Excellence Through Equity

So here’s what’s happening in Towson starting tomorrow:

BCPS and the National Center for Education and Innovation (Hope Foundation) are co-hosting the Maryland Excellence through Equity Summit 2016, August 15-16, 2016 in Towson at the Carver Center for Arts and Technology.  The summit is co-hosted by Dr. Dance and Alan M. Blankstein, Founder, Solution Tree & HOPE Foundation.

Dr. Nancy Grasmick, Presidential Scholar for Innovation in Teacher and Leader Preparation for Towson University and Former State Superintendent of Maryland Public Schools, will present at the conference.

Also presenting will be Dr. Marcus Newsome, who is Dr. Dance’s mentor, was a member of his transition team, and whose brother was a BCPS Assistant Superintendent.

Conference topics include:

  • Anytime/Anywhere Learning: Best Practices in Blended and Project-Based Learning
  • Data Analysis for Equity-Focused School Improvement Planning


Dr. Dance is all about excellence and equity.

But for Dr. Dance, it’s equitable access to a digital learning environment, which, in his view, will close the achievement gap.

“Excellence Through Equity” should ring some bells, since it’s the title of a book co-authored by the summit’s co-host Blankstein (along with Pedro Noguera) available through ASCD.


ASCD, founded in 1943, is the “global leader in developing and delivering innovative programs, products, and services that empower educators to support the success of each learner.”  It’s been considered a respected professional organization for educators and leaders, but it appears to have sold out to become a part of the ed-tech reform movement.

In February 2011, it was granted nearly $3 million by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to “provide teachers and school leaders with supports to implement the Common Core State Standards at the district, school, and classroom levels.”

Well-known education blogger Anthony Cody in a 2013 post questioned if ASCD was “embracing market-driven education reform” based on the fact that it had first endorsed CCSS, then accepted the Gates Foundation grant.

So here’s the problem with “Excellence Through Equity” as it applies to BCPS:

Blankstein and his co-author Noguera call for equity by addressing the needs of the whole child.  This is admirable and is the basis of the “community school” model, which BCPS will begin piloting.

However, the Blankstein-Noguera-ASCD ETE model also calls for personalized learning and detracking.  BCPS already has both.

If the good “community school” changes — feeding hungry children, mentoring, etc. — are layered atop the obscenely expensive personalized learning reforms, these changes will no doubt make STAT appear successful (which it is not). The truly needed and most basic changes on their own would close the achievement gap. And think of how much could be done to create equitable access to new, safe, and excellent “21st-century” schools if STAT had not been implemented and nearly $300 million in taxpayer dollars had not been spent …


3 thoughts on “Excellence Through Equity

  1. Technology DID NOT help with equity issues in Sixty Five countries around the world.

    Software-based learning as savior is a chimera here. One that mostly lines the pockets of for-profit ed tech firms, to the detriment of disadvantaged children who need more personal attention vs. screen time (headphones on, watching videos, etc.) Just look at all the BCPS tweets of school children and Lighthouse school photo galleries to see “21st century learning” in action… Unfortunately this resembles dystopia, as applied under S.T.A.T.

    See this recent NPR story…last paragraph here…


    Last fall, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development published its first-ever, and one of the largest-ever, international analyses of student access to computers and how that relates to student learning. (The OECD administers the PISA test, the world-famous international academic ranking.)

    For this report, the researchers asked millions of high school students in dozens of countries about their access to computers both in the classroom and at home, and compared their answers to scores on the 2012 PISA. Here’s the money quote:

    “Students who use computers very frequently at school do a lot worse in most learning outcomes, even after controlling for social background and student demographics.”

    That’s right. Lots of computer time meant worse school performance — by a lot.

    A little bit of computer use was modestly positive, the authors found. But countries that invested the most in technology for education in recent years showed “no appreciable results” in student achievement.

    And, striking at the root of one of the biggest claims made about tech in education, “perhaps the most disappointing finding in the report is that technology is of little help in bridging the skills divide between advantaged and disadvantaged students.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s