INNOVATE!!!! INNOVATION IS THE KEY FOR CHANGE IN THE WORLD!!!!!

Dr.Jemi Sudhakar

发布日期: 2018年2月5日

What is meant by innovation in education?

Innovation is defined as “the process of making changes to something established by introducing something new.” It applies to “…radical or incremental changes to products, processes or services. ” Over the years there have been many changes in the way education is designed and delivered in parts of the world.

What is the role of innovation in education and development?

Innovation is defined as “the process of making changes to something established by introducing something new.” It applies to “…radical or incremental changes to products, processes or services.” Over the years there have been many changes in the way education is designed and delivered in parts of the world.

Today, technology is a significant driver behind change, and sometimes plays an important role in innovations in educational design and delivery. There are immense possibilities for greater and wider-spread change with the use of present-day technological advancements, as well as with the implementation of innovative educational programs. The challenge is to ensure that innovation plays a constructive role in improving educational opportunities for billions of people who remain under-served in a rapidly developing world.

The following is one scenario that serves to illustrate the potential impact of technology in education. This scenario may or may not represent an ideal application of innovation and technology; however it is indicative of the link between technological innovation and innovations in educational delivery:

A scenario . . .

Anne attends evening classes while working full-time. She travels to work by bus, making an hour and half commute each day. After settling in her seat, Anne puts on her headphones and turns on her PDA/cell-phone (a ‘smart phone’), which has an audio copy of the lecture from the night before. After class, the evening before, Anne had gone online using her low-cost computer to download the audio recording the lecturer had made. Now she listens to the lecture a second time to fill in gaps that she missed when she was tired in the evening class. Anne also sends a text message from her smart phone to a classmate in order to clarify the meaning of a concept. Arriving at work, Anne is feeling more confident about the concepts that seemed so fuzzy the previous evening.

During her lunch break, Anne uses her company computer to browse the class discussion area on the institution’s website, and she joins her class colleagues in a brief online discussion. Next Anne begins to tackle her homework, which requires research, discussion of the topic with a class group, and submission of a joint assignment. Anne starts planning the assignment during the afternoon tea break, and at the end of the work day she spends 20-minutes typing the assignment outline and then emails it to her group before saving it on a memory stick and heading home via minibus. En route, Anne catches up on readings. One chapter is from a 500-page book, which is both heavy to carry and very expensive. Fortunately, the institution has digital rights for use of the content by its learners, so Anne downloaded the chapter to her smart phone. Considering her hectic family life, this chapter would likely go unread at home.

The above scenario might seem familiar to those who have studied by night classes. While it focuses on a learner, the scenario could be similar for teachers, tutors, agricultural extension workers, and other learners.

Technologies that are now available in most Commonwealth countries increase the potential to support learners and educators, and can help remove the barriers of time and distance. New information and communications technologies (ICTs) do not replace all previous ones, nor do they replace the need for good educational design and delivery. However, appropriate technologies can provide additional possibilities for learner support, interactivity, and access to education.

…On the weekend, Anne must travel to visit a relative in a rural area, so she is unable to attend a scheduled discussion group session. The institution broadcasts its discussion groups by radio, so Anne tunes in, and uses her cell-phone to send her comments via text messages that her group leader shares with the group. The cell-phone is affordable and works well outside of city limits where land-lines do not exist.

Innovation for ‘Learner-Centered’ Education

How can innovation and technology offset the barriers of access and mobility that has been a deterrent to education in many parts of the developing world?

With the emergence of smart phones, eBook readers, ‘Podcasts’ and ‘Vodcasts,’Internet and low-cost computers, as well as solar electricity, cell phone access, and other technologies, comes the opportunity to provide education to assist individuals and communities in places under-served by traditional educational institutes. Technology and other innovations enable educational design and delivery to be adapted to the needs and environment of students enrolled in Open and Distance learning (ODL) and traditional educational programs. Thus, technology can also help programs shift to a ‘learner-centered’ approach to education.

Needs Driven Approach to Innovation

The focus must be on achieving education and development objectives, not on popularizing technical gadgets. However, learners have demonstrated the ability to gain technical proficiency in a variety of software, hardware, and other information and communications technologies (ICTs). How can education systems assimilate this into program design and delivery in order to improve efficiency, control costs, and expand delivery of education to larger numbers of people? How will the convergence of communications technologies affect the potential for providing improved learner support?

