Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform November 4, 2015

Lessons from Educators on the Big Screen: Part II

For better or worse, films influence people. While known for exaggeration, I do feel like the best-made films contribute something to society at large. In the case of movies where excellence in teaching is the star, there is a lot to be gleaned – whether for first time or veteran teachers.

In part I of this series, I wrote about four inspirational movies that highlight transcendent educators. Today I want look at a few more of my favorites from the big screen and the lessons they teach teachers about their important jobs.

Lean on Me (1989). This is not really about a teacher per se, but about a principal. Joe Clark (Morgan Freeman) comes to save a school about to be taken over by the state. It is run down and full of rebellious and even criminal-minded young people. Joe Clark, the principal with the baseball bat, quickly tries to run the school like some angry but well-meaning despot. At first his teachers are against his methods (and critics of the movie made the same mistake), but as both students and teachers warm up to him, it’s clear that what he is doing is really working.

He does, however, have his enemies; particularly one member of the School Board, who is trying to get him fired. When he is caught chaining the school doors against the fire department’s regulation, he is put in jail, and the School Board convenes a special session to decide if he should be fired. But the students show up in front of the jail en masse and demand his release, which is eventually granted. Immediately after his release, he receives good news; the entire student body has passed the test administered by the state. This movie is yet another shining examples of a dedicated educator who breaks the rules and succeeds precisely for that reason.

Dangerous Minds (1995). This may begin to sound like a litany, but Dangerous Minds is yet another story (based on a true story) involving the dedication of a teacher in an underpriviledged school. Here Michelle Pfeiffer plays the real-life LouAnne Johnson, whose story the movie is based on. Johnson, an ex-Marine, is hired on the spot without really being informed of the kind of class she is to teach. Her students are not interested in learning, are disrespectful and the class is basically in chaos. At first she almost gives up in frustration, but then she decides not to. Once she has made up in her mind that she is going to win over the students, the “battle” begins. Once more, we have a movie about a teacher who breaks as many rules as it takes. In the end, the class is completely won over. In fact, they not only start learning and enjoying it, but they have also come to love and respect their teacher along the way.

Freedom Writers (2007). This is based on another true story. Here Hilary Swank plays the real-life Erin Gruwell. Her dedication also leads to a compassionate understanding of her underprivileged students, and she achieves the ultimate breakthrough when she informs them that they aren’t the first young people besieged by problems. Although she is not permitted to use The Diary of Ann Frank, she does precisely that, at her own expense. She also buys notebooks for her students and encourages them to keep diaries that she would only read if they permitted her to do so. Needless to say, breaking all the rules once more allows her to become an exceptional teacher whom her students come to love.

While I’m not advocating anarchy and chaos in the classroom, all these movies are good at pointing out that you can’t have a great school by making everything and everyone wear the same straitjacket. Rules and regulations are fine, provided that they don’t interfere with the real business of teaching. These fictional and real-life educators got through to their students by leveling with them, by understanding where they come from, and by empathizing with their struggles.

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers November 4, 2015

The Implications of Universal Preschool

President Obama has been vocal about his belief that a publicly-funded universal preschool initiative is necessary to give American children an academic advantage before ever setting foot in a Kindergarten classroom. A poll conducted by the bipartisan team of Hart Research and Public Opinion Strategies found that 70 percent of respondents were in full support of a universal preschool plan as long as it did not contribute to the national deficit. Sixty percent of the Republicans polled supported the plan, despite its close ties with the Democratic Chief. It is clear that average Americans, despite party affiliation, are supportive of essentially extending the public school system to include preschool-aged students – but should K-12 educators be on

On paper, universal preschool seems like it would provide a definite boost to the K-12 academic initiatives that follow. Children with an earlier start in school settings should hypothetically have a stronger knowledge base before Kindergarten and be further developed in the social aspects that accompany the school years, and life beyond them. Common sense would dictate that adding a one-year option for preschool would lead to higher achievement throughout the K-12 journey, but the facts actually contradict this stance.

Studies of federal early education programs, like Head Start, have found that kids entrenched in academics early on show little to no academic advantages compared to kids that started school later. The positive academic impact of early education programs is non-existent by fifth grade. Further, state-based preschool campaigns in states like Oklahoma reveal no real long-term critical thinking or social advantages for the students.

The idea that setting kids in a school environment earlier than Kindergarten leads to better, smarter students is flawed – if just the results of these studies are to be trusted.

So then what is with the push for this universal preschool? Critics of the plan say it is just a way to add more education jobs, particularly since proponents want to insist that states accepting federal preschool dollars pay preschool teachers at the same rate as elementary ones.

The plan has also been accused of being a federally-funded childcare angle meant to help alleviate the cost woes of working parents along with giving kids a jump on academics. Predictably, this ruffles the feathers of constituents who are already leery of Obama’s so-called “socialist agenda” and the government having too much control over family affairs. Both claims are a stretch, in my opinion, and not the real issues that need to be discussed when it comes to the worthiness of universal preschool.

