In 2003, the book Moneyball was released. It outlined the strategies of the Oakland A’s – a team with no money that was miraculously competing with some of the biggest dollar teams in baseball like the Yankee’s. Everyone wanted to know how.

Baseball is a game of numbers, a game of statistics (a field education is increasingly dealing with) and it always has been. In the late 90s and early 21st century, the Oakland A’s with Billy Beane at the helm started to question some of these statistics. Why were RBIs such a big deal? Who cares if a pitcher wins 20 games? Little did Beane know, these questions would revolutionize baseball front offices in the coming years.

One team that has embraced this sort of thinking is the Boston Red Sox. Much of their success in the 00s can be attributed to this new line of thinking. General Manager, Theo Epsteins’ recent quote about right fielder, J.D. Drew further illustrates the changing thinking in baseball.

When you’re putting together a winning team, that honestly doesn’t matter. When you have a player who takes a ton of walks, who doesn’t put the ball in play at an above average rate, and is a certain type of hitter, he’s not going to drive in a lot of runs. Runs scored, you couldn’t be more wrong. If you look at a rate basis, J.D. scores a ton of runs.

And the reason he scores a ton of runs is because he does the single most important thing you can do in baseball as an offensive player. And that’s NOT MAKE OUTS … Look at his runs scored on a rate basis with the Red Sox or throughout his career. It’s outstanding.

You guys can talk about RBIs if you want … we ignore them in the front office … and I think we’ve built some pretty good offensive clubs.

So you see what baseball started to figure out was it wasn’t just about statistics. It was about the right statistics. It was about measuring run scoring and run prevention. Sure RBIs is an okay statistic, but there are better statistics to measure the ability of a ballplayer.

What does this have to do with education?

Right now it seems like all every teacher, parent, administrator, uncle, grandma, pastor, politician and journalist care about is educational statistics. How much have are students reading and math scores improved? Are we competing globally? Are our teacher’s improving our kids class scores?

Sure answering these questions is a good thing, but it feels like we are just throwing numbers all over the place. Statistics that don’t measure the right results. RBIs and Wins.

The million dollar question however is what are the right statistics?

Here’s the thing though – It took a long time for baseball to get it right. Bill James, who is widely considered the father of using the right statistics, started publishing his annual Baseball Abstracts in 1977. For 20 years, Bill James was shouting from the roof tops the fallacies of current baseball statistics. Some teams started listening, but many baseball folks are still trying to get it right.

What does that mean for education?

It’s going to take time. There is a lot of information out there and a lot of statistics. It’s nearly impossible for one person to wade through the sea of data and reveal some universal truths about learning.

However, if we keep asking the right questions and keep questioning the norm we’ll find something that will work. One thing to keep in mind, however, is not to jump to conclusions. If some one claims that student tests scores are low because the teachers are poor, he is probably wrong. If someone claims teacher performance has no impact on student performance he is probably wrong too.

I’m excited there is a lot of interest in education right now and hopefully the increased press will bring about innovation in the field.

Like this post? Leave a comment and add us to your RSS feed.

If your students aren’t always enthusiastic about writing assignments, maybe it’s time to try something other than “Tell me what you did on your summer vacation…”

Students will get more out of writing if they’re excited about the topic.  Ask a 12-year-old to tell you why he likes Call of Duty, and I bet he’ll produce 3 or 4 volumes of well-developed prose.

Or, as Rob Stone suggests, have them write about music.

As the online host of the “iPod-inspired, Writing Across the Curriculum homepage“, Rob argues that the two most important things for any student are technology and music.

Thanks to the emergence of personal music players (that’s the PC way of saying iPod) and music studios’ relentless pursuit of students with a disposable income, student’s lives are accompanied by an endless stream of pop music.  While music is primarily distributed for entertainment, most artists explore concepts and themes in their music which may used as a basis for thoughtful writing.

Over at WritingFix, Rob has collected over 50 lessons plans tied to a specific “mentor text” (a song and its lyrics), designed to engage students through writing.

Involving artists like Ben Harper, The Cure, The Beatles, Jack Johnson, and Sara Bareilles, the lessons generally asks students to write a poem that expands on a theme in the song, or to mimic the content and format of a particular selection.