In an environment in which the postal system is slow or unreliable, traditional ODL can face challenges in program delivery. Today Internet and email has enabled changes in the design and delivery of ODL in many parts of the world. What technologies are accessible for learners in developing countries? In many places, cell phones are in very widespread use, and text messaging is popular for work and personal communications, yet few institutions have adopted this tool. How can instructors and institutes more closely match their educational design and delivery with the technologies to which learners have regular access?

Keeping Abreast of Technological Change

"Although technology should not drive our teaching, technology does drive change".

Today, educators have the challenge of monitoring changes in technologies, determining if they apply to learners living in ‘the real world,’ and seeking ways to use technologies to complement and support instructional methodologies and practices.

Who will educate the educators? How can educators keep abreast of technological advancements that support innovations and improvements in instructional design and delivery? What can institutions, governments, and international organizations do to help educators to master new technologies and tools for creating and facilitating educational opportunities?

Challenges, Opportunities, and Barriers

Given the challenges of insufficient numbers of teachers being trained, teachers leaving the profession, and too few classrooms in developing countries, can technology enable more people to access education? Will the next generation of low-cost computers make it feasible for more students in developing countries to have access to this technology? It is not the technology, but the potential it provides for access, efficiency, and enhanced learning opportunities. Computers better enable learners to access education through ODL. Learners can use Internet technology to communicate with other students or instructors across a city or around the world. Teachers and students can access information through virtual libraries and the World Wide Web, and use software to master technical as well as academic skills.

The opportunities are immense, but there are also technological limitations in many parts of developing countries. Barriers to technological innovations for supporting education include inadequate telecommunications bandwidth, lack of trained support staff, and the cost and the availability of simple telephones, cell phones, computers, and electricity.

Here are some questions to ponder in applying innovation to enable access to education:

What processes are needed to provide electricity and broadband access for all educational institutions (e.g. schools, colleges, universities);
What processes are needed to provide broadband access to all lifelong learners (adults who can pay reasonable rates for access);
What alternatives do institutions have if they are unlikely to be connected to a reliable electricity service in the foreseeable future;
What alternatives are there for introducing computers or increasing their numbers in schools and institutions of higher learning; and
If computers are to be installed in institutions, what processes are under way to ensure full training and support for teachers and learners to effectively integrate these into the teaching, learning and school management processes?
What are the innovations in education that can help meet the three-billion people challenge?

Innovation for Education for Development

The challenge of closing the ever-widening gap between the haves and have-nots may rest with the willingness of the education community to view education from a new perspective —and to innovate. This may include making use of affordable and accessible technologies to expand access to education. It may also require other innovative process or service strategies that do not rely on technology. It may require a shift in focus, to target educational and training programs to align more closely with what people identify as their most urgent needs.

Providing education in new and unconventional ways is only one of a number of solutions, but it is through innovation that we can meet the challenges of improved efficiencies, lower costs, increasing accessibility, and greater success in achieving development goals through education.

What is innovation in a school?

An Innovation School (either a conversion of an existing school or a new school) is an in-district public school that can be established by a wide range of applicants, may utilize increased autonomy and flexibility in six areas (curriculum, budget, schedule and calendar, staffing, professional development, and district ...

1. What are the essential features of an Innovation School?

An Innovation School (either a conversion of an existing school or a new school)is an in-district public school that can be established by a wide range of applicants, may utilize increased autonomy and flexibility in six areas (curriculum, budget, schedule and calendar, staffing, professional development, and district policies), and is authorized by the local school committee.

In exchange for increased ownership, discretion, and authority to establish and operate an Innovation School, eligible entities will be held responsible for improving student learning and school performance in accordance with measurable annual goals. Two goals of establishing these schools are to foster innovation across the state and increase students’ access to excellent educational opportunities – while retaining funding within public school districts.

2. Why would I want to create an Innovation School?

Innovation Schools represent a chance for local school committees – in cooperation with superintendents, teachers’ unions, parents, outside partners and others – to internally charter their own schools. The new law gives traditional schools and educators the chance to develop the autonomy and flexibility to compete with charter schools and eliminate the need for school funding to leave the districts. In addition, it empowers teachers and others to take a leadership role in the development and operation of public schools.

