6 Reasons for Using Evernote as Your To-Do List Application

EVERNOTE IS NO LONGER AN ACCEPTABLE OPTION FOR ME. BENDING SPOONS ACQUIRED IT IN 2023 AND HAVE DEFORMED THIS PRODUCT AND ITS COSTS TO THE POINT THAT I WOULD NOT LONGER RECOMMEND IT.

Still looking for a good way to keep track of all those administrative tasks? I've tried several to-do apps but Evernote's versatility and features make it an excellent choice to keep up with your daily, or in my case, weekly task lists. I have a notebook in Evernote dedicated to keeping my weekly tasklists in one place. Every Monday morning, I open and start a brand new list. Using the Evernote's check-box feature, I create a box and enter each item. I check off items as the week progresses, and I add new ones as I stumble across them. As often happens in the life of a school administrator, I have a few items left over at the end of the week. I just copy and past them into the next week's Task List. There are several great reasons for using Evernote as your "To-Do List App."

• You can create task lists very easily.
• Once created, you can access your task list across devices and on the web. Your task list follows you around like a shadow.
• You can create a notebook where you store all your task lists for back reference if needed.
• Use the "Tag" feature to make your task lists fully searchable.
• Upload any files such as Word Docs, PDFs or photos right into the task list. That means you don't have to search elsewhere for the files needed for the task.
• Create a shared task list and share it with your assistance principals. That way you can tackle the tasks as a team.

Evernote's versatility make it my "To-Do List App" of choice. 

Evernote Task List

Get Evernote by visiting their web site. https://evernote.com/

ASCD Calls for Move Away from Sole Reliance on Standardized Testing for Accountability

One of the leading educator organizations in this country is calling for an end to the over-reliance on standardized testing in accountability practices.They are calling for what is called "multimetric accountability" by which, according to their press-release includes:

• not using standardized test scores as the "sole measure of student achievement, educator effectiveness, or school quality."
• having an accountability system that "promotes continuous support and improvement and that also is: "public and transparent, includes a range of subjects beyond English and mathematics, and that incorporates non-academic factors such as measures of school climate, safety, and parental engagement."

I applaud ASCD's decision to wade into the over-reliance of standardized testing issue by our federal and state education leaders and policymakers. We in North Carolina now subject our students more state tests than we ever have, and because of the emphasis on using these tests in teacher and principal evaluations, we are turning our schools into "test-prep factories." ASCD's call for a move to "multimetric accountability measures can't come too soon. I just hope they sent a copy of their press release to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and to the state education leaders here in North Carolina.

Here's the entire text of the ASCD press release.

ASCD Releases 2014 Legislative Agenda, Calls for Increased Multimetric Accountability

Alexandria, VA (01/29/2014)—ASCD released its 2014 Legislative Agenda on Monday, January 27th, at the association’s Leadership Institute for Legislative Advocacy in Washington, D.C. Developed by the association’s Legislative Committee—a diverse cross section of ASCD members representing the entire spectrum of K–12 education—the 2014 ASCD Legislative Agenda outlines the association’s federal policy priorities for the year.

The key priority for ASCD and its members in 2014 is to promote multimetric accountability so that standardized test scores are not the sole measure of student achievement, educator effectiveness, or school quality. Multimetric accountability systems must promote continuous support and improvement and:

• Be public and transparent.
• Include a range of subjects beyond English language arts and mathematics.
• Incorporate important nonacademic factors such as measures of school climate, safety, and parental engagement.

“ASCD believes college and career readiness includes educating the whole child and involves more than proficiency in one or two subjects,” said David Griffith, ASCD director of public policy. “Multimetric accountability systems should use formative assessments, evidence of student learning, and progress toward personal growth objectives to measure student and teacher success rather than rely on standardized test scores as the primary reference point.”

