weekly check-ins, we can likely reduce his absence risk by 60 percent.

    The technology to do this already exists. Machine learning can identify patterns across thousands of student records that would take humans months to discern. AI can surface early warning signs before problems become crises. These tools amplify teacher judgment, serving up insights and allowing educators to focus their expertise where it matters most.

    The cultural shift required

    Before any school rushes to adopt the next analytics tool, it’s worth pausing to ask: What actually happens when someone uses data in their daily work?

    Data use is deeply human. It’s about noticing patterns, interpreting meaning, and deciding what to do next. That process looks different for every educator, and it’s shaped by the environment in which they work: how much time they have to meet with colleagues, how easily they can access the right data, and whether the culture encourages curiosity or compliance.

    Technology can surface patterns, but culture determines whether those patterns lead to action. The same dashboard can spark collaboration in one school and defensiveness in another. That’s why new tools require attention to governance, trust, and professional learning–not just software configuration.

    At the end of the day, the goal isn’t simply to use data more often, but to use it more effectively.

    Moving toward this future requires a fundamental shift in how we think about data: from a compliance exercise to a strategic asset. The most resilient schools in the coming years will have cultures where data is pervasive, shared transparently, and accessible in near real-time to the people who need it. Think of it as an instructional co-pilot rather than a monkey on the back.

    This means moving away from data locked in the central office, requiring a 10-step approval process to access. Instead, imagine a decentralized approach where a fifth-grade team can instantly generate insights about their students’ reading growth, or where a high school counselor can identify seniors at risk of not graduating with enough time to intervene.

    This kind of data democratization requires significant change management. It demands training, clear protocols, and trust. But the payoff is educators empowered to make daily decisions grounded in timely, relevant information.

    Turning data into wisdom

    Data has been part of education from the very beginning. Attendance records, report cards, and gradebooks have always informed teaching. What’s different now is the volume of data available and the sophistication of tools to analyze it. K-12 educators don’t need to become data scientists, but they do need to become data literate: curious, critical consumers of information who can ask powerful questions and interpret results within the rich context of their professional expertise.

    The schools that harness their data effectively will be able to identify struggling students earlier, personalize interventions more effectively, and use educator time more strategically. But this future requires us to move beyond the dashboard and invest in the human capacity to transform data into wisdom. That transformation starts with data literacy, and it starts now.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • How professional learning transformed our teachers

    How professional learning transformed our teachers

    Key points:

    When you walk into a math classroom in Charleston County School District, you can feel the difference. Students aren’t just memorizing steps–they’re reasoning through problems, explaining their thinking, and debating solutions with their peers. Teachers aren’t rushing to cover content, because their clear understanding of students’ natural learning progressions allows them to spend more time exploring the why behind the math.

    This cultural shift didn’t come from adopting a new curriculum or collecting more data. Instead, we transformed math education by investing deeply in our educators through OGAP (The Ongoing Assessment Project) professional learning–an approach that has reshaped not only instruction, but the confidence and professional identity of our teachers.

    Why we needed a change

    Charleston County serves more than 50,000 students across more than 80 schools. For years, math achievement saw small gains, but not the leaps we hoped for. Our teachers were dedicated, and we had high-quality instructional materials, but something was missing.

    The gap wasn’t our teacher’s effort. It was their insight–understanding the content they taught flexibly and deeply.

    Too often, instruction focused on procedures rather than understanding. Teachers could identify whether a student got a problem right or wrong, but not always why they responded the way they did. To truly help students grow, we needed a way to uncover their thinking and guide next steps more intentionally.

    What makes this professional learning different

    Unlike traditional PD that delivers a set of strategies to “try on Monday,” this learning model takes educators deep into how students develop mathematical ideas over time.

    Across four intensive days, teachers explore research-based learning progressions in additive, multiplicative, fractional, and proportional reasoning. They examine real student work to understand how misconceptions form and what those misconceptions reveal about a learner’s thought process. It is also focused on expanding and deepening teachers’ understanding of the content they teach so they are more flexible in their thinking. Teachers appreciate that the training isn’t abstract; it’s rooted in everyday classroom realities, making it immediately meaningful.

    Instead of sorting responses into right and wrong, teachers ask a more powerful question: What does this show me about how the student is reasoning?

    That shift changes everything. Teachers leave with:

    • A stronger grasp of content
    • The ability to recognize error patterns
    • Insight into students’ conceptual gaps
    • Renewed confidence in their instructional decisions

    The power of understanding the “why”

    Our district uses conceptual math curricula, including Eureka Math², Reveal Math, and Math Nation. These “HQIM” programs emphasize reasoning, discourse, and models–exactly the kind of instruction our students need.