The real question that needs to be answered is whether or not starting kids earlier, across the board, will have a measurable impact on the success of American students throughout their careers. This answer comes with a host of complications though. What specific gains will constitute “success” in a universal preschool initiative? Higher standardized test scores? Better graduation rates? More graduates who go on to earn math and science degrees? Laying out a preschool plan that does not spell out any goals, or steps for achievement, is like sowing seeds haphazardly in a field and hoping something comes to fruition.

The second question should be: If implemented, how long will it take to see potential improvements? At what grade level will universal preschool benefits materialize – or at what age do educators stop hoping to see any positive impact?

Education is a right for all children but the how and when of that learning is muddy. Universal preschool may be the boost American children need to regain some academic ground on the world stage – or it may prove to be a better idea in theory than practice.

What are your thoughts on publicly funded universal preschool?

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation November 4, 2015

District 49 Partners with myON to Present Leaders in Literacy Summit

Colorado district to host November 5 event to highlight best practices in reading readiness

(Peyton, CO) — On Thursday November 5, 2015, District 49 will host the Leaders in Literacy Colorado Summit. The Summit will provide educators with tools to achieve third-grade reading readiness and college and career preparedness. Leaders and teachers from around the state will also share their best practices for boosting literacy achievement.

The complimentary event, taking place at District 49’s Creekside Campus from 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., will include a keynote presentation, breakout sessions, and a panel discussion.

“At District 49, we believe high-performing teams are the engines of innovation and productivity, and are fully committed to the third-grade reading initiative and incorporating rigor and high expectations around literacy,” said Peter Hilts, District 49’s Chief Education Officer. “We are honored to be part of the Leaders in Literacy Summit, which brings together Colorado’s best to learn from each other and better support students in our great state.”

Jason Turner, Professional Development Director at MetaMetrics will be the event’s keynote speaker. Turner will focus on the importance of reading preparedness and reading on grade level by third grade, measuring and monitoring reading growth to differentiate instruction, using measures to ensure students are on a trajectory to college and career readiness, as well as understanding the effects of early literacy on lifelong success.

Breakout sessions will include presentations from Colorado education leaders District 49’s Peter Hilts, Colorado Literacy and Learning Center President Dr. Lynne Fitzhugh; and Alisa Dorman, the Executive Director of the Office of Literacy at the Colorado Department of Education.

myON, K-12 education’s leading provider of personalized literacy environments, will provide lunch and a short presentation on its 21^st-century literacy solution.

To register for the Leaders in Literary Summit, click here.

About District 49

District 49 is the 13th largest school district in Colorado, serving nearly 20,000 students in eastern Colorado Springs and the unincorporated area of El Paso County known as Falcon. District 49 maintains a robust portfolio of 22 high performing schools to meet the unique needs and interests of every student. Primary literacy, reading at grade level by the end of third grade, is the #1 priority for elementary students and schools. Elementary students who demonstrate mastery of basic academic content and skills are able to access higher levels of more specialized learning as they matriculate toward graduation and post-secondary success. As secondary students build on this strong foundation, they display increasingly divergent abilities and passions. So, the most important program in our secondary schools is designing individualized learning plans for every student. Through a program called 49 Pathways, we provide personal and academic advising to help every student identify and pursue meaningful learning.

About myON™

myON, a business unit of Capstone, has created a personalized digital literacy environment that transforms learning. myON expands the classroom for teachers and students by providing unlimited access a collection of more than 10,000 enhanced digital books with multimedia supports, real-time assessments, and a growing Literacy Toolkit that enhances the myON literacy ecosystem. myON empowers students and teachers with real-time, actionable data—number and type of books opened and read, time spent reading, results of regular benchmark assessments, and more—based on embedded Lexile assessments that measure student reading and writing growth. With myON, every student experiences the benefits of personalized literacy instruction to propel them to new and unlimited learning opportunities.

Event Contact Information:

Lisa Benko

myON

[email protected]

720-838-0982

Kristen Thompson

myON Account Representative

[email protected]

952-224-0517

Amber Whestine

District 49

[email protected]

719-494-8951

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation November 3, 2015

The Four Pillars of Flipped Learning

Note: Today’s guest post was written by Jessica Yarbro, George Mason University, Patrick McKnight, Ph.D., George Mason University, Kari M. Arfstrom, Ph.D. Executive Director, Flipped Learning Network and Katherine McKnight, Ph.D. Pearson’s Center for Educator Learning & Effectiveness.