To focus improvement efforts on the need of students, the association is also recommending a well-rounded approach to education that supports the whole child, safe and effective conditions for learning, and ongoing professional development to support educator effectiveness. ASCD firmly believes policymakers must consider the best interests of students as the deciding factor in each and every recommendation. Some additional items of importance this year are

• The availability of Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, or college dual-enrollment courses for all students.
• In-school social and emotional learning, mental health services, and counseling to increase students’ capacity to achieve.
• Making the necessary investments in time and money to support educators along the entire career continuum.

For educators seeking to become informed about the education policy and politics that influence their day-to-day work, ASCD offers the Educator Advocates program. This program empowers educators to speak up and shape our nation’s future by joining with colleagues to help lawmakers make the best education decisions. Educator Advocates receive a host of benefits, including theCapitol Connection weekly e-newsletter and just-in-time e-mail alerts on important issues, designed to position them to make a decisive difference.

The complete 2014 ASCD Legislative Agenda can be found at www.ascd.org/legislativeagenda. For more information on ASCD’s Educator Advocates program, visit www.EducatorAdvocates.org. Visit www.ascd.org to learn more about ASCD programs, products, services, and membership.

Who Controls the School Calendar in NC? Not Those Making Decisions for Kids!

A few years back, our North Carolina legislature succumbed the heavy lobbying of the travel and tourism industry, as well as an organization called Save Our Summers, and passed a law that public schools can't start their school year before August 25 and must end the school year by June 10. This organization, called Save Our Summers, which has a Web Site here (Save Our Summers Website), lobbied and successfully pushed through this legislation which took the decisions about the yearly calendar out of school leaders hands. This organization claims to be a "volunteer coalition of parents, grandparents, and education professionals" and their purpose is to "preserve the summer months for outside-the-classroom childhood and learning experiences." In realty, one can only wonder if their real mission is to preserve a long summer calendar so that families will potentially spend more time and money filling the coffers of the travel and tourism industry in North Carolina. One can only suspect that their party is probably fully funded by the travel and tourism industry, but since they provide no transparency regarding their donors, who knows!

Today, I stumbled across this Op Ed from Texas entitled "King: Travel Industry Dictates School Schedule in Texas." Apparently, the state of Texas also suffers with the same problem: a sector of business and industry dictates school policy. In stead of being able to construct a school calendar that fits the needs of the school system and students, districts in Texas also have to create calendars that appease the tourism industry.

This problem is perhaps a symptom of a much, much larger problem with public education in the United States. Many, many educational decisions are not the result of sound, effective reasoning about what's ultimately good for kids; educational decisions are way too often the result of who lobbies the loudest and who can spend the most money to get what they want.

What's really interesting in North Carolina, charter schools don't have to abide by this calendar law. They can set their calendars to begin and end independently of the law. This, of course, brings up an entirely different question as to why should charter schools be exempt and public schools not. Don't the kids of those schools deserve the same consideration regarding the "preservation of the summer months for outside-the-classroom and learning experiences?"

Controlling the school calendar so that schools optimize learning for students and maximize district operations is common sense. One thing the legislature and governor needs to do if they want to prove they're supporting education this year is to give school districts back the flexibility of setting their school calendars instead of once again proving that they listen to special interests.

4 Reasons to Attend the Ohio Educational Technology Conference 2014: Check Out the Keynote Lineup!

There are plenty of opportunities to learn more about ed tech at this year's Ohio Educational Technology Conference beginning this Monday January 27. Here's the Keynote Speaker lineup for this year's conference.

Monday, January 27

9:30 a.m.- 10:30 a.m.
Kevin Honeycutt, Technology Integration Specialist, ESSDACK

Inspirational Teachers Change Minds and Lives

This keynote is an exploration of the importance of inspirational teaching and of building positive relationships with learners. I share stories of transformational teachers and experiences along with powerful tools and ideas to help today’s teachers make a difference in the lives of kids. I seek to help educators re-believe in themselves and re-find that spark that launched them into education in the first place. I challenge teachers to become the always-on learners that we need our kids to be. I share my passion for stories to inspire kids and challenge teachers to tell their own stories and help others understand that teaching is much more than a job. Join me for this inspirational message that is designed to help heal and re-inspire educators and empower them to continue to do the most important job on Earth. Bring an open heart and an open mind and we’ll find our teaching power together.                                                                                       

On Monday, January 27, 2014 at 1:00 p.m. Kevin will also host his Featured Workshop Session, "Teaching "Wired" Learners"!