    But conceptual materials only work when teachers understand the purpose behind them.

    Before this professional learning, teachers sometimes felt unsure about lesson sequencing and the lesson intent, including cognitive complexity. Now, they understand why lessons appear in a specific order and how models support deeper understanding. It’s common to hear teachers say: “Oh, now I get why it’s written that way!” They are also much more likely to engage deeply with the mathematical models in the programs when they understand the math education research behind the learning progressions that curriculum developers use to design the content.

    That insight helps them stay committed to conceptual instruction even when students struggle, shifting the focus from “Did they get it?” to “How are they thinking about it?”

    Transforming district culture

    The changes go far beyond individual classrooms.

    We run multiple sessions of this professional learning each year, and they fill within days. Teachers return to their PLCs energized, bringing exit tickets, student work, and new questions to analyze together.

    We also invite instructional coaches and principals to attend. This builds a shared professional language and strengthens communication across the system. The consistency it creates is particularly powerful for new teachers who are still building confidence in their instructional decision-making.

    The result?

    • Teachers now invite feedback.
    • Coaches feel like instructional partners, not evaluators.
    • Everyone is rowing in the same direction.

    This shared understanding has become one of the most transformative parts of our district’s math journey.

    Results we can see

    In the past five years, Charleston County’s math scores have climbed roughly 10 percentage points. But the most meaningful growth is happening inside classrooms:

    • Students are reasoning more deeply.
    • Teachers demonstrate stronger content knowledge and efficacy in using math models.
    • PLC conversations focus on evidence of student thinking.
    • Instruction is more intentional and responsive.

    Teachers are also the first to tell you whether PD is worth their time…and our teachers are asking for more. Many return to complete a second or third strand, and sometimes all four. We even have educators take the same strand more than once just to pick up on something they may have missed the first time. The desire to deepen their expertise shows just how impactful this learning has been. Participants also find it powerful to engage in a room where the collective experience spans multiple grade levels. This structure supports our goal of strengthening vertical alignment across the district.

    Prioritizing professional learning that works

    When professional learning builds teacher expertise rather than compliance, everything changes. This approach doesn’t tell teachers what to teach; it helps them understand how students learn.

    And once teachers gain that insight, classrooms shift. Conversations deepen. Confidence grows. Students stop memorizing math and start truly understanding it.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Cutting costs without cutting corners

    Cutting costs without cutting corners

    Key points:

    With the end of federal COVID-19 emergency funding and the inherent volatility of state income tax revenues, California school districts are in an era of financial uncertainty. Fortunately, Jurupa Unified School District is already several years into the process of finding ways to track and control expenses while still supporting teachers and staff so they can provide the best possible educational experience for our students. Here’s how we’re making staffing and payroll processes more efficient, starting with the perennially challenging extra duty.

    Getting a handle on extra duty

    In addition to our salaried staff, we have a number of part-time, hourly, and what we call “extra duty” assignments. Because a significant amount of our funding comes from grants, many of our assignments are temporary or one-time. We fill those positions with extra duty requests so we’re not committed to ongoing payroll obligations.

    For many years, those extra duty requests and time cards were on paper, which meant the payroll department was performing redundant work to enter the information in the payroll system. The request forms we used were also on paper, making it very difficult to track the actual time being used back to the request, so we could be sure that the hours being used were within the limitations of the request. We needed a better control mechanism that would help school sites stay within budget, as well as a more formal budget mechanism to encumber the department and site budgets to cover the extra duty requests.

    Budgeting can get very complicated because it’s cross-functional. It includes a position-control component, a payroll component, and a financial budgeting component. We needed a solution that could make all of those universes work together. The mission was either to find a system or build one. Our county office started a pilot program with our district to build a system, but ultimately decided against continuing with this effort due to the resources required to sustain such a system for 23 county districts. 

    Our district engaged in a competitive process and chose Helios Ed. Within six months, our team developed and launched a new system to address extra duty. Since then, we have saved more than $100,000 in staffing costs, time expenses, and budget overruns because of the stronger internal controls we now have in place.

    A more efficient (and satisfied) payroll department

    Eliminating redundant data entry and working with data instead of paper has allowed us to reduce staffing by two full-time equivalents–not through layoffs, but through attrition. And because they have a system that is handling data entry for them, our payroll department has more time to give quality to their work, and feel they are working at a level more aligned to their skills.