While various new learning styles are making headway in the classroom, none more than Flipped Learning has made such an impact. In fact, a 2014 survey, conducted by the Flipped Learning Network™ (FLN) and Sophia Learning, revealed that in a matter of two years, the FLN has seen a 700% growth in teachers joining the FLN community, which now is comprised of more than 20,000 educators. Additionally, nearly 100% of teachers recognize the term and almost 80% indicate they have “flipped” at least one lesson in the last school year.

FLN defines Flipped Learning as a pedagogical approach in which direct instruction moves from the group learning space to the individual learning space, and the resulting group space is transformed into a dynamic, interactive learning environment where the educator guides students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.

FLN leaders determined that there is a difference (and that they are not interchangeable) between Flipped Learning and the Flipped Classroom – which has been misused by many. Flipping a class can lead to Flipped Learning, but it’s not a definite. Many teachers may already flip their classes by having students read text outside of class, watch additional videos, or solve extra problems, but to engage in Flipped Learning, teachers must incorporate four pillars into their practice: (F.L.I.P) Flexible Environment, Learning Culture, Intentional Content and Professional Educator.

The Four Pillars

Flexible Environment
Educators create flexible spaces where students choose when and where they learn. Additionally, educators who flip their classes are flexible in their expectations of student timelines for learning and in their assessments of student learning.

Learning Culture
In a Flipped Learning model, in-class time is dedicated to exploring topics in greater depth and creating rich learning opportunities. As a result, students are actively involved in knowledge construction as they participate in and evaluate their learning in a manner that is personally meaningful.

Intentional Content
Flipped Learning Educators determine what they need to teach and what materials students should handle on their own. Educators use Intentional Content to maximize classroom time in order to adopt methods of student-centered, active learning strategies, depending on grade level and subject matter.

Professional Educator
The role of a Professional Educator is even more important, and often more demanding, in a Flipped Classroom than in a traditional one. During class time, they need to observe students, providing them with instant feedback and an assessment their work. While Professional Educators take on less visibly prominent roles in a flipped classroom, they remain the essential part that enables Flipped Learning to occur successfully.

While the Flipped Learning model may not work for every class, the model represents an innovative approach to teaching with the potential to create active, engaged and learning-centered classrooms. FLN’s four suggested pillars serve as ways to help educators successfully implement a Flipped Learning model. What are some other suggestions that you’ve seen being implemented in a successful Flipped Learning classroom?

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform November 3, 2015

Is it Possible to Sustain School Reform Indefinitely?

By Matthew Lynch

The word “reform” comes with the connotation of something with a start and end date. There are reformation eras in history, and policies, and initiatives. The problem with thinking of reform, particularly school reform, on a timeline is that the most successful reform attempts are ongoing.

People involved in the piloting stage of school reform often see what they are doing as something limited by time. Other stakeholders likely share this view, or are of the opinion that the work will stop when the reform money runs out, or that, the new reforms won’t take hold. This generally leads to fragmentation, or a lack of a coherent approach to reform, and as a result, reform efforts often end up sidelined. Unfortunately, this circumstance runs contrary to the realization of in-depth, sustained school reforms.

The cyclical turnover of superintendents and school board members makes it difficult to ensure that others will continue effective systemic reforms begun by one board and superintendent. New superintendents and new school boards often want to make their marks by initiating changes rather than sustaining the strategies created by their predecessors.

This is often the case even when evidence suggests that existing programs are the ones that need to be sustained to meet long-term goals, such as closing the achievement gap or getting all students to proficiency. The new leadership appears to forget that there are no quick fixes or short term reforms that guarantee continuous improvement in student achievement, as they jump to exchange existing efforts for improvement with new ones.

The process of school reform can become very lengthy and on the whole it is expected to stretch across a period of several years. Ironically, school districts are placed under tremendous pressure to turn a new page each year, allowing for only a fraction of the time required for any reform plan to produce results. This is sometimes part of a government ploy when budget cuts are enforced with little notice, or a result of resentful parents streaming to the authorities in opposition to some aspect of the an existing plan.

The process of annual makeovers comes at substantial costs to the states that are likely already operating on limited funds. Cost is not the only issue however. By reinventing the system each year, educators, teachers, and principals alike, have no chance to come to terms with the details of any particular plan before it’s time to implement the next one. As a result, educators are never fully versed on any plan, in effect making the process of reform fruitless.

The role of the school district is to take a long-term approach, define, and articulate the school reform agenda for the district, as they are a crucial source of leadership in implementing and sustaining reform. Their role should be to develop a framework by which sustainable reforms can be measured even if there is a turnover of staff.

A school reform framework should include four key points:

improving student achievement
fiscal accountability
increasing organizational effectiveness
building and improving relationships with staff and the broader community.

This framework provides an agenda that the school board and staff can work from and use as a checklist to measure the success of reforms. It also means that when recruiting new staff you should look to hire people whose vision matches the already defined vision of the district, an important factor when it comes to sustaining change over time. Reform then should become a permanent goal of every school system, not something that can be plotted out nicely on a calendar.