3:45 p.m.- 4:45 p.m.
Jack Uldrich, Renowned Global Futurist and Best Selling Author

Why Future Trends in Higher Education Demand Unlearning

In the past 100 years, the world has witnessed a startling amount of change—everything from mass industrialization and globalization to space flight and longer life expectancies. Experts are now predicting society will witness a comparable amount of change within the next two decades. In this fast-paced, informative and entertaining presentation, renowned global futurist Jack Uldrich will provide an insightful overview of how a number of technological trends—information technology, mobile web communications, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), social networking, artificial intelligence, wearable technology, business analytics (data mining) and gaming dynamics—are fueling significant change within the field of higher education. Uldrich will then share a number of “unlearning” strategies higher education professionals can employ today to not only prepare their institutions and organizations for tomorrow’s change but also seize the opportunity to create a better and brighter future for their students and themselves.

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

9:30 a.m.- 10:30 a.m.                                                             
Dr. Casey Wardynski, National Educational Technology Teacher of the Year
Sponsored by  

Preparing Students to Succeed in the Conceptual Age

We live in an exponential age in which knowledge is created and obsoleted at an accelerating pace.  Exponential forces are now at work which are redefining the way in which we live, work and play.  Our role is to provide students with exceptional learning experiences that prepare them for life and career in a world of exponential change.  The way we define, organize and provide educational services must change to meet the needs of students in the time in which we live.


Wednesday, January 29, 2014

9:30 a.m.- 10:30 a.m.
Alan November, Founder of November Learning, Inc

Leadership: Managing the Transition

Listen as he outlines essential skills for leadership and offer both practical guidelines and creative solutions for building accountability into the planning and implementation process. Articulating vision and mission, managing change, and aligning technology to primary curricular goals are emphasized. He will explore the “leader as a role model” concept and look at various professional development opportunities, such as joining a global professional community.


For more information about the Ohio Educational Technology Conference 2014 visit their Website.

Ohio Educational Technology Conference 2014 Web Site

What Are the Real Motives Behind the Common Core State Standards? Let's Be Honest with Ourselves!

Today,  there was this post on the Public School Forum of North Carolina website defending the Common Core. That post, entitled "Common Core Standards Will Help NC Meet Its Challenges," was written by Caroline McCullen, the director of education initiatives at SAS which already has a multi-million dollar contract with North Carolina to provide value-added teacher data analysis software for teacher and principal evaluations.

Let me say up front in the interest of disclosure. I am a skeptic about the Common Core, not because I do not believe in the need to have higher standards. Also, who knows, the scheme might ultimately bring about some positive change in education. But, as a skeptic and admitted cynic about the reasons the Common Core were developed, my cynicism says that perhaps these standards were developed as a commercial opportunity for corporations like Pearson and other test companies to make more money off the public school systems. After all, as Diane Ravitch points out, those tasked for developing these standards "contained few educators, but a significant number of representatives of the testing industry." (See "Everything Your Need to Know Know about the Common Core.") Now, Ravitch has made it clear that she doesn't support the Common Core either. However, I will set aside my own skepticism and cynicism and look carefully at the arguments used to defend the Common Core the post.

• The Common Core is "more rigorous than North Carolina's previous standards."
• The Common Core is "benchmarked against college and career readiness measures.."
• The Common Core is "endorsed by governors of both parties across the country."
• The Common Core will "assure North Carolina citizens and business community that our students and future employees are challenged in the classroom and prepared to meet to compete in the global economy."
• Because North Carolina NAEP scores declined in 2009, the state's standards "were lower" there the Common Core standards are needed.
• The Common Core is needed because we need more rigorous tests so that we can compare students across the state and across the country.