    Finding efficiencies in your district

    While Jurupa Unified has found efficiencies and savings in these specific areas, every school district is different. As many California district leaders like to say, we have 1,139 school districts –and just as many ways of doing things. With that in mind, there are some steps to the process of moving from paper to online systems (or using online systems more efficiently) that apply universally.

    1. Sit down and identify your objectives. What are the critical components that you must have? 
    2. Make the decision to make or buy. When COVID first hit, Jurupa Unified created its own invoice-routing system through SharePoint. We’ve also built an excursion request process in PowerApps that handles travel, conferences, and field trips. As our county office found out, though, when you’re bringing a number of functionalities together, it can make more sense to work with a vendor you trust.
    3. If you choose to buy software, be certain that it can do precisely what you need it to. If a vendor says they can develop a functionality along the way, ask to see the new feature before you buy.
    4. Be certain the vendor will be responsive. When it comes to a function such as payroll, you’re dealing with people’s livelihoods, and you need to know that if there’s something wrong with the system, or if you need help, that help is just a phone call away.

    Putting in a new payroll management system has made an enormous difference for our district, but it’s not the end of our cost-cutting process. We’re always looking at our different programs to see where we can cut back in ways that don’t impact the classroom. Ultimately, these changes are about ensuring that resources stay focused where they matter most. While budgets fluctuate and funding streams remain unpredictable, my team and I come to work every day because we believe in public education. I’m a product of public education myself, and I love waking up every day knowing that I can come back and support today’s students and teachers.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Modernizing education communications for safety and simplicity

    Modernizing education communications for safety and simplicity

    Key points:

    Schools, colleges, and universities face growing challenges in keeping their communities informed, connected, and engaged. From classroom collaboration to campus-wide alerts, reliable communication is critical to creating positive learning environments and student experiences.

    Currently, many educational institutions are weighed down by outdated and disjointed communication systems that hinder learning, experience, and even safety. Educators need technology that is both flexible and responsive, and these systems are falling short.  

    The campus communication disconnect

    Many schools find themselves in a fragmented communication trap, juggling a complex tech stack with outdated systems. On its own, each tool might work well, but when different applications are used for texts, emails, virtual classrooms, and emergency alerts, each with separate logins and interface, communication can become disjointed.

    School district IT teams are notoriously spread thin, and having fragmented communication tools that requires their own training, trouble shooting, and management is burdensome. This also adds unnecessary complexity for the wider faculty that can easily lead to missed messages or alerts. When taking safety into account, hampered communications in times like severe weather or lockdown can have serious repercussions.

    Outside of safety and complexity, patchworked communication systems can weigh schools down financially. Many platforms come with their own hidden fees or inconsistent licensing costs across departments. Those seeking to upgrade might face a block if budgets don’t have room for the initial investment, even though it could lead to long-term savings. This has left many schools in the position of maintaining a web of outdated tools like on-site servers or phone lines where potential benefits are overshadowed by price and complications.

    Key benefits of unified communications

    Faculty, students, families, and communities must be connected for impactful learning. Effective connection requires simplified and streamlined information sharing, which can be achieved through unifying communications. Modern, unified communication systems bring together channels like alerts, email, phone, messaging, and virtual learning into one platform, making it easier for schools to stay informed and engaged.

    Driven by a need for reliability, security, and budget predictability, 62.5% of educational institutions are now moving to UCaaS platforms, according to a 2025 Metrigy study. In practice, these platforms can enable teachers to reach the school nurse, contact a parent, or join a virtual classroom–all without switching platforms. For administrators, these tools can provide ecosystem management through one simple dashboard, reaching from individual campuses to entire school districts.

    Today’s learning environment requires flexibility. Whether class is fully remote or in person, modernized communication ensures both staff and students maintain consistent access to learning. Modern tools are also simplified–they can exist on the cloud in one platform, decreasing the need for separate servers, phone systems, or emergency alert tools.

    Modernized communication isn’t just convenient, but functions to bolster safety and responsiveness. For example, if a safety threat is reported, in real time, a unified system can automatically alert first responders, prompt crisis notifications, and confirm message distribution. Outside of emergencies, in a more day-to-day function, administrators can benefit from smoother operations like automated attendance alerts and streamlined family communications. 

    Uplevel with AI

    AI has emerged as a valuable partner for school administrators who perpetually need to do more with less. Within unified communications systems, AI can identify overlooked patterns and inefficiencies, such as if parent engagement rates climbed when sending a text as opposed to a phone call.

    Faculty can use AI to automate more administrative tasks like summarizing meeting notes, routing calls, or translating messages for multilingual families. These tools can help staff focus more on hands-on teaching and human interactions. Collated over time, these learnings can aid in decision making around staffing, communication approach, and resource allocation.