This initiative represents both a challenge to and an opportunity for local educators to implement innovative practices within traditional public school settings and control their own curricula, staffing, schedules, budgets, and professional development. As noted above, in exchange for the much broader authority and discretion required to run their own school, these pioneering educators will be held responsible, under the innovation plan agreed to by the local school committee, for advancing student learning and school performance.

Innovation Schools allow for deeper engagement in core subjects, more enrichment activities, longer school days, schools with particular instructional themes or areas of focus, and freedom from certain district rules and/or contract provisions. Innovation Schools provide teachers and others with an unprecedented opportunity to increase ownership of their schools and to take charge of both academic programming and operations. Applicants can operate schools under the terms and conditions that will best meet the needs of their students, as they will have the authority and flexibility to adopt curricula, implement instructional and assessment practices that they think will ensure students learn. As a result, Innovation Schools can dramatically increase opportunities for teacher leadership and deepen teacher professionalism.

Another exciting feature of these schools is that every aspect of the work is local. Proposals to establish either new schools or convert existing schools will be generated at the local level, reviewed and approved by local stakeholders, and the Innovation School will be authorized and evaluated by the local school committee and superintendent respectively.

3. What is the process for establishing and approving an Innovation School?

The process for establishing and approving an Innovation School islaid out in the Innovation

Schools statute, G.L. c. 71, s. 92. That process is as follows:

§ Step 1: An eligible applicant develops and submits an initial prospectus to the Superintendent of the district in which the proposed school would be situated.

o Eligible applicants are parents, teachers, parent-teacher organizations, principals, superintendents, school committees, teacher unions, colleges and universities, non-profit community-based organizations, non-profit business or corporate entities, non-profit charter school operators, non-profit education management organizations, educational collaborative, consortia of these groups, and other entities authorized by the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education.

§ Step 2: The screening committee -- convened by the Superintendent within 30 days of receiving the prospectus,and consisting of the superintendent or his/her designee, a school committee member or a designee selected by the school committee, and a representative of the local teacher’s union–reviews and votes on the initial prospectus; two-thirds approval is required.

§ Step 3: An innovation plan committee must be established within 30 days of approval of the prospectus, and this committee develops and internally approves the innovation plan; a majority vote is required.

While the size and composition of the innovation plan committee can be determined by the applicant, it must not include more than 11 individuals, and must include the following: the applicant; the superintendent or designee; a school committee member or designee; a parent who has 1 or more children enrolled in the school (or in the case of a new school, in the district); a principal employed by the district; and 2 teachers employed by the district.

o The parent will be selected by the applicant from among nominees submitted by parent-teacher organizations in the district (if these organizations exist), or among volunteers in the area or community that the proposed school will serve.

o The principal and 1 teacher will be selected by the applicant from volunteers in the district, and the other teacher will be selected among nominees submitted by the local teacher’s union.

If an innovation plan includes provisions that conflict with state laws or regulations governing other public schools, approval by the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education is required.

Please see question #17for detailed information about securing approval from the Commissioner or Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

§ Step 4a: For the conversion of existing schools, upon approval of the innovation plan by the innovation plan committee, the school’s current teachers vote on the plan; two-thirds approval is required.

o If approved by two-thirds of the teachers, the innovation plan must be submitted to the school committee.

§ Step 4b: For new schools, upon approval of the innovation plan by the innovation plan committee, the applicant, local teacher’s union, and superintendent must negotiate proposed waivers or modifications to the collective bargaining agreement (if applicable); if agreement is not reached within 40 days, the statute spells out an arbitration process.

o Upon completion of the negotiation or arbitration, as applicable, the innovation plan is submitted to the school committee.

§ Step 5: The school committee must hold at least one public hearing on the innovation plan, and then must, within 60 days of receiving the plan, conduct its vote on whether or not to approve the plan; a simple majority is required for approval.

§ Step 6: If approved by the school committee, the Innovation School is authorized for up to five years. The Superintendent must notify the Commissioner within 30 days of school committee authorization of an Innovation School. The Superintendent shall include a copy of the approved innovation plan in the notification to the Commissioner.