Let's examine each of these points/

Are the Common Core standards more rigorous than North Carolina's previous standards?Probably, but neither McCullen nor our own state provide any extensive evidence to support this claim. They ask us to accept it as a fact. Certainly, if I look at the CCSS and the previous standards, I can see for myself that they are parts that are more rigorous, but when making claims, it is the responsibility of the one making the claims to support it, not me. In a document entitled "13 Things to Know about the Common Core State Standards in North Carolina" (See document here), makes the assertion that CCSS are more rigorous but doesn't provide any kind of analysis to support their claim either, nor is there a citation to any evidence. In fact, I could not find any detailed analysis that compares North Carolina's previous standards with the CCSS to determine which was more rigorous. If anyone knows such a detailed analysis I would like to see it. But what if they are more rigrous? Does it directly mean they are somehow better? What if in their rigorousness they aren't developmentally appropriate? What if what is assigned to one grade level is above the cognitive ability level of the students in that grade level? Then there's that whole argument that grade level assignments are bogus and arbitrary to begin with.We Americans seem to have a fetish for this word "rigorous" as if magically more rigorous always means better and more appropriate.

McCullen next argues that the "Common Core is bench-marked against college and career readiness measures." Those supporting the Common Core have been making this claim from the beginning. What does benchmarked really mean? According to one definition, it is a verb which means "to evaluate and check (something) by comparison with a standard." Does this really mean anything? Educators are notorious, especially testing and standards experts, for using words like to this to provide some kind of legitimacy to whatever they are arguing for. Still, if those who support these Common Core Standards argue that they are "benchmarked" then I suppose we have to take their word for it.

Next, McCullen argues that we should accept these standards because they are "endorsed by the governors of both parties across the country." This point really adds nothing to the argument as to why these standards are legitimate. In using an "argument from authority" McCullen tries to somehow make these standards valid simply because the governors accept them. Governor McCrory accepts the practice of school vouchers but that doesn't mean I agree with him. Just because the "authorities" accept the Common Core does make them any more legitimate. Using the fact the National Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers is simply arguing that because these individuals are in positions of authority, then the standards are worthy of being accepted or adopted. Arguments from authority do not really support why they should be implemented.

McCullen then argues is that the Common Core will somehow "assure the citizens of North Carolina and business community that our students and future employees are challenged in the classroom and prepared to meet the global economy." McCullen's claim here has no scientific or otherwise any evidence to support it at all. These standards will only assure the citizens of North Carolina that students are challenged, if those citizens see them as valid and challenging. There is simply no evidence to support this claim because the standards haven't been in place long enough to assure anyone of anything. They were not tested, just implemented.  The Common Core standards by themselves aren't evidence that anyone would be assured of anything until they have been implemented, tested and tried.. It's their effective implementation that will attest to how challenging they are, and we want know that for years, if they last that long.

Next, McCulen uses the decline in NAEP scores to claim that North Carolina standards were low. This claim also can't be made either. A decline in standardized test scores can be caused by anything, and was most likely caused by many, many factors. McCullen provides only a general statement without any supporting statistics to support her assertion.

The final assertion McCullen makes is that CCSS are needed because we need more rigorous tests in order to compare students nationally. This claim betrays what I am afraid the real motivation behind the Common Core is: the development and implementation of a nation-wide testing system that is a sure to be bonanza of companies like Pearson, College Board, and the ACT. The ACT has already announced an initiative to develop their own "Common Core" tests to be peddled to the states. Then there are companies like SAS waiting in the wings to sell data analysis software to all 50 states. The Common Core is all about testing and reforming education so that tests work better. Does any else see anything wrong with forcing our education system to fit testing so that it works rather than reforming our education so that it better serves students?