    Where to start

    Modernizing communication requires alignment between faculty, IT departments, and leadership. Before selecting a solution, school leaders should work to identify pain points and align goals across departments to ensure any updates serve both operational and academic priorities.

    When evaluating a consolidated communication solution, it’s important to consider tools that fit the specific needs of your institution, offering both flexibility and scalability. These solutions should work to unify legacy systems where needed, instead of completely gutting them. For example, an effective solution for your school might have the ability to work with bell or hardware phone systems while modernizing the rest of your communication tools into a single platform to minimize disruption and protect previous investments.

    A complete overnight rework of current communication systems is intimidating, and frankly, unrealistic. Instead, start by evaluating where a few systems can be consolidated and then gradually expand. This could look like first integrating messaging and emergency alerts before looking to incorporate analytics and collaboration tools.

    A more connected future

    The current education landscape is intrinsically dynamic, hybrid, and interconnected. Learning now takes place across both physical and digital spaces, requiring students and educators to collaborate seamlessly across locations and time zones.

    As advanced technology like AI continues to integrate into schools and universities, those that modernize their communications now will ensure they are ready to meet current and future educational needs for more effective, seamless, and safe learning environments.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • We built evaluation for accountability–now it’s time to build it for growth

    We built evaluation for accountability–now it’s time to build it for growth

    Key points:

    Teacher evaluations have been the subject of debate for decades. Breakthroughs have been attempted, but rarely sustained. Researchers have learned that context, transparency, and autonomy matter. What’s been missing is technology that enhances these at scale inside the evaluation process–not around it. 

    As an edtech executive in the AI era, I see exciting possibilities to bring new technology to bear on these factors in the longstanding dilemma of observing and rating teacher effectiveness.

    At the most fundamental level, the goals are simple, just as they are in other professions: provide accountability, celebrate areas of strong performance, and identify where improvement is needed. However, K-12 education is a uniquely visible and important industry. Between 2000 and 2015, quality control in K-12 education became more complex, with states, foundations, and federal policy all shaping the definition and measurement of a “proficient” teacher. 

    For instance, today’s observation cycle might include pre- and post-observation conferences plus scheduled and unscheduled classroom visits. Due to the potential for bias in personal observation, more weight has been given to student achievement, but after critics highlighted problems with measuring teacher performance via standardized test scores, additional metrics and artifacts were included as well.

    All of these changes have resulted in administrators spending more time on observation and evaluation, followed by copying notes between systems and drafting comments–rather than on timely, specific feedback that actually changes practice. “Even when I use Gemini or ChatGPT, I still spend 45 minutes rewriting to fit the district rubric,” one administrator noted.

    “When I think about the evaluation landscape, two challenges rise to the surface,” said Dr. Quintin Shepherd, superintendent at Pflugerville Independent School District in Texas. “The first is the overwhelming volume of information evaluators must gather, interpret, and synthesize. The second is the persistent perception among teachers that evaluation is something being done to them rather than something being done for them. Both challenges point in the same direction: the need for a resource that gives evaluators more capacity and teachers more clarity, immediacy, and ownership. This is where AI becomes essential.”

    What’s at stake

    School leaders are under tremendous pressure. Time and resources are tight. Achieving benchmarks is non-negotiable. There’s plenty of data available to identify patterns and understand what’s working–but analyzing it is not easy when the data is housed in multiple platforms that may not interface with one another. Generic AI tools haven’t solved this.  

    For teachers, professional development opportunities abound, and student data is readily available. But often they don’t receive adequate instructional mentoring to ideate and try out new strategies. 

    Districts that have experimented with AI to provide automated feedback of transcribed recordings of instruction have found limited impact on teaching practices. Teachers report skepticism that the evolving tech tools are able to accurately assess what is happening in their classrooms. Recent randomized controlled trials show that automated feedback can move specific practices when teachers engage with it. But that’s exactly the challenge: Engagement is optional. Evaluations are not. 

    Teachers whose observations and evaluations are compromised or whose growth is stymied by lost opportunities for mentoring may lose out financially. For example, in Texas, the 2025-26 school year is the data capture period for the Teacher Incentive Allotment. This means fair and objective reviews are more important than ever for educators’ future earning potential.

    For all of these reasons, the next wave of innovation has to live inside the required evaluation cycle, not off to the side as another “nice-to-have” tool.

    Streamlining the process

    My background at edtech companies has shown me how eager school leaders are to make data-informed decisions. But I know from countless conversations with administrators that they did not enter the education field to crunch numbers. They are motivated by seeing students thrive. 

