GOVERNOR’S BRIEFING/Tuesday, May 5
NY State, Gates Foundation
Aim To Reimagine Schools
In ‘New Normal’ To Follow
ALBANY – In his daily briefing, Governor Cuomo announced that New York State is collaborating with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to develop a blueprint to reimagine education in the “new normal.”
As New York begins to develop plans to reopen K-12 schools and colleges, the state and the Gates Foundation will consider what education should look like in the future, including:
• How can we use technology to provide more opportunities to students no matter where they are;
• How can we provide shared education among schools and colleges using technology;
• How can technology reduce educational inequality, including English as a new language students;
• How can we use technology to meet educational needs of students with disabilities;
• How can we provide educators more tools to use technology;
• How can technology break down barriers to K-12 and colleges and universities to provide greater access to high quality education no matter where the student lives; and
• Given ongoing socially distancing rules, how can we deploy classroom technology, like immersive cloud virtual classrooms learning, to recreate larger class or lecture hall environments in different locations?
The state will bring together a group of leaders to answer these questions in collaboration with the Gates Foundation, who will support New York State by helping bring together national and international experts, as well as provide expert advice as needed.
Governor Cuomo also announced a new contest asking New Yorkers to create and share a video explaining why people should wear a mask in public. The winning video will be used as a Public Service Announcement. Videos should be less than 30 seconds long, should show a mask properly worn over the mouth and nose and must be submitted by May 30th. Interested New Yorkers can learn more at WearAMask.ny.gov.
School budgets and dependence on uncertain amounts of state aid make technology alternatives a good thing to investigate. Upstate districts are financially finished for many reasons. Inept school boards, union contracts and vanishing enrollments have been the case for 20 years so alternatives to the status of district management are more than overdue.
Technology is probably the answer. Ask anyone who disagrees what their plan is like I’ve been doing for the last 15 years.
Rick Hulse Sr.
It isn’t a simple question to answer. Technology can only be part of a solution. This crisis has shown us that. The people of this area are certainly a strength and an asset to our community and educational systems. It is a thankless job to be a member of a school board or a administrator, teacher, support staff person sometimes. I appreciate that they have the heart that is needed to do the job. Change will come from this and I hope it is thoughtful and caring to all.
While technology may well be an additional tool for the world of education, it should not be thought to be an end all, be all for education. It does not seem at all possible that the goal of K-12 education can be met without face to face interaction between students and students, students and teachers and students and coaches.
Although most of education focus is on the academic end of things, there can be no doubt that the goal of education is much more sweeping in nature. The learning acquired from sports and other extracurricular activities are every bit as important as academic pursuits. Plus, it is only from face to face interaction that students can learn the all important 4Cs of education, namely caring, cooperation, collaboration and communication.
So while technology should be explored and used as appropriate in education, the need of education to remain dependent for the most part a face to face interaction should not be overlooked.
Catherine Lake Ellsworth, Mount Vernon, Ohio
I have read the preceding responses and can echo the comments made in the last two. It is the first, by Mr. Hulse, that I take exception to.
As society has developed different technologies, schools have included many of these new ideas into their programing and in their approach to teaching. Yes, budget constraints play a very important part in the pace at which the new technologies get introduced. It seems that rural districts have always been fighting the battle of getting their “fair share” of the government distributed dollars to help keep up with the more urban school districts. Declining enrollments and funding tied to enrollment and tax base makes for an even greater challenge. BUT, the comment above singling out “inept school boards” in a discussion of greater use of technology in the delivery of instruction, is terribly misguided. Using the generalization of “upstate” districts and citing the “inept school boards” smacks of an “elitist and deplorable” comparison indicating that downstate districts or more urban districts may have very capable school boards and financially sound programs.
I did not see any ideas outlined in the “new normal” suggestions that address district management as noted in Mr. Hulse’s comments. I am thinking that responding to the material presented regarding the additional use of technology in education was just a way for getting in a shot at the local school boards and nothing to do with the pros or cons of what or how technology would improve the delivery of education.
The use of technology was just beginning to have an impact on education when I retired in 1998. Since then I have been amazed at the ways that technology has influenced how and what students learn. I am sure it will continue to impact learning in ways we may only be able to imagine. Any coordination of efforts to assist with this would be welcome as long as it does not also come with additional unfunded mandates.
Douglas Geertgens