One thing to keep in mind: just because you’re using music doesn’t mean you’re being relevant.  A senior in high school (born around 1991) probably won’t be too familiar with Pat Benatar, Jim Croce, Neil Diamond, or Don McLean.

It’s worth checking out the current Top 30 to see what music your students are likely listening to.  Of course, make sure to check the lyrics to make sure they’re appropriate for class.

And there’s no reason to limit the lesson output to poetry.  You can use “We Didn’t Start the Fire” by Billy Joel to prompt some discussion of historical events and how they shaped our society.  “The 3 R’s” by Jack Johnson is a great way to get students thinking about the environment and they can help the school “go green”.

Let your imagination go wild.  Then, surprise your students by asking them to take out their iPods instead of their pencils.

For some, it only takes a glimpse of life outside the classroom to start questioning the purpose of school. Especially when all the fun seems to happen beyond the academic calendar.

Of course, parental pressure aside, most students stay in school because they realize an education will help them sustain a career they (hopefully) enjoy, affording them a comfortable, satisfying lifestyle. And some students simply like to learn.

But, as a society, are these the only reasons we have school?

Seth Godin thinks there are at least 27 purposes for school. Things like:

6. Pasteurize out the dangerous ideas
7. Give kids something to do while parents work
12. Generate future scientists who will advance medicine and technology
25. Decrease crime by teaching civics and ethics
27. Make sure the sports teams have enough players

Perhaps most compelling is reason #1: “Become an informed citizen”.

Democratic societies give equal power (well, voting rights) to every citizen, and depend on an informed citizenry to make wise decisions. Critics of democracy say that voters will always be irrational to a certain extent, but no one doubts that education is a step in the right direction. What voters know (or think they know) helps determine their vote.

Education also plays a major role in what you care about. For instance, knowing that one billion people do not have access to clean water probably makes you more likely to pressure your congressman to support international relief efforts. And this influences the political trends of the nation as a whole.

A Rand-McNally Grammar School Geography book from 1897 puts it this way:

The republican form of government is the form consistent with the highest degree of civilization. It is a government of the people, by themselves, for their own benefit. As the sovereignty is vested in the whole people, the vote of the poorest, humblest, and most ignorant citizen is as potent as that of the wealthiest, greatest, and most learned.

The danger attending such a government is that ignorant citizens may so far outnumber wise men that, when misled by those who are designing and unprincipled, laws may be enacted that are hurtful to society.

As guard against this danger, republican governments establish systems of public education designed to give to all their citizens such knowledge and mental discipline as will enable them to act with intelligence and judgment in the exercise of sovereignty.

I love it. It’s exciting to think of education as more than job preparation. It’s a contribution to the success of our nation, and people everywhere.

And in addition to “mental discipline”, I think democracy most benefits when educators help students discover the intersection of their passions and skills. Competent workers, doing what they love, inspiring others to achieve more….sounds like a pretty nice place to live.

She cites research commissioned by the British Library and the Joint Information Systems Committee that says:

[Web users] tend to seek information horizontally–meaning they skim, or bounce from page to page, without reading in depth and rarely return to a previous source. About 60 percent of electronic journal users view no more than three pages, the study found, and 65 percent never return.

The study also reveals statistics about students’ preference for web researching. For instance, 89 percent of college students use search engines to begin an information search, the study found–while only 2 percent start from a library web site.

Are students to blame for this? Or is it a design issue?

In my experience, students don’t use library web sites for research because they are more difficult to use. While libraries contain richer, more reliable information than Google, they aren’t designed as well. Students can’t find relevant data as quickly as they can with Google.

The depth of information a reader seeks is also a design issue.

Good designers can present large amounts of information in an intelligent way, that encourages users to read all of it. Perhaps students are skimming more because information sources aren’t designed to encourage in-depth reading.

Ask any student to compare/contrast their favorite textbook with their least favorite. I’ll bet each textbook presents the same amount of information. But the good textbook packages their data better.

Library web sites (and other rich sources of information) aren’t losing the popularity content because they have lots of data. They’re losing because they’re poorly designed.