    The breakthrough we need now is an AI-powered workspace that sits inside the evaluation system. Shepherd would like to see “AI that quietly assists with continuous evidence collection not through surveillance, but pattern recognition. It might analyze lesson materials for cognitive rigor, scan student work products to detect growth, or help teachers tag artifacts connected to standards.”

    We have the technology to create a collaborative workspace that can be mapped to the district’s framework and used by administrators, coaches, support teams, and educators to capture notes from observations, link them to goals, provide guidance, share lesson artifacts, engage in feedback discussions, and track growth across cycles. After participating in a pilot of one such collaborative workspace, an evaluator said that “for the first time, I wasn’t rewriting my notes to make them fit the rubric. The system kept the feedback clear and instructional instead of just compliance-based.”

    As a superintendent, Shepherd looks forward to AI support for helping make sense of complexity. “Evaluators juggle enormous qualitative loads: classroom culture, student engagement, instructional clarity, differentiation, formative assessment, and more. AI can act as a thinking partner, organizing trends, highlighting possible connections, identifying where to probe deeper, or offering research-based framing for feedback.”

    The evaluation process will always be scrutinized, but what must change is whether it continues to drain time and trust or becomes a catalyst for better teaching. Shepherd expects the pace of adoption to pick up speed as the benefits for educators become clear: “Teachers will have access to immediate feedback loops and tools that help them analyze student work, reconsider lesson structures, or reflect on pacing and questioning. This strengthens professional agency and shifts evaluation from a compliance ritual to a growth process.”

    Real leadership means moving beyond outdated processes and redesigning evaluation to center evidence, clarity, and authentic feedback. When evaluation stops being something to get through and becomes something that improves practice, we will finally see technology drive better teaching and learning.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • What K-20 leaders should know about building resilient campuses

    What K-20 leaders should know about building resilient campuses

    Key Points:

    When a school building fails, everything it supports comes to a halt. Learning stops. Families scramble. Community stability is shaken. And while fire drills and lockdown procedures prepare students and staff for specific emergencies, the buildings themselves often fall short in facing the unexpected.

    Between extreme weather events, aging infrastructure, and rising operational demands, facility leaders face mounting pressure to think beyond routine upkeep. Resilience should guide every decision to help schools stay safe, meet compliance demands, and remain prepared for whatever lies ahead.

    According to a recent infrastructure report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers, the nation’s 98,000 PK-12 schools received a D+ for physical condition–a clear signal that more proactive design and maintenance strategies are urgently needed.

    Designing for resilience means planning for continuity. It’s about integrating smarter materials, better systems, and proactive partnerships so that learning environments can bounce back quickly–or never go down at all.

    Start with smarter material choices

    The durability of a school begins at ground level. Building materials that resist moisture, mold, impact, and corrosion play a critical role in long-term school resilience and functionality. For example, in flood-prone regions, concrete blocks and fiber-reinforced panels outperform drywall in both durability and recovery time. Surfaces that are easy to clean, dry quickly, and don’t retain contaminants can make the difference between reopening in days versus weeks.

    Limit downtime by planning ahead

    Downtime is costly, but it’s not always unavoidable. What is avoidable is the scramble that follows when there’s no plan in place. Developing a disaster-response protocol that includes vendors, contact trees, and restoration procedures can significantly reduce response time. Schools that partner with recovery experts before an event occurs often find themselves first in line when restoration resources are stretched thin.

    FEMA’s National Resilience Guidance stresses the need to integrate preparedness and long-term recovery planning at the facility level, particularly for schools that often serve as vital community hubs during emergencies.

    Maintenance as the first line of defense

    Preventative maintenance might not generate headlines, but it can prevent them. Regular inspections of roofing, HVAC, plumbing, and electrical systems help uncover vulnerabilities before they lead to shutdowns. Smart maintenance schedules can extend the lifespan of critical systems and reduce the risk of emergency failures, which are almost always more expensive.

    Build flexibility into the design

    Truly resilient spaces are defined by their ability to adapt, not just their physical strength. Multi-use rooms that can shift from classroom to shelter, or gymnasiums that double as community command centers, offer critical flexibility during emergencies. Facilities should also consider redundancies in HVAC and power systems to ensure critical areas like server rooms or nurse stations remain functional during outages.

    Include restoration experts early

    Design and construction teams are essential, but so are the people who will step in after a disaster. Involving restoration professionals during the planning or renovation phase helps ensure the layout and materials selected won’t hinder recovery later. Features like water-resistant flooring, interior drainage, and strategically placed shut-off valves can dramatically cut cleanup and repair times.