The Innovation School is evaluated annually by the superintendent. At the end of the authorization period, the Innovation School can request that the school committee extend the authorization of the school for an additional period of not more than 5 years; before doing so, the Innovation School leadership must convene a group of stakeholders to discuss potential revisions to the innovation plan. If any changes are made to the plan that affects the collective bargaining agreement, the plan must be approved by two-thirds of the teachers in the school.

Please note that all Innovation School Screening Committee meetings and Innovation Plan Committee meetings are subject to Open Meeting Law requirements (see question 6 below for more detail).

4.What is the definition of a teacher for purposes of the teacher vote? How is the vote conducted?

New regulations approved by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE)that went into effect February 17, 2012,include a definition of “teacher” for purposes of a vote. Teachers are defined as any person working half-time or more in a school or school district under a license listed in 603 CMR 7.04 (3)(a).

The Innovation Schools statute requires that the teacher vote be conducted by secret ballot.

5. May subcommittees to the Innovation Plan Committee be established?

Nothing shall prevent an innovation plan committee from establishing one or more subcommittees to advise the innovation plan committee. An advisory subcommittee may include individuals who are not members of the innovation plan committee, but only members of the innovation plan committee are eligible to serve as chair of an innovation plan subcommittee. Only the innovation plan committee shall have final approval of the innovation plan.

6. Are Screening Committees and Innovation Plan Committees subject to Open Meeting law requirements?

Based on guidance from the state Attorney General’s Division of Open Government, both Screening Committees and Innovation Plan Committees are public bodies subject to the state Open Meeting law. Therefore, both the Screening Committees and Innovation Plan Committees must follow the procedures laid out by the Open Meeting law, including posting notice of meetings and taking minutes of meetings. For more information on the Open Meeting law, please review the Attorney General’s Open Meeting Law Guide, available at

https://www.mass.gov/ago/government-resources/open-meeting-law/attorney-generals-open-meeting-law-guide.html.

7. What role will the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (ESE) have in the approval process for an Innovation School?

Unlike in the charter school approval process, local school committees – not ESE – will have final

approval over the authorization of Innovation Schools. However, ESE and the Executive Office of

Education (EOE) will support the Innovation Schools initiative by providing technical assistance and support; collecting and disseminating data, research, and best practices; and, if funding is available, providing planning and implementation grants to eligible applicants.

8.What are the required elements of an initial prospectus for an Innovation School?

The prospectus must include, but not be limited to, the following elements: 1) information about whether the school will be a conversion of an existing school or a new school, and the name of the proposed school for conversion or the new location, respectively; 2) the number of students who will be enrolled and the number of staff members who will be employed; 3) the overall vision for the school, including goals for improving student achievement and school performance; 4) the types of autonomy and flexibility that will be utilized to operate the school, and why specific strategies are necessary; 5) the external partners (if any) that will contribute to the establishment and operation of the school; 6) the anticipated components of the innovation plan; 7) specific needs or challenges the school is designed to address; and 8) a preliminary description of the process to involve stakeholders and a proposed timetable for establishing the school.

9.What are the required elements of an innovation plan for an Innovation School?

The innovation plan must include, but not be limited to, the following elements: 1) a curriculum plan that includes detailed information about how the proposed curriculum will improve student achievement and school performance; 2) a budget plan that includes detailed information about how funds will be used differently in the proposed school; 3) a detailed school calendar and schedule plan; 4) a staffing plan that includes detailed information about how the principal, teachers, and other staff members will be recruited, employed, evaluated, and compensated in the proposed school; 5) a detailed description, if applicable, of any proposed waivers or modifications to collective bargaining agreements; 6) a plan that includes detailed information about the unique operational policies and procedures that will be implemented in the school, and how they will support student achievement and school performance; and 7) a professional development plan that includes detailed information about how the proposed school will provide ongoing and high-quality professional development opportunities to administrators, teachers, and other staff members.

In addition, the innovation plan must include measurable annual goals including, but not limited to, the following elements: 1) student attendance, safety, and discipline; 2) promotion, graduation, and dropout rates; 3) student achievement on the MCAS; 4) progress related to identified areas of academic under performance; 5) progress among subgroups of students (including lower-income students, English Language Learners, and students receiving special education services); and 6) the reduction of achievement gaps among different groups of students.