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch November 3, 2015

Fostering Diversity: A Necessary Step for HBCU Survival

Historically black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, have provided a top-notch education for African Americans since pre-Civil War days. These schools, founded prior to 1964 with the goal of serving black students, once provided windows to educational pursuits when other doors were slammed shut to African Americans. With diversity at all American colleges and universities on the rise, and the emergence of flexible online programs, where do HBCUs fit in the contemporary higher education picture?

A Powerful Educational Presence

According to ThinkHBCU.org, 70 percent of the nation’s African American physicians and dentists earned their degrees at HBCUs. Over 50 percent of public school teachers of African American descent earned their degrees at HBCUs. African Americans with communication technology degrees from HBCUs make up 44 percent of the nation’s total and 43 percent of mathematics degrees awarded to African Americans come from HBCUs. The range of industries addressed in the offerings of HBCUs is vast, contributing to a larger and more integral African American presence in the workforce.

Women gain an especially strong advantage when they earn a degree from an HBCU. The United Negro College Fund has reported that females who graduate from Bennett and Spelman Colleges make up more than half of the African American women who eventually earn science doctorates. To put that in perspective, that number is higher than the amount produced by all seven Ivy League sister schools put together. In a workplace when minorities often still struggle to reach the highest ranks, African American women hold a strong advantage with a degree from a HBCU.

Remaining Relevant

When HBCUs first began popping up in America, they were a necessity to higher educational paths for African American young people. Benefactors like John Rockefeller founded Spelman College in Atlanta (named after his wife, by the way) in order to give black students a shot in a nation still very much in the throes of Jim Crowe-law domination. Most of the 105 HBCUs were founded in former slave areas that still presented steep challenges for African Americans that aspired to higher education but faced discrimination in dominantly white college settings.

The original intent of HBCUs worked. Some of the nation’s brightest and most influential minds came out of HBCUs. Langston Hughes was a Lincoln University graduate. Martin Luther King Jr. earned his degree from Morehouse College. Talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, education expert Marva Collins and Brown University President Ruth J. Simmons all earned degrees from HBCUs (from Tennessee State University, Clark Atlanta University and Dillard University, respectively). These powerful pillars of the African American community were able to achieve optimal success in life because of the education they received from HBCUs.
What about now? With white students quickly becoming one small aspect of non-HBCU settings, do ambitious African American students really need a HBCU to achieve success? Perhaps a more poignant question is this: does it help or hinder the African American community when its members attend a HBCU today? I think the answer is grounded in the particular student’s intent. Young African Americans today do not NEED a HBCU to obtain a general education, but they may find particular programs at individual schools meet their career objectives. Some may even find academic inspiration in the original founding purpose of a HBCU and that feeling of carrying on tradition may fuel them to graduate, make an impact in the world and give back to their college or university.

The Future of HBCUs

The original purpose of HBCUs is no longer the only reason but that does not mean that these institutions lack other attractive qualities. In fact, many students with white European, Latino or Asian roots are choosing HBCUs because of the strength of the academic programs and generally lower tuition costs. During the 2011 – 2012 school year, West Virginia State, Kentucky State and Delaware State universities all reported that more than 25 percent of their populations were made up of white Americans. A continued push for diversity on HBCU campuses is the only way these schools can transition from the necessity of the past to the potential of the future. This means implementing more online course options and flexible degree programs so that all students can picture themselves succeeding at a HBCU. Gratitude for the original intent of HBCUs combined with forward educational thinking for students of all heritages will carry HBCUs to the next level of achievement in higher learning circles.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's November 3, 2015

Report: HBCU students better prepared after graduation than peers

A new Gallup-USA Funds Minority College Graduates Report shows that “HBCU graduates are more likely to prosper after graduation than students who graduate from non-HBCUs.”

The news comes as HBCUs are under scrutiny for effectiveness and if black students are better served by attending Predominately White Institutions (PWI).

Some HBCUs are struggling to survive due to debt but this report shows that the product being produced at America’s predominately black colleges and universities is pretty good. For anyone who has been lauding the relevancy of HBCUs for some time now (like me), this is music to our ears.

The study found that over 50 percent of HBCU graduates who were surveyed viewed their prospects after graduation as positive while just under 30 percent of black graduates from PWIs viewed them as positive.

Again–all good news for soon-to-be graduates and for the health of HBCUs. Of course, there is always a ‘but’ when studies are released.

“The report found that four in 10 black HBCU graduates are more likely to thrive financially while fewer than three in 10 black graduates of other schools can say the same.”

That news is likely tied to the overall health of the economy and how graduates may find their place in an ever changing workforce. I’m also not sure what the definition of “thrive” is in this case. There is a difference, I think, in being comfortable or being affluent.

Overall, though, this news is great for HBCUs and the students who attend them. The report found that graduates from HBCUs are better emotionally, have stronger relationships, and are more goal oriented as well.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers November 2, 2015

School Security: Just Smoke and Mirrors?