    Think beyond the building

    Resilient schools need more than solid walls. They need protected data, reliable communication systems, and clear procedures for remote learning if the physical space becomes temporarily inaccessible. Facility decisions should consider how technology, security, and backup systems intersect with the physical environment to maintain educational continuity.

    Schools are more than schools during a crisis

    In many communities, schools become the default support hub during a crisis. They house evacuees, store supplies, and provide a place for neighbors to connect. Resilient infrastructure supports student safety while also reinforcing a school’s role as a vital part of the community. Designs should support this extended role, with access-controlled entries, backup power, and health and sanitation considerations built in from the start.

    A resilient mindset starts with leadership

    Resilience begins with leadership and is reflected in the decisions that shape a school’s physical and operational readiness. Facility managers, superintendents, and administrative teams must advocate for resilient investments early in the planning process. This includes aligning capital improvement budgets, bond proposals, and RFP language with long-term resilience goals.

    There’s no such thing as a truly disaster-proof building. But there are schools that recover faster, withstand more, and serve their communities more effectively during crises. The difference is often found in early choices: what’s designed, built, and maintained before disaster strikes.

    When resilience guides every decision, school facilities are better prepared to safeguard students and maintain continuity through disruption.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #1 focuses on the Trump Administration’s goal of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.

    Key points:

    In light of Donald Trump assuming a second presidential term in 2025, conversations concerning dismantling the United States Department of Education have resurfaced. Supporters argue that federal involvement in education undermines state authority, while critics fear that removing the federal role could exacerbate inequities and hinder national progress. To evaluate the proposal, it is crucial to examine the federal and state roles in education, the historical and constitutional context, and the potential benefits and challenges of such a shift.

    The federal role in education

    The United States Constitution does not explicitly grant the federal government authority over education. As Lunenberg et al. (2012) noted, “Education is not a function specifically delegated to the federal government” (p. 327). Instead, under the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states (McCarthy et al., 2019). This leaves education primarily under state jurisdiction, with federal involvement historically limited to indirect support rather than direct control.

    The United States Department of Education was established in 1979. It is responsible for overseeing federal funding for schools, enforcing federal laws in education, and ensuring equal access for students across the country.  Furthermore, it has played a significant role through legislation such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its successors: NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and ESSA (the Every Student Succeeds Act). These laws link federal funding to specific requirements, which aim to address inequities in education. Currently, federal contributions account for approximately 8 percent of funding for elementary and secondary education, with the remaining 92 percent coming from state and local sources (“The Federal Role,” 2017).

    The role of state and local control in education

    Education policy and administration have traditionally been state functions. States determine funding formulas, establish teacher certification requirements, and oversee curricula through their departments and boards of education (Lynch, 2016). Governors and state legislatures allocate funds, which are often distributed to schools based on enrollment, need, or specific programs (Lunenberg et al., 2012).

    Local school boards also play a critical role, managing day-to-day operations and responding to community needs. This decentralized structure reflects a longstanding belief that local authorities are better positioned to address the diverse needs of their communities. However, it has also led to significant disparities between states and districts in terms of funding, resources, and student outcomes.

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education 

    One of the most compelling arguments for dismantling the United States Department of Education lies in the principle of localized control. Critics argue that education is best managed by state and local governments because they are closer to the specific needs of their communities. Localized governance could allow schools to tailor their policies, curriculum, and resource allocation in ways that best fit the unique demographics of their regions. For example, schools in rural areas may have vastly different needs than those in urban centers, which is why local authorities are likely better equipped to address these disparities without the interference of federal oversight.

    The concern extends beyond general education. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is enforced by the United States Department of Education, mandates that students with disabilities receive free and appropriate public education (FAPE) along with necessary services and accommodations. Similarly, the department oversees federal programs that support English Language Learner (ELL) students by helping schools provide tailored instruction and resources to students who are not native English speakers. Without federal oversight, it is possible that these programs could lose funding or be inconsistently applied across states, causing vulnerable populations to be without critical support.

    Advocates of dismantling the United States Department of Education also point to the financial burden of maintaining a federal agency. They argue that billions of dollars allocated to the department could be redirected to state education budgets, thereby allowing for more impactful initiatives at the forefront. By eliminating bureaucratic layers, states could potentially deliver education funding more efficiently, thereby focusing resources directly on teachers, classrooms, and students.