It is time for those peddling the Common Core to stop using vague generalities and marketing statements to sell it. Let's just be honest about it and what the motives are for implementing them. Ultimately, it might prove to be more rigorous and better prepare our students to complete globally. They might even assure our communities that classrooms are in fact more challenging. But until they have been implemented, making such claims do not make them true. Also, be honest about motives. The Common Core was implemented in order to provide standards that could be tested nationally so policy makers and education leaders can compare how students are doing nationally. For example,  being able to say in your role as State Superintendent that my state was "number one" on the National Achievement test after all is a good trophy to have. Then of course, there's the commercial bonanza to boot where all manner of companies can now make a bundle too. Who does it harm? Let's hope not the kids and our educational system.

3 Steps to Being Civil on Twitter: It's OK to Block the Trolls!

Is there anyone like myself who sometimes feels just a twinge of guilt when blocking the latest troll that responds to your tweet? Part of me believes that in the interest of fairness I should hear what they have to say; that it's OK for someone to disagree. But a bigger part of me wants to draw the line. Often these "trolls" as they are called do not really add anything to the discussion or conversation; they simply engage in name calling and derogatory language. They aren't interested in exchanging ideas. They are only interested in promoting their "rightness" or righteousness.

One of the biggest problems we have as a society today is the lack of civil discourse. I know, I have been guilty from time to time too, of letting my passion for what I believe in get in the way of engaging in a productive conversation. Taming that passion is hard, especially when you believe in something so completely. Yet, when those passions rule, we end up with virtual Twitter Town-Hall Meetings where no one is doing anything but yelling at each other. That is often the result of those exchanges with those trolling Twitter and looking for a fight to pick. So why do we continue to engage in them?

We need civil discourse more than ever because of the major issues we face: climate change, depletion of natural resources, pollution, and a host of problems bearing down on us globally. Yes, I am well aware that there are those who are unable, incapable, or unwilling to engage in a civil conversation about these issues. There are even those working hard to deny that these are really problems and that they even exist.Yet, that does not mean we can't work to foster an atmosphere where civil discourse can happen, even on Twitter? As a Twitter user, here's some of the measures I plan to take to do my part.

1. Before I Tweet, I will reflect just a moment and ask, "Is what I'm tweeting about people or about ideas? Is it helpful discourse or harmful?" I can disagree with Arne Duncan and Pearson about the direction public education is taking. I can even criticize what looks to be an agenda of corporatizing public education, but what I need to refrain from doing is attacking the person. We can be miles apart from someone philosophically and not see them as an enemy. We need not be guilty of being so attached to our desire to be right that we belittle others. Reflect then Tweet is pretty solid advice.

2. Block the trolls and those who do not engage civilly. I give myself permission without remorse to block those who break into the conversation with name-calling and personal attacks. Calling someone a "loon" or otherwise belittling them is not fitting discourse, and we need to give ourselves permission to walk away. If such people want to be heard, let's engage in discourse about ideas, not personalities. In the future, I give myself permission to block those who do not engage in conversation civilly. As a society, those with rigid mindsets and strongly attached to being right are not subject to being convinced by argument any way, so why engage them?

3. I must always remember no one really owns an idea, opinion or perspective. We become so attached to our perspective, we scream to the word "it's mine" when we approach discourse with a rigid mind. In reality, an idea or opinion is just that. Being open-minded means being flexible and open to the real possibility that we might be wrong. This is sometimes so difficult for me personally. I want to be right so I work hard to make it so, but where things go wrong is when being right become more important than the truth. Also, things go wrong when being right means more than being compassionate to the people around us. As I engage in online discourse through Twitter, Facebook, and elsewhere may I remember that being open-minded, being compassionate is more important than being right.

We don't have to allow those wanting to turn the Web into a Townhall where people shout at each so loudly neither side is hearing the other to do that. It's perfectly OK to "block the trolls" and refuse to engage in conversations with those not willing to be civil in their discourse, but we also must be aware of when we ourselves slide into that mode too.

