One of the constants of my job is regular contact by salespeople letting me know that their product or program is a must buy for our district. I usually say no thanks. The education support industry is a huge multi-billion dollar organism that is constantly reacting to research and changes in education policy. Each change, the Common Core Standards is the latest such example, offers companies an opportunity to develop a new product. While I appreciate the role of this industry, I am usually reluctant to extend ourselves too far down a company’s path for fear that the product will offset or derail the local nature of our improvement efforts. Although the tension between the product and local need is often weak, it is one that all educators need to keep in mind.
Sustained school improvement is dependent on improving the system and not on a quick programmatic fix. Doing the improvement work in-house allows a district to be responsive and to stay on track. The time to do this work however, is limited. Should we make it or buy it? A current example of this question is deciding whether we should write our own common formative assessments or adopt a national version that mostly fits our curriculum? The temptation to buy your way to improvement is a strong one. It is critical however, that those doing the selling are: part of a larger network that is reciprocal in nature with the school district, willing to make adjustments, provide professional development, and show flexibility with processes. If they are not, then the answer is still no thanks.
Should we make it or buy it?
One of the constants of my job is regular contact by salespeople letting me know that their product or program is a must buy for our district. I usually say no thanks. The education support industry is a huge multi-billion dollar organism that is constantly reacting to research and changes in education policy. Each change, the Common Core Standards is the latest such example, offers companies an opportunity to develop a new product. While I appreciate the role of this industry, I am usually reluctant to extend ourselves too far down a company’s path for fear that the product will offset or derail the local nature of our improvement efforts. Although the tension between the product and local need is often weak, it is one that all educators need to keep in mind.
Sustained school improvement is dependent on improving the system and not on a quick programmatic fix. Doing the improvement work in-house allows a district to be responsive and to stay on track. The time to do this work however, is limited. Should we make it or buy it? A current example of this question is deciding whether we should write our own common formative assessments or adopt a national version that mostly fits our curriculum? The temptation to buy your way to improvement is a strong one. It is critical however, that those doing the selling are: part of a larger network that is reciprocal in nature with the school district, willing to make adjustments, provide professional development, and show flexibility with processes. If they are not, then the answer is still no thanks.