10. Is there a specified time frame in which local school committees must approve an innovation plan?

Once the innovation plan is completed, it must be approved internally by a simple majority of the innovation plan committee. Once it is approved, in the case of school conversion, the applicant submits the innovation plan to teachers in the school that is proposed for conversion. Teachers vote by secret ballot within 30 days; a two-thirds majority is required for approval.

In the case of a new school, the applicant, local teacher’s union, and superintendent must negotiate any waivers or modifications to the collective bargaining agreement. If negotiations have not resulted in an agreement within 40 days, either party may petition the division of labor relations for the selection of an arbitrator. This arbitrator must be selected within three days and must conduct a hearing within 14 days of selection. The arbitrator will submit a final and binding decision within 14 days of this hearing. After the arbitrator’s decision, the school committee has 60 days within which to hold a public hearing on the innovation plan and vote to authorize the Innovation School; a simple majority is required to authorize the school.

In general, it is recommended that applicants initiate the approval process no later than 6 months prior to the opening of the proposed Innovation Schooland that applicants build in additional time (i.e., another 3 to 6 months) for initial development and planning prior to initiating the formal approval process. The statute, however, does not specify a particular timetable.

11. Is there a deadline for opening an Innovation School?

No. The process for establishing an Innovation School is entirely locally based, and the time frame for opening a school will be determined by the applicant(s), local stakeholders involved in the process of developing an innovation plan, and ultimately the school committee.

12. What role do teachers’ unions have in the Innovation Schools approval process?

In general, ESE and EOE encourage districts to involve all appropriate stakeholders, including teachers’ union leaders and members, in the process of establishing an Innovation School. The law requires that a representative from the leadership of the local teacher’s union sit on the screening committee that approves or rejects an applicant’s prospectus. In addition, for the establishment of new Innovation Schools, the union must participate in negotiations required for any waivers or modifications to the applicable collective bargaining agreement. Note: for the conversion of an existing school, the innovation plan must be approved by two-thirds of the current teachers.

13. In the case of the conversion of an existing program within a school into an Innovation

School Academy, what is the teacher voting unit?

A new regulation adopted by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education on January 24, 2012 addresses this issue. In the case of a conversion of an existing program to an Innovation School Academy, the innovation plan must include a description of the teachers in the school to whom the plan will be submitted for approval. The regulations do not provide guidance as to which teachers should be included in the vote. It is up to the Innovation Plan Committee to determine which teachers should vote on the plan. The committee may decide that just the teachers in the program should vote or include other teachers in the school in the vote as well.

In the case of proposing a new program as an Innovation School Academy, the applicant shall follow the process laid out for establishing a new school.

In the case of a partial school conversion, ESE and EOE advise districts to involve teachers from the part of a school being proposed for conversion, as well as teachers from the part of the school that would not be converted, in the development process for the conversion. Doing so will help to ensure appropriate understanding of how the proposed conversion would affect students and educators in both parts of the school.

14. Will Innovation Schools have a school-based governing body separate from school and district leadership?

The statute authorizes Innovation School founders to create an advisory board of trustees, but they can also operate under traditional or other school leadership structures. The applicants for the school have the discretion to determine – and to set forth in the innovation plan – the leadership structure they choose, subject to final approval by the local school committee. The statute also requires that the school committee and superintendent hold the school accountable for meeting the terms of its innovation plan.

15. How are Innovation Schools different from the multiple types of Horace Mann charters, Pilot schools, and other non-traditional models?

There are several major distinctions and some minor distinctions between these types of schools in the areas of approval process, accountability, funding, and student admissions processes, among others.

Primarily, Innovation Schools differ from Horace Mann charters in two ways: (1) in that they do not require approval at the state-level; and (2) depending on the type of Horace Mann, in that there are differences in the procedures related to the local teachers’ union. While the Achievement Gap Act of 2010 created multiple types of Horace Mann charters (traditional, “conversion” and “the 14 new Horace Mann charter schools”), all of these Horace Mann charter schools require approval from the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE). Innovation Schoolssolely require approval of the local school committee, and there is no state involvement in the initial approval unless the innovation plan seeks the Commissioner’s approval for a provision that conflicts with state laws or regulations governing other public schools. Additionally, traditional Horace Mann charter schools continue to require union approval before the application goes before the BESE.

