When I went to school, the education of the day prepared me to be successful in the current society. Repeating that type of education would do the students of today a disservice. The pace of change is accelerating. The direction of that change is both awesome (e.g., changes in communication technology blending computers and telephones) and frightening (e.g., degradation of the majority of Earth’s eco-systems and a growing gap between the “haves” and the ‘have nots”). With globalization and climate change the problems that were once geographically distant are arriving on our doorsteps. To deal with the problems of tomorrow students of today will need to learn to deal with complexity, work collaboratively across disciplines, and make decisions in an uncertain environment.

There are a number of educational initiatives that attempt to address the questions associated with what type of education should we provide to students of today to prepare them for the workforce and civic participation (e.g., Partnership for 21^st Century Skills and EdSteps Global Competencies). Such initiatives seem to fall short, in part because they do not identify the purpose of primary and secondary education. While the vast majority of school districts wrestle with providing a quality education for students—which is admirable—often the purpose of that education goes undefined. Is the purpose still to create a workforce that will keep the U.S. economically competitive as mentioned in A Nation at Risk in 1983? Educating for economic competitiveness created a few short-term winners and lots of losers. In the long run every country is currently paying or will pay the price of ecological deterioration, social inequity, and economic instability inside their borders or in a neighboring country or trading partner. Could the purpose of education become safeguarding the well being of the students now and in the future which would entail working toward the common good, global stability, and a brighter more sustainable tomorrow?

Some states and provinces (State of Washington and the Province of Manitoba of Canada) as well as countries (Finland and India) have included sustainability as a major curricular theme. Education for sustainable development (ESD) has become an overarching paradigm for educational discourse outside of the USA as a result of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005 – 2014. As I look at the first graders and think about their collective future, I am of the opinion that the formal education community in the U.S. should engage in exploring the ESD paradigm.

Rosalyn McKeown is the Secretariat for the UNESCO Chair on Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainability at York University in Toronto, Canada

Today, there are a plethora of alternative certification programs that provide different pathways for those who want to work as a teacher.  In Washington, DC the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) lists 13 organizations that are state-approved educator preparation programs, of those only 8 are colleges and or universities. The other five are non-profit organizations or Local Education Agency’s. In an effort to recruit more teachers, especially in areas where there are national shortages such as special education, math and science, many states are advocating for alternative programs that offer certification to prospective teachers, without requiring a degree in education.  In New York, the Department of Education is now asking for the ability to license teachers without having to go through college or universities. What does this mean for traditional teacher education programs?

One of the well known alternative programs is Teach for America (TFA). TFA recruits recent college graduates to teach in high poverty, inner city schools. They receive five weeks of training before receiving their own class of students.  Teachers from traditional programs take a variety of courses to gain knowledge about child development, teaching, and learning that typically take 4 to 6 semesters, and spend 12 weeks or more as a student teacher working full time alongside a qualified teacher before they are expected to take on their own classroom. The latter is more time consuming, but it also offers more opportunity to become highly qualified.

Teacher shortages are real and we must do something to recruit more highly qualified young people into the field of education. But we must remember that teaching is a profession. It requires skills and knowledge and opportunities to learn from those who have more experience.  When we reduce teaching to something that can be learned in a few short weeks, we devalue and de-professionalize the field of teaching.

Traditional teacher education programs must now compete for students that might be swayed by these new programs offering a paying job as a teacher much sooner than what it takes to complete an undergraduate program. But is teaching a job or a career? Are we professionals or are we low-skilled workers? Do you want the person educating your child to have the knowledge, skills, and preparation needed to be a great teacher, or would you prefer someone who had five weeks of training?

Dr. Denisha Jones is an assistant professor and coordinator of Early Childhood Education at Howard University

What do students do with this knowledge when they face the prospect of having to earn a living?

An answer to this question lies in the letters of “T” and “E” of STEM.  James Pellegrino and Margaret L. Hilton note that “deeper learning” and “transfer” are important goals of education (National Research Council. Education for Life and Work: Delivering Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21^st Century. Washington, DC. The National Academy Press, 2012). 

Technology and engineering offer real-world opportunities for deeper learning and transferability of cross-cutting concepts of scientific and mathematical ideas, principles and processes.

How to effectively integrate these themes into curricula that engender college and career readiness remains a challenge.

Raymond J. Dagenais, Ed.D. is a Curriculum/Professional Development Specialist at the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy and a co-leader of the Design Team for the Aurora University based John C. Dunham STEM Partnership School

William L. Sterrett is an assistant professor and CIS coordinator in the Watson College of Education at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington.

A uniform approach and less political posturing are needed. We have experienced horrific events at Sandy Hook Elementary and Columbine High School. We do not need politicians who are posturing for re-election or furthering their political careers to be using the safety of our schools as a political issue.

Clear thinking and reasonable solutions are what is needed.  Conversations about real solutions and remedies for this horrible trend have to be had. Conversations that involve all stakeholders and not just politicians can pinpoint real solutions that are based on real situations. Research is telling us that our schools are much safer now than a decade ago.

The conversation should focus on what is working and how to make real choices and improvements that will continue to improve the safety of our most precious national resource.  Instead of new gun regulations that would most likely not prevent a mentally unstable individual from entering a school and shooting students and teachers, a plausible approach would be to look at policies that have already proven to be  successful and add to or improve upon those policies.

Marcia Bolton, Ed.D. is an Associate Professor of Education and the Director Certification, Student Teaching and Intern Programs at Widener University Chester, PA.

While ensuring a safe learning environment is not arguable practical constraints very often determine the strategies and procedures that can be effectively employed in achieving this result.   Frequently, cost is at the top of the list.  But schools have found ways to fund efforts to provide safe learning environments.

Despite the implementation of such procedures I have seen people (myself included) wandering around schools that I have had the opportunity to visit not having checked –in, not being escorted, not wearing visitor identification.   Yet the money has been spent on efforts to secure entry.

Are those of us responsible for implementing security strategies and procedures truly paying attention, making a personal commitment, putting forth the effort to make sure that, to the best of our abilities, schools remain a safe place to spend time?

How effective is restricted access in establishing a safe learning environment?

Raymond J. Dagenais, Ed.D. is a Curriculum/Professional Development Specialist at the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy and a co-leader of the Design Team for the Aurora University based John C. Dunham STEM Partnership School

If sequestration occurs…it looks like Virginia schools would lose $69,002,000, with an impact on 114,030 students, and job losses totaling 1,317.

In addition to the pure political content offered by the election aftermath, there are important implications for education. These will have a direct impact on you and your students, so it’s important to be informed.  The candidates agreed that education is vital to the American economy, but offered different visions for the future of American education. With Congress still divided, education reform will remain a heated debate. Now that President Obama has won re-election, it is time to focus on what he and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan seek to accomplish in the next four years. EdWeek has suggested five key areas, including reauthorizing ESEA legislation and continuing to pursue Common Core standards.

In June we encouraged you to discuss the election with your students. Now that the election is over, the real implications begin. What education policies do you think the administration should pursue?

Alexander “Sandy” Pope is a Ph.D. student in social studies education at Teachers College, Columbia University