Background

The educational health of a society is determined in greatest measure by its educational system. Using this indicator of educational health as a predictor, the future of the United States is mixed. The top ten percent ofchildren and youth from advantaged backgrounds will continue to experiencea world class education. The fifteen million children and youth in poverty will continue to fall further behind. Estimates of school drop outs range from 3,000 to 7,000 per day. Accepting the low end, most conservative estimate, we will create a citythe size of Chicago every 2 and ½ years filled with low-skilled and no-skilled dropouts each of whom will be a personal tragedy anda drain on the resources of the larger society.

In typical American fashion we are trying to spend our way to a solution. The $500 billion dollars spent each year on education makes it the third largest expenditure after defense and health. Yet, as more is spent each year the number of children and youth in poverty who are left further behind increases.

The HEF Solution

For more than a decade our foundation has been committed to the concept that no school can be better than its teachers and school administrators. The size of a school, its curriculum, organization,materials and equipment, physical facilities, assessment policies, and the amount of funds behind each student all have some effect on learning, but the most powerful effectfor children and youth in poverty is the quality of their teachers.

To implement our commitment to securing outstanding teachers and administrators we have trained the hiring officials in over 220 cities on how to select educators who will make a difference in the learning of children and youth in poverty.Using our selection instruments, these school districts are bringing new populations of educators into the schools who will not only be more effective but who will remain in schools serving poverty students for substantial periods.

In this decade of working with school districts all across America we too have learned; we have sharpened our training and deepened our insights regarding the most critical factors for securing more effective personnel.We now have the ability to turn failing schools into effective ones if given the opportunity to reconstitute the teaching and administrative staffs of such schools.

The Challenge

Problems related to educating all children and youth in the United States are similar to problems in other nations where poverty is even greater and more widespread. What the HEF has learned and can do regarding securing the educators students in poverty need can be of immense help in other countries. At the same time, by implementing our mission on an international basis, we will undoubtedly learn more effective ways of improving schools in America from the experiences and successes of the societies and cultures with which we partner.

The challenge is to conceptualize ways that will enable the HEF to function usefully on an international level.From examining the experiences of the past we knowa great many examples of things that have not worked for other foundations and universities. Efforts that are not connected with clearly observable and assessable projects frequently result in one-time conferences, the publication of unread papers, and even the exchange of individuals who are work in each other's countries for a period of time but whose impactdisappears when they return home.

Future Opportunities

Without precluding numerous other possibilities following are merely some beginning ideas for pursuing the work of the HEF on an international basis.

1. Retest the selection instruments currently used by HEF to select teachers in America to assess their applicability in other nations. Make the necessary adjustments and develop selection instruments appropriate to the particular country. Follow up the use of these instruments to determine their effects.

2. Do the same with selection instruments currently used by HEF to select educational administrators and leaders; assess their applicability in other nations.

3. Work with governmental ministries who are interested in developing new and alternative ways of preparing and certifying teachers for students in poverty. These would be programs that focus on bringing new populations into teaching, and/or preparing them on-the-job rather than in traditional ways.

4. Work with specific school districts and schools that are deemed to be failing. Reconstitute their staffs of teachers and administrators and assess the impact of such efforts on student learning.

5. Work with certifying agencies within the ministries of education on policies and procedures that would help to secure the teachers and administrators who will be effective with students in poverty.

6. Work with particular school districts on ways of improving and upgrading the professional development ofexisting teachers and administrators.These efforts would include the development of technology currently in development at the University of Central Florida and in testing itsapplicability in other cultures.

7. Develop an electronic system for continuously sharing cooperativelydeveloped programs, trouble-shooting problems in offering such programs and evaluating the effectiveness of such projects.

These are merely a few examples of cooperative efforts which might be undertaken.The critical dimension for HEF is that these projects exert some real impact on the education of children and youth in poverty.

Next Steps

The HEF will meet with representatives of interested countries in a conference, in seminars orin individual meetings. The purpose of these meetings will be tolearn more abouthow these nations approach the challenge of selecting educators forstudents in poverty. These meetings will provide a basis for judging the feasibility of HEF forming partnerships to which they may contribute their expertise.