Innovation Schools require approval of the innovation plan by vote of 2/3 of the teachers, in the case of a conversion school. In the case of a new Innovation School, the statute requires the applicant to negotiate with the local teachers’ union regarding any modifications or waivers to the collective bargaining agreement. EOE has prepared a fact sheet that provides further details regarding the primary differences among these types of schools; this document is available at

16. How can an innovation plan committee receive approval for provisions in an innovation plan that conflict with state laws or regulations governing other public schools?

If an innovation plan includes any provision that may conflict with state laws or regulations governing other public schools, the applicant must secure approval as follows: to secure approval from the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, the innovation plan committee must submit the following information to the Office of Charter, Innovation and Redesign at the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, with copies to the local superintendent and school committee: 1) a letter listing the provisions that may conflict with state laws or regulations governing other public schools; 2) a specific legal citation for each state law or regulation that poses a conflict and therefore requires approval; and 3) a detailed explanation of why the waiver is necessary to advance the mission or educational programs of the proposed Innovation School.

If the Commissioner does not approve the proposed provisions in the plan that may conflict with state laws or regulations, the innovation plan committee may ask the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to review the matter. If the applicant seeks review from the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, the innovation plan committee must submit a letter listing the provision(s) in 603 CMR 48.00 that require a waiver, and why each is necessary to advance the mission or educational programs of the proposed Innovation School. The Board shall make the final decision on this issue.

For all requests, the innovation plan committee must also submit the most recent version of the proposed innovation plan.

The information and relevant documents should be submitted at least 45 days prior to the school committee meeting at which the members will vote to approve the innovation school plan. If Board approval is required, additional time may be required to accommodate its monthly meeting schedule.

Funding

17. What state or federal funds, if any, will be provided to support the establishment or operation of Innovation Schools?

Innovation Schools are intended to be a fiscally neutral school redesign model, in which long-term support for new or different programs or services primarily will be supported through increased flexibility in the school’s existing budget. At the same time, EOE and ESEare eager to provide new resources to support these initiatives. Consequently sources of private, state and federal funding to support the planning and initial implementation of Innovation Schools have been secured.

For the first time, the state budget includes an Innovation Schools line item of $1 million dollars. These funds will be used to support planning, implementation and enhancement grants as well as to support technical assistance to Innovation School planners.

18. What amount of funding will an Innovation School receive for each school year? Can an Innovation School secure additional funding through other public or private sources?

The statute states that: “An Innovation School shall receive each school year from the school committee the same per pupil allocation as any other district school receives.”Additionally, the statute provides that any unused funds may be retained and used in subsequent school years. The statute also states that an Innovation School may do its own fundraising and may establish a non-profit to assist with fundraising, and the district may not reduce the yearly allocation to the school as a result of the school’s fundraising activities.

19. Can an Innovation School serve students from more than one district?

Yes. An innovation plan could include strategies to enroll students from multiple districts; for example, applicants can utilize existing inter-district school choice options to enroll students, or develop other enrollment and tuition agreements with sending districts. In addition, two or more districts could partner with an applicant to establish an Innovation School.

20. If an Innovation School proposes an extended day or year, will it be eligible for state Expanded Learning Time (ELT) grant funding?

Should grant funds become available, approved Innovation Schools will be eligible to apply for ELT funds. Updated information on the Extended Learning Time initiative can be found at www.doe.mass.edu/redesign/elt/?section=eval .

Other

21. Do autonomies in all of the areas – curriculum, budget, schedule, staffing, professional development, and district policies – have to be implemented by a proposed Innovation School?

No.The innovation plan must articulate the desired autonomy and flexibility in 1 or more of these areas. However, if an applicant chooses to include multiple areas of autonomy and flexibility in the initial prospectus and innovation plan, ESE and EOE encourage the applicant to connect

proposed strategies in different areas to maximize the benefit to the school. For example, the

implementation of innovative strategies with regard to curriculum should be connected to a robust staffing plan, and the implementation of innovative strategies with regard to staffing should be connected to a strategic budget plan.

22. What rules will govern admission to anInnovation School?

Any student who is enrolled in a school that is subsequently established as anInnovation School will retain the ability to remain enrolled in the school. Innovation Schools also must comply with applicable state and federal laws regarding the enrollment of students with disabilities, English Language Learners, and other categories of students.Beyond the requirements of state and federal law with respect to specific populations of students, the applicant(s) may determine procedures for admission to a newly established Innovation School,subject to final approval by the school committee.