    Another critical function of the United States Department of Education is establishing and enforcing national education standards. Programs such as NCLB and ESSA aim to hold schools accountable for student performance and ensure consistency across states (albeit, there are arguments those programs have led to a culture of “teaching to the test” and have stifled creativity in the classroom), but allowing states and local districts to have greater freedom to design their own standards and assessments may fostering innovation while also leading to the quality of education varying dramatically from state to state and can cause challenges for students in transient populations due to a lack of cohesion disrupting their education and limiting their opportunities.

    Keeping the United States Department of Education 

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education raises significant concerns about equity. The department plays a crucial role in addressing disparities in funding education, as well as in funding access. Federal programs (i.e., Title I, free meals, counseling, after-school programs, etc.) provide additional resources to schools serving high numbers of low-income students, many of which are located in inner-city areas. Without the United States Department of Education, these programs might be eliminated or left to the discretion of states that have historically struggled to prioritize funding for underserved communities.

    Inner-city urban schools often face unique challenges (i.e., overcrowding, insufficient funding, higher rates of poverty among students, etc.). Many of these schools also serve disproportionately high numbers of students with disabilities and ELL students, thereby making federal support even more vital. The United States Department of Education enforces civil rights protections that ensures that all students (including vulnerable subgroups) receive equitable treatment. Dismantling the department could weaken these safeguards, thereby leaving marginalized communities more vulnerable to neglect. Therefore, the loss of federal oversight is a serious concern for public education. Historically, states have not always allocated resources equitably, and urban school districts have often been underfunded compared to their suburban counterparts. Federal intervention has been essential in addressing these disparities. Without it, inner-city schools may struggle to maintain even basic standards of education, thereby exacerbating poverty and inequality.

    All schools (not just inner-city schools) will be adversely impacted by dismantling the United States Department of Education. Federal funding supports Advanced Placement (AP) courses, STEM initiatives, and dual-enrollment opportunities. Dismantling the United States Department of Education could lead to inconsistencies in college admissions processes because states might adopt different graduation requirements and assessments. This lack of standardization could complicate admissions for students applying to out-of-state or prestigious universities. Furthermore, the United States Department of Education funds research initiatives that lead to the development of new teaching methods, technologies, and curricula. These innovations often benefit all schools, but without federal support, such research might stagnate leaving schools without access to cutting-edge educational resources.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the debate pertaining to dismantling the United States Department of Education has taken on new urgency under the Trump administration in 2025. While advocates of dismantling the department argue for greater local control and efficiency, the critics highlight the potential risks to equity and access.  As the nation grapples with this issue, it is essential to prioritize the needs of students (and communities). The ultimate goal must be to create a more equitable and effective education system that serves all students regardless of their background or zip code.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Being a principal just got harder–and here’s why

    Being a principal just got harder–and here’s why

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #3 focuses on challenges in school leadership.

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    There is a squeaky old merry-go-round in my neighborhood that my own children play on from time to time. Years of kids riding on it have loosened its joints so it spins more freely and quickly. The last time they played on the merry-go-round, my children learned the important lesson that the closer to the center they sit the more stable and in control they feel.

    While being a school leader has always felt like being on a spinning piece of playground equipment, leading since the inauguration of President Donald Trump has made me feel as if I moved from the center to the edges in this merry-go-round metaphor. Immigration raids and attacks on civil liberties have made the work feel blindingly fast.

    The school I serve has a large population of immigrant students. Teens who just weeks ago felt like our school was a safe and secure place now carry a new level of concern into our classrooms and hallways. My school has seen a significant drop in attendance since January with parents and guardians citing the desire to keep their children home instead of sending them to school and putting them in harm’s way as ICE raids happen across the city.

    Our staff feels the impact of the rhetoric and policy shifts out of Washington as well. They fear for the physical and emotional safety of our students when they leave the school.

    For my part, I wonder if my decisions that prioritize equity and inclusion will make me the target of criticism–or worse, an investigation. This year, we have had ongoing professional development opportunities to teach staff how they can better support our queer students and employees. Each time we engage in these discussions, I find myself worrying about the repercussions.

    But I am determined that the programs and people in place to support and protect our most vulnerable students will not go away. Rather, they will be reinforced. My role as a school leader is to create an environment so safe and accepting that students and staff never feel like they must look over their shoulder while they are at school. We want them to breathe easily knowing that, at least during the school day, they can be seen, safe, and successful.

    To be sure, this job has always been a juggle, which includes instructional leadership, behavioral support, budgeting, staffing, and–in my case–fighting the stigma of historically being identified as a low-performing school by the Colorado Department of Education. But the changes out of Washington have taken things to the next level. As I navigate it all, I do my best to be energetic, optimistic, and reliable. Each day is an exercise in finding joy in my interactions with students and staff.