In theory, parents and educators would do anything to keep students safe, whether those students are pre-Kindergartners or wrapping up a college career. Nothing is too outlandish or over-the-top when it comes to protecting our kids and young adults. Metal detectors, security cameras, more police presence in school hallways, gated campuses – they all work toward the end goal of sheltering students and their educators and protecting the most vulnerable of our citizens. Emotions aside though – how much does school security really increase actual safety? And do school security efforts actually hinder the learning experience? It sounds good to taut the virtues of tighter policies on school campuses but is it all just empty rhetoric?

Recently the University of Kentucky came under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union for plans to install 2,000 security cameras on campus. Representatives at UK say the move is a response to the increasing randomness of school violence at all levels of the learning process and a way to better ensure student safety. The ACLU says it is a blatant violation of privacy.

I say it is money wasted because all the security cameras in the world would not have prevented the largest school tragedies of recent history, from Sandy Hook Elementary to the Virginia Tech massacre. Security cameras and other monitoring devices give us a false feeling of security and an actionable course when there are no answers to pointless questions.

While extreme, UK’s camera monitoring plans are in sync with what is happening in K-12 schools across the nation. In the 2009 – 2010 school year, 84 percent of high schools had security cameras for safety monitoring. Over half of all middle and elementary schools had them too, with 73 and 51 percent respectively. Despite this, the National Center for Education Statistics reports that the percentage of high schools with controlled access to school buildings during normal hours is lower than that of middle and elementary students. Though not expressly stated in these findings, it would seem that in the case of high schools, cameras are more of a way to catch rule-breakers after the fact than a way to prevent violence and other criminal activities.

Students are not the only ones who are the subjects of safeguards like surveillance cameras. Teachers, administrators and other staff are also vital when it comes to putting school safety into place – and in the case of teachers, they are on the front lines of what is going on with students. Limited access to K-12 campuses is meant to protect outsiders from harming the many people who are supposed to be there. But what about student-versus-student violence, or student-versus-teacher physical altercations? In 2011, 12 percent of high schoolers reported being in a physical fight at school that year. Nearly 6 percent reported carrying a weapon, like a gun or knife, onto school property in the month preceding the survey. By the time a security camera picks up on the fact that a student has a knife or gun, is there really any timely way to prevent the inevitable.

Given the fact that state spending per student is lower than at the start of the recession, how much should schools shell out in the way of security costs? Perhaps the best investment we can make to safeguard our students and educators is in personal vigilance. Perhaps less reliance on so-called safety measures would lead to higher alertness.

What role should school security play on K-12 campuses, and should it be a financial priority?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform November 1, 2015

The School’s Role in Sex Education and Preventing Teenage Pregnancy

By Matthew Lynch

For how progressive Americans claim to be, conflicting messages about sex abound. Young people hear messages about abstinence until marriage alongside the messages about the importance of using protection during sexual intercourse. Ashamed to ask legitimate questions, youth often turn to their peers for information about sex instead of to their parents and other trusted adults. At the same time, they are bombarded with sexual images from the media. With all these conflicting aspects of sex, is it any wonder the youth of today are confused?

As of today, the federal government will only fund programs that teach abstinence until marriage and one third of all American schools teach this type of sex education program. Many schools do teach comprehensive sex education, which promotes abstinence until marriage, but also address issues of protection against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Recently, President Obama proposed ending funding for abstinence-only programs and instead funding comprehensive sex education programs, but he has not made much progress in that regard, as social conservatives seem to continue to reign when it comes to the topic.

It’s not difficult to see why the programs need to be changed, though. The rates of teen pregnancy and STDs are higher in the United States than in any other developed country and it is only getting worse. Sexual activity among teens occurs at high rates, which suggests abstinence-only programs are not working. In fact, these programs are woefully out of date, inaccurate and severely biased. Sexual activity, pregnancy rates, and rates of STDs either stay the same or increase after teens have taken these abstinence-only programs.

The number of babies born to teens has decreased in recent years, but the actual rate of teenage sexual activity has increased. Teens are demanding information beyond that offered through abstinence-only programs. Many states are willing to forego federal funding, in order to offer comprehensive sex education programs that include up-to-date and non-judgmental information.

One of the newest approaches, and one that is expected to be more successful, is the Baby Think it Over program. In this program, students are given the responsibility of caring for a “baby” for an extended period of time. This is a newborn infant and the computer program that goes with it makes it “cry” at regular intervals. The computer will alert the instructor if the baby has been mistreated or neglected. This is a good program to teach students what it is like to have the responsibilities of a parent.