23. What constitutes an Innovation“School” as opposed to a program at a school?

A school is generally characterized as an entity with a high degree of independent management prerogative, with leader(s) that report directly to a district-level supervisor or an oversight board. Entities which are recognized by the ESE as public elementary or secondary schools have the following responsibilities:

Have an assigned principal who holds a valid Massachusetts license to serve as principal (with the exception of charter schools), is employed under an independently negotiated contract, has authority over and responsibility for all budget, personnel, educational, and operational matters at the school;

Operate at least 180 days in a school year;

Provide a minimum of 900 hours per school year of structured learning time to every student (if an elementary school) and provide a minimum of 990 hours per school year of structured learning time to every student (if a secondary school) per 603 CMR 27.02;

Administer the MCAS at the appropriate grade levels; and

Submit all required ESE school-level data reports (e.g., SIMS, EPIMS, Schedule 3 of the EOYPR, etc.) linked to a school code. The district may complete the actual submission of the report, but the data must be reported by school and for each school. The school will be reported separately for the purposes of enrollment, accountability, and other school-level determinations.

The legislation authorizing Innovation Schools permits the establishment of academies within existing public schools; these academies are subject to the same approval process as Innovation

Schools, and like anInnovation School, they must also operate under an innovation plan.

24. What are the consequences for the school or external partner for failure to meet the terms of the innovation plan?

If the school committee determines, on the advice of the superintendent, that the school has not met one or more goals in the innovation plan, the school committee has the authority to amend the innovation plan. If the school committee determines, on the advice of the superintendent, that the school has substantially failed to meet multiple goals in the innovation plan, the school committee can 1) limit one or more components of the innovation plan if necessary; 2) suspend one or more components of the plan; or 3) terminate the authorization of the school. Such limitation or suspension cannot take place before the end of the second full year of operation, and the school’s authorization cannot be terminated before the end of the third full year of operation.

25. If a district is proposing a “school within a school” or an Innovation Academy, what happens to the school’s Title I status?

If the new school is operating under a separate school code, it will receive its own Title I status based on the poverty percentage in the new school. If the school does not have a separate school code, it retains the parent school’s Title I status. In either case, the district’s overall Title I entitlement grant allocation would not be affected.

26. If there are issues related to funding, governance, or other factors that affect the operation of the proposed school that are not included in the legislation, how should applicants proceed with establishing an Innovation School?

Applicants should addressall significant factors about the operation of the school in the innovation plan; as noted in the response to question #17, if proposed strategies conflict with existing state laws and regulations regarding the operation of public schools, applicants must secure approval from the Commissioner or the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

27. What will happen if someone (or a group of people) does not abide by the required process for establishing and approving an Innovation School?

The process for establishing and approving an Innovation School is entirely locally based, and dependent upon the cooperation and collaboration of different members of the community. Therefore, any issues or concerns related to these processes must be addressed and resolved at the local level by appropriate members of the community

However, newly adopted regulations do address the failure by a school district to support an authorized Innovation School. The operators of an authorized Innovation School who encounter failure by a sponsoring district to support the school, including, but not limited to, failure to provide the autonomies and flexibilities approved in the school’s innovation plan, may petition the Commissioner for the selection of a mediator or an arbitrator.

Note: After the initial period of authorization, should a majority of the school committee not approve of an extension of the period of authorization of an Innovation School, the leadership of the school may seek authorization from the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education for the extension.

I nnovation processes in education are dominant in all countries. We should step towards taking elements from developed countries, however some problems still do appear. This article takes into consideration some of the educational and economical issues.

Solving these problems could be a key step to boosting innovation

Education has 99 problems, but the desire to solve those problems isn’t one. But because we can’t cover 99 problems in one story, we’ll focus on seven, which the League of Innovative Schools identified as critical to educational innovation.

While these aren’t the only challenges that education faces today, these seven problems are often identified as roadblocks that prevent schools and districts from embracing innovation.

Problem No. 1: There exist a handful of obstacles that prevent a more competency-based education system

7 big problems–and solutions–in education (continued)

Today’s education system includes ingrained practices, including policy and decades-old methods, that prevent schools from moving to competency-based models.