    I find joy in seeing students cheer on their peers at basketball games. I find joy in watching a teacher sit with a student until they grasp a challenging concept. I find joy when I see staff members step in to teach a class for a colleague who is sick or just needs a break. I find joy and hope in my daily interactions with students and staff; they are the core of my work and are the bravest people I have worked with in my career.

    When I push my children on the merry-go-round, I tell them to get to the center because the spinning seems to slow down and the noise decreases. This is the same advice I would give to school leaders right now. Get right to the center of your work by being with students and staff as much as possible. Even at the center, the spinning does not stop. The raids, political attacks, and fear tactics do not decrease, but the challenge of facing them becomes a little more manageable. While every force out there may be pushing leaders away from the center of their work, prioritizing that values-based work reminds us exactly why we do what we do.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    For more news on school leadership, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership hub.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • DEI in education: Pros and cons

    DEI in education: Pros and cons

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #6 focuses on DEI in education.

    Key points:

    Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become integral to educational institutions across the United States. DEI aims to foster environments where all students can thrive regardless of their backgrounds. The programs are designed to address systemic inequalities, promote representation, and create inclusive spaces for learning. However, as DEI becomes more prevalent, it also faces scrutiny and debate regarding its effectiveness, implementation, and impact on educational outcomes.

    One of the main advantages of DEI in education is the promotion of a more inclusive and representative curriculum. Students gain a broader understanding of the world by integrating diverse perspectives into course materials. This enhances critical thinking and empathy. Furthermore, the approach prepares students to navigate and contribute to our increasingly globalized society. Moreover, exposure to diverse viewpoints encourages students to challenge their assumptions and develop a more nuanced perspective on complex issues.

    DEI initiatives also contribute to improved academic outcomes by fostering a sense of belongingness amongst students. When students see themselves reflected in their educators and curricula, they are more likely to feel valued and supported. This leads to increased engagement and motivation. This sense of inclusion can result in higher retention and graduation rates (particularly among historically marginalized groups). Furthermore, diverse learning environments encourage collaboration and communication skills because students learn to work effectively with peers from different backgrounds.

    In addition to benefiting students, DEI programs can enhance faculty satisfaction and retention. Institutions that prioritize diversity in hiring and promotion practices create more equitable workplaces. This can lead to increased job satisfaction among faculty members. Mentorship programs and professional development opportunities focused on DEI can also support faculty in creating inclusive classroom environments, which further benefits students.

    Despite these benefits, DEI initiatives are not without challenges. One significant concern is the potential for resistance and backlash from individuals who perceive DEI efforts as a threat to traditional values (in other words, a form of reverse discrimination). This resistance can manifest in various ways (opposition to DEI policies, legal challenges, and political pressure). Such opposition can hinder the implementation and effectiveness of DEI programs, thereby creating a contentious atmosphere within educational institutions.

    Another challenge is the difficulty in measuring the success of DEI initiatives. Without clear metrics, it can be challenging to assess the impact of these programs on student outcomes, faculty satisfaction, or institutional culture. The lack of quantifiable data can lead to skepticism about the efficiency of DEI efforts, thus resulting in reduced support or funding for such programs. Additionally, the absence of standardized definitions and goals for DEI can lead to inconsistent implementation across institutions.

    Resource allocation is also a critical issue in the execution of DEI initiatives. Implementing comprehensive DEI programs often requires significant financial investment (funding for specialized staff, training, and support services). In times of budget constraints, institutions may struggle to prioritize DEI efforts. This may lead to inadequate support for students and faculty. Without sufficient resources, DEI programs may fail to achieve their intended outcomes thus further fueling criticism and skepticism.

    The potential for tokenism is another concern associated with DEI initiatives. When institutions focus on meeting diversity quotas without fostering genuine inclusion, individuals from underrepresented groups may feel marginalized or exploited. Tokenism may undermine the goals of DEI by creating superficial diversity that does not translate into meaningful change or equity. To avoid this, institutions must commit to creating inclusive environments where all individuals feel valued and empowered to contribute fully.

    Furthermore, DEI programs can sometimes inadvertently reinforce stereotypes or create division among student populations. For example, emphasizing differences without promoting commonalities may lead to increased social fragmentation or feelings of isolation among certain groups. Educators must carefully balance the celebration of diversity with the promotion of unity and shared values to foster cohesive learning communities.

    In summary, DEI initiatives in education offer numerous benefits, but these programs also face significant challenges. To maximize the positive impact of DEI efforts, educational institutions must commit to thoughtful, well-resourced, and inclusive implementation strategies that promote genuine equity and inclusion for all members.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link