Other approaches include building a support system for pregnant teens and bringing the family onboard. In this way, the negative reactions to teen pregnancy are replaced with the kind of attention that ensures the teen mother and the baby are well cared for, and that pre-natal and post-natal education and care are available. During both the pregnancy and the birth of the child, teen mothers are able to live stress-free environments with the love and support of their family. This level of support increases the possibility that the teen mother will finish high school and find the means to support herself and her baby.

By taking a “see no evil” approach to sex education, we are providing a severe disservice to our youth. More informed teens will make more informed decisions, and they deserve the chance for that.

How do you think sexual education in the U.S. can be modified to better fit today’s society?

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch, Teachers November 1, 2015

Ask An Expert: Teachers Are Mandatory Reporters of Child Abuse

Question: I am a third-grade teacher who works in a suburb outside of Philadelphia, PA. Based on several signs and a gut feeling, I suspect that one of my outgoing students is experiencing child abuse. I plan to report my suspicions through the proper channels, but my question is: can I be sued by the child’s parents if I am wrong? Helen S.

Answer: Helen, don’t be so hard on yourself. Parents who abuse their children go to great lengths to cover up their crime and convince everyone else that all is well. Child abuse and child neglect are issues that we would rather avoid. Unfortunately, they are all too real and are so prevalent that, as teachers, we must rise to the challenge.

It is very important to remember that it is not always obvious in which family abuse might occur, and abuse and neglect do not necessarily have to be ongoing. Parents may end up becoming abusive for various reasons, including financial or psychological stress, or unrealistic expectations of their children. It can be as simple as losing one’s temper under stress and calling a child “stupid,” or smacking them in the face.

As a teacher, you are a mandatory reporter of child abuse and neglect. In simple terms, you are legally obligated by your state to report signs of child abuse and neglect to the proper authorities, especially in situations where you see physical and emotional signs of possible abuse. You should report your suspicions at the first sign of trouble while also following district and state guidelines.

Many teachers clam up in this type of situation, mostly due to their fear of falsely accusing someone of such a heinous crime. Thankfully, social service agencies do a good job of investigating reports of child abuse, so if a child is being abused, more often than not social services makes the right call. Also, many teachers are afraid of being sued by the child’s parents, and possibly incurring their wrath.

The good news is that, in the United States, teachers are protected from litigation in situations where they report suspicions of child abuse, as long as they follow the requirements specific to their district and state. So breathe a sigh of relief, as chances are your worst fear will never come true. In the end we have to realize that the safety of the students placed in our care is our number one priority, and if we are proven wrong … well, we want to be proven wrong, don’t we?

Child abuse is a very serious problem that must not be taken lightly. Any sign of abuse must be reported, and teachers must be ready to offer support and encouragement to these students. You can never be 100% sure that your suspicions are right, but don’t let your doubt stop you from following your intuition.

As you gear up to report your suspicions through the proper channels, take solace in the fact that you are doing the right thing and will not face litigation as a result. Not only are you performing your legal duty, but you can sleep comfortably at night knowing that you took the bold action required to protect the students under your care.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Teachers November 1, 2015

Peering Past the ‘Pixie Dust’ of Technology

How schools can ensure that technology is used effectively to transform teaching and learning

By Jill Hobson

When it comes to technology use in schools, a persisting tendency exists to believe that infusing classrooms with new technology will miraculously change teaching and learning. Unfortunately, education technology isn’t like Tinker Bell’s pixie dust. Sprinkling it in classrooms won’t magically transform instruction.

The novelty of new technology simply doesn’t change instruction by itself. Teachers must have guidance and direction, as well as a model for effective edtech use, in order to truly transform teaching and learning.

Today, many administrators expect technology to be used in daily instruction. The sentiment is admirable, but without setting clear expectations for how technology should transform instruction, what districts will see is “mood use.” If teachers are in the mood to use technology, they will. Otherwise, the district’s significant investment in new learning technologies may sit idly by, gathering dust.

For technology to be an integral part of a school district’s strategic improvement plan, technology directors must outline and communicate specific goals to all stakeholders. Then, they must measure progress toward that goal, continually coaching and improving as necessary.

Developing common language

The first step is to develop a common language. The education community works diligently to ensure its members have a common understanding around most aspects of instruction. For instance, if asked, “What does it mean to teach fractions effectively?” a school’s math department probably has a standard definition by which to measure learning outcomes against a stated objective. But if asked, “What does it mean to use technology effectively to teach fractions?” that’s another question altogether, and one where responses likely diverge.

Just as a school or district develops a common understanding of what effectively teaching a concept looks like, developing a similar definition for effectively teaching with technology is a must. Once established, schools can design professional development and classroom behaviors around this standard.

In developing a common understanding, school and district leaders should focus on teaching and learning, and not on the technology itself. Begin by asking questions such as: “How should instruction look?” and “What kind of learning do we want to see?” Next, leaders should outline attributes they would like to see realized in the classroom, such as students developing higher-order thinking skills; project-based and authentic learning; collaborative, personalized, and rigorous learning. Once a common language is established, district and school leaders can begin building a vision that will be clearly defined – and understood.