Being Right Isn't the Most Important Thing: Getting Leadership Right

"One of the biggest problems we encounter is verbal communication that is misunderstood or unskillfully handled." Sharon Salzberg & Robert Thurman, Love Your Enemies: How to Break the Anger Habit & Be a Whole Lot Happier

It's Monday morning, and you're sitting at your desk. You get a call from your school receptionist that Ms. (You Insert the Name Here) has arrived in the office and she is agitated and angry, much like she usually is. Your receptionist informs you that she is upset once again about something that's happened to her daughter in the classroom. Upon hearing this news, you begin to tense up, as if ready for battle. You just didn't need to face this parent this morning. She has a habit of showing up when a thousand things are already on your calendar. You tell your receptionist that you'll be there in just a few minutes.

This scenario is common experience for any school administrator. Even when I was a teacher, there were those few parents I just hated to get a phone message in my box or an email requesting a meeting. I knew they were angry, and I knew they wanted a piece of me. They were generally unhappy with life and wanted to take it out on me and whoever else happens to be convenient. As Salzberg and Thurman point out, these moments are when our verbal communication can be easily misunderstood if we don't handle speaking and acting skillfully. In these crucial moments when others approach us armed and ready, it is crucial that we use the right speech.

According to Buddhist thinking, the criteria for determining what "right speech" is involves two questions: 1) Is it true? and 2) Is it useful? Notice that saying the right thing here involves both of these. What we say obviously must be true. Speaking falsehoods and untruths are never acceptable. But also notice that just because something is true that doesn't mean we have to say it. Take the parent scenario above. While the truth might be that the parent is being entirely unreasonable and a bully, it would not be considered skillful to state this truth directly. Just because something is true does not give us blanket permission to say it. What we need is sensitivity and discernment, according to Salzberg and Thurman.

How does this look in life and in our leadership in the school and classroom? We sometimes must recognize "being silent is sometimes better than speech that is not true or speech that is not useful."Speaking lies and deception are never successful in resolving issues. If untruths are used, once the truth is known, even if at a later date, the issue becomes even more complicated because now we have our own deception of others to deal with too. On the other hand, things that might be true, might also be best left unsaid because speaking them is not useful. Being insensitive and uncouth is rampant in American society today. Many, many government leaders seem to lack sensitivity. They speak what might be true, but is certainly not useful. Here are some excellent questions we can ask ourselves during these crucial moments when we're trying to decide what to say:

• What actually matters the most at this moment? What do I care about more than anything else right now? Answering this question truthfully makes it very difficult to say what is unskillful. In the parent scenario earlier, it becomes immediately clear that neither the parent's obvious cantankerousness nor your aggravation are paramount. Determining what happened to the child that concerns the parent is most important. By refocusing out attention on what matters most we can set aside everything else.
• When you find yourself in conflict, do you care more about being right or being happy? Often, we get so caught up in our own righteousness that we seem to forget that "being right" isn't the most important thing at a given moment. Sometimes parents or even students we deal with might be wrong, but our insistence of being right can only make things even more difficult. Sometimes we just have to let go of our wanting to be right in order to connect with others.
• Can you step off your pedestal long enough to acknowledge that being right might not matter if it only prolongs or exacerbates the problems? The pedestal of righteousness many school leaders and even classroom teachers stand on is quite high. Again our insistence of being right is sometimes not useful in every situation, so we must let it go.

How you approach potential verbal confrontations with others is an excellent indicator of your own leadership ability. According to biographer Walter Isaacson, Steve Jobs notoriously called things as he saw them. He was well-known by those he worked for, for stating the obvious and the truth no matter how hurtful or harmful it might be. His belittling of subordinates is legendary. Sure, he and his company were highly successful, and some others have argued that his "blunt and direct" way of speaking to others was the reason. I suspect it to be a bit more complicated than that. Sometimes, the important principle for leaders in schools and classrooms is to remember: "Being right isn't the most important thing."