Various models

Models that describe the effective use of ed-tech already exist, and they can help decision makers as they bring their vision for technology use to life.

For example, the LoTi (for Levels of Teaching Innovation) model defines technology use from Level 0 (non-use) through Level 6 (Refinement). Another model, Grappling’s Technology and Learning Spectrum, defines ed-tech use as a three-step progression: from technology literacy, to adapting, to transforming.

The Technology Integration Matrix, developed by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology at the University of South Florida College of Education, outlines five levels of performance: Entry, Adoption, Adaptation, Infusion, and Transformation. Five learning characteristics are described at each of these levels, including: Active, Collaborative, Constructive, Authentic, and Goal-Directed.

Using a model is highly effective for any entity in the education space. Promethean’s model, which guides the development of all its educational technology products, believes that ed-tech must enhance four critical capabilities for teachers, students and schools: increase student engagement, provide learning feedback, personalize instruction, and foster collaboration. Within each capability, products must allow for the three teaching and learning modalities of developing, applying, and creating.

Whether using an existing model or creating a model, districts must establish a vision for effectively teaching and learning with technology. Then, they can start to measuring progress toward their vision by collecting data.

Classroom walkthroughs

While districts should spotlight stories that demonstrate successful use of technology, it’s important to remember that anecdotal evidence doesn’t paint a complete picture of what’s going on in classrooms. It represents one sample. Peering past the ‘pixie dust’ of technology features and functions will uncover patterns of use or non-use and allow us to see what’s really happening

Collecting data is critical to this effort. One of the best ways to collect data is walking through your building, looking in classrooms, and observing how technology is being used. The point is not to use this information in a punitive way, but as a snapshot of where you are – and what actions you need to take in order to improve.

As the director of instructional technology for Georgia’s Forsyth County Schools, I conducted numerous classroom walkthroughs and developed professional learning plans based on this information. After doing more than 2,100 walkthroughs in Forsyth County, I firmly believe they should not be done alone. By conducting walkthroughs as a group, more in-depth and reliable data is collected, and the team of stakeholders can collaborate after the fact about what they observed.

The selected technology use model will determine what data to collect during walkthroughs. It will indicate the characteristics to observe and offer guidance on how to tally the observations. Many models encourage observers to create a summary of the lesson activities observed. In my experience, it’s also advisable to create a short coaching statement for the teachers observed in a given walkthrough that guide a teacher on next steps for technology integration in their classroom.

To delve even deeper into your schools’ technology use, focus observations and efforts on key areas for students and teachers:

Look at the work product students are producing.
- Are all of the products exactly the same?
- Does the student work simply report back facts or does it go beyond existing information?
Look at teachers’ lesson plans.
- Is there evidence of project-based learning?
- Do the plans suggest that students have ownership of their own learning?
- Is there evidence that formative assessment information is being used to adjust the instruction?
Talk with your teachers, students, and parents.
- Ask about the best examples they have seen of technology use in the school.
- Where do those examples fall within the technology integration model for your school or district?
- Are the examples similar across stakeholder groups or is there some difference?

Use all of this information to assess the district’s current standing with technology use. Now ask, do practices match the goals set as a district?

Look for patterns, such as an over-emphasis on teacher-led instruction, a lack of instruction guided by formative assessment data, or student projects that don’t involve collaboration, which can lead to better insights into where to focus professional development efforts. Also make sure to coach for better performance. The old saying, “There is no finish line,” rings true. Even when effective technology use is realized, encouraging continuous improvement of performance ensures students always receive the highest level of instruction.

Next steps

Four more strategies that can help make change happen in schools and districts includes:

Practice rating ed-tech use as a group. Look at several examples together, whether from one’s own district, from YouTube, or an online teaching and learning community. Free online communities, such as Promethean Planet, that contain pedagogically sound video resources can help start conversations about technology in the classroom: what works, what needs to be improved, and so on.

Have teachers observe each other. Peer-to-peer learning is a profound form of professional development. Giving teachers opportunities to see examples from their colleagues’ instruction can help visibly move the needle. In order to make observation a reality, be a resource that supports your teachers. Assist with scheduling, make connections between teachers who can learn from each other, and provide information to help guide their discussions.

Build a library of exemplary lessons. Ask teachers to share their most effective lesson plans utilizing technology to transform learning. If possible, record short videos of these lessons. Collect lessons and videos in a single repository that educators can easily access to see examples of success.

Celebrate every success. Moving from point A to point Z takes time. Changing and improving technology usage during instruction is a continuum. It’s important to acknowledge each small step taken toward the end goal.

Everyone in your school or district can be working toward the same goal of ensuring that educational technology investments effectively transform teaching and learning. The first step is aligning to a common vision for effective ed-tech use followed with a means of measuring progress and a system for continual improvement. After all, to reach the same place, we must start with the same goal in mind. Unless your goal is the power of flight – then I recommend pixie dust.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here.

________________

The former Director of Instructional Technology for the Forsyth County Schools in Georgia, Jill Hobson is now Senior Education Strategist for Promethean. She can be reached for questions at [email protected]

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education November 1, 2015

Pioneering a ‘transnational’ university

*The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest column by David P. Dauwalder, Ph.D.

Welcome to the San Diego-Baja California Binational Mega-Region.

While that’s a mouthful, the term is now in wide use by U.S. and Mexican leaders and organizations to define the transnational area consisting of San Diego and Imperial counties and the State of Baja California. The region has an estimated population of 6.78 million, with 3.44 million in the U.S. and 3.34 million in Mexico, unified by a dense and complex set of transactions and relationships across the international boundary. It represents the largest concentration of population along the U.S.-Mexican border.

By any measure, it’s a remarkable place. The San Diego-Tijuana urban region is the largest binational metropolitan area in the U.S. and the largest in the world. At its center is the globe’s busiest land-border crossing, with more than 100,000 people coming northward every day to shop, work, and study and for tourism and recreation. Each month, more than one million U.S. citizens cross the border into Tijuana and back. Despite the security enhancements on the U.S. side of the border, the two halves of the region are intimately connected demographically, culturally, politically, economically, and in so many other ways.

The vitality of the binational region is incontrovertible. San Diego County is the state’s second-most populous, with a balanced, forward-looking economy based on universities and research, clean tech, the military, tourism, life sciences, aerospace, healthcare, maritime, and information and communications technologies. Tijuana is now the second-largest city on the West Coast of North America, with steep population growth in recent decades. It is a major center for manufacturing, especially in electronics, medical devices, aerospace, and automotive, integrated with the global economy. Much of the manufacturing includes shipping goods at various stages of production

back and forth locally across the border.

Leaders in the U.S. and Mexico, from the head-of-state level down to grassroots communities, have put in motion historic, multi-faceted efforts to enhance international integration with a strong emphasis on education, especially teacher and student mobility. These efforts are particularly vigorous in the binational region.

As it happens, the Mega-Region offers a set of special opportunities to enrich and transform colleges and universities. These opportunities are enhanced by exceptional developments in relations between Mexico, on the one hand, and a variety of key individuals and organizations in the U.S., the State of California, and San Diego County.

Preliminary at-border survey data suggest there are currently as many as 1,250 Mexico- originating university students in San Diego County, and that number could swell to 3,600 by 2025. Additionally, Mexico’s demand for higher education is growing: nearly 55 percent of the population is under 30 years of age. In addition, Mexico is the third-largest recipient of H1-B visas to the U.S. – visas aimed at well-trained non-immigrants, working for a short period. In broad strokes, Mexican students are drawn to academic programs with practicums (co-op experiences and internships), short-term and research programs, and language acquisition.

San Diego hosts the largest naval fleet in the world and has the only major submarine and shipbuilding yards on the West Coast. So, not surprisingly, San Diego County is also home to the largest population of active-duty military and retired military in the U.S. These individuals and their families enjoy substantial educational benefits.

Leaders in all sectors on both sides of the border have demonstrated a remarkable unity of purpose to foster closer relations and to profit from the advantages of the binational character of the Mega-Region. Significant disciplined and coordinated bi-national initiatives to build shared infrastructure, to lobby jointly both Washington and Mexico City on regional issues, to promote educational exchange, and to raise awareness of the Mega-Region appear to be gaining support in both countries. Regional leaders regard San Diego and Baja California as complementary assets.

These regional attitudes and initiatives coincide with an exceptional push at this time toward further integration of the three NAFTA countries, the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. This push toward further integration responds to intensifying global competition from other multinational regions, particularly the European Union and eastern Asia and India. This theme of North American integration was stressed repeatedly during the recent California-Mexico Trade Initiative X, the 10th annual delegation to Mexico City by the San Diego Regional Chamber.

For colleges and universities in Southern California and throughout the Southwest, the prospect of transnational education seems both natural and inevitable. There simply is no better time for educational institutions to focus on transnational issues and on the aim of producing innovative thinkers and problem-solvers with the expertise to confront the challenges of transnational development from both a regional and a global perspective. Drilling down, the question is how can universities – acting individually or collectively — amplify these institutional U.S. and Mexican regional relationships, using them to develop alliances and partnerships contributing to program development, student recruitment, facilities expansion, and financial support?

Thanks to today’s climate of interdependence, we’re all about to find out.

__________________

David P. Dauwalder, Ph.D., is Executive Vice President and Provost of Woodbury University in Los Angeles and San Diego.

Lessons from Educators on the Big Screen: Part II

The Implications of Universal Preschool