Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Diverse Conversations: Analyzing the Intersection of Higher Education and Immigration Reform

Immigration reform has been a hot button issue in the United States for decades. Earlier this year, the Obama administration, along with members of the Republican Party, outlined a plan for comprehensive immigration reform. When they sit down to work out the details, it is critical that higher education finds its way to the center of the discussion. A college education is a virtual prerequisite for securing the American dream and currently it is an option that is off the table for more than one million undocumented students. In order to learn more about the intersection of higher education and immigration reform, I sat down with Luis G. Pedraja, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs at Antioch University in Los Angeles.

Q: How does the lack of legal immigration options affect the college prospects of the children of illegal immigrants and their futures?

A: Children of illegal immigrants face limited prospects, greater financial burdens, a lack of support networks, and fear. While some states allow undocumented students to attend state institutions, pay in-state tuition, or provide some level of state financial aid, many states bar them from even enrolling. In addition, they cannot receive federal financial aid, loans, or work-study money. Because of their status, most of them will not find substantial employment that will allow them to pay tuition. Unless they receive scholarships, the majority of private universities will be out of reach. The few who do attend colleges most likely will have to work several low paying jobs to cover living expenses and tuition while they attend classes, often preventing them from full-time studies. In addition, they must cope with the constant fear of deportation for them and their families.

Q: By taking the option of attending college off the table for millions of immigrants, it seems that we are going against the values and principles upon which this country was founded. What are your thoughts?

A: Our country was founded on the principle that all are endowed with three basic rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The sole crime of the undocumented is the pursuit of these basic human rights. Most of these students came as children, some as infants, brought by parents hoping for a better future and the need to survive. Their economic woes often resulted from unfair trade, economic exploitation, and conflict—at times due to U.S. and European trade practices and politics. These children did not choose to break any immigration laws. Most were educated in our schools. Some were even born here, but unable to obtain birth certificates out of fear. They do not always have options to return to their home countries, where they no longer fit or have ties. Thus, they are trapped, victims of circumstances, with limited future prospects for education, gainful employment, and economic survival. To penalize them for actions over which they had no control would be akin to giving a ticket to everyone riding in a car.

Q: How should immigration reform address this?

A: I would like to challenge our political leaders to make education a path to citizenship. While broader reform is necessary, making higher education in particular a path to citizenship can benefit not only undocumented students, but also our nation. Let me elaborate. First, although the majority of undocumented students are already fluent in English and can function in American society, a higher education will ensure it and quiet some critics. Second, the attainment of a higher education degree will demonstrate their work ethic and abilities to be productive members of society. Third, education as a pathway will enable these students to seek gainful employment and contribute to society. Fourth, we train a large contingent of foreign students that eventually take their acquired skills abroad; an education pathway will keep highly skilled and talented individuals in the U.S., contributing to our economic development. Finally, research shows that individuals with some college education tend to earn more than those without. This will enable them to have greater purchasing power and contribute more to taxes. Current research indicates that undocumented laborers pay taxes, but because of the level of employment they can attain, their tax contribution is not as high as other groups.

Q: How does the reluctance to pass immigration reform affect the U.S. economy?

A: Studies indicate that close to 65% of job openings in the next five years will require at least some college education. While many countries invest in education as a way of strengthening the economy, it is one of the first items we tend to cut. Currently, only about 40% of the population attends college. This is creating a gap that will have a significant impact on our economy, leading to the erosion of the middle class, increased unemployment, and lower purchasing power. To strengthen our economy and leadership in the world economy, we need to be increasing access to education and encouraging more people to attend college to ensure a skilled workforce in our country.

Barring undocumented students from attending college only aggravates matters. First, it prevents the students from obtaining better employment that will increase their purchasing power and tax contributions. As a result, these young men and women will have a grim future, with limited prospects of finding better jobs. In addition, they will be more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Second, by not having sufficient skilled labor within our country, we risk that industries will be more drawn to relocate research and production to other countries, again lowering our GDP and our economic power. Instead of exporting talent to other countries, we should be importing individuals who will contribute to our economic growth. To some extent we already bring talented and skilled laborers to our country from abroad, so why not grow our own who already share our values? Third, by educating these men and women, they will be able to attain better employment and bear a greater portion of our tax burden, which will be necessary to sustain our aging population. Fourth, these students can be “ambassadors” to other countries, serving to bridge our interests and values to those of other nations and cultures.

Our failure to pass immigration reform ultimately cripples our economy by preventing us from keeping skilled individuals in our country and from bringing those with skills that we might be lacking. Immigrants are economic drivers. They do not take jobs from Americans; they often serve as the backs upon which America is built and often do the work that most of us are unwilling to do.

I would like to thank Dr. Pedraja for participating in this interview and for his insightful commentary on the intersection of higher education and immigration reform.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, International Education

Fostering Global Citizenship through Skype

Guest post by Sarah Byrne

CHAT to the Future is a growing registered charity based in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada committed to education, global citizenship, and ending the cycle of extreme poverty. They unify these three concepts through the integration of technology into the lives of North American students.

CHAT itself stands for Care and Hope through the Adoption of Technology. CHAT runs a small orphans’ home in Kasangati, Uganda and uses the power of North American schools to fully fund everything from rent to education.

 

The real power in what CHAT does comes from Skype and their ability to connect the kids in Uganda to students of all ages across America and Canada. The kids in Uganda Skype for three hours each week, spending half hour installments talking to their friends, singing, learning, and sharing. This connection allows children in North American classrooms to expand their worldview and learn about a different culture through friendship and hands-on experience. Most importantly, it inspires global thinking in our students and facilitates global citizenship.

Technology has allowed teachers in this generation to access guest speakers, create digital meet-ups with other classrooms, and keep parents connected at the click of a button. CHAT wants to play a part by connecting kids via Skype and giving teachers the resources to integrate technology into their classrooms. When a class Skypes with children from Uganda, they are not only making new friends, but making global-minded connections.

One of the common problems with technology in the classroom is funding – new technology is expensive, and finding creative ways to utilize existing technology can be next to impossible. Webcams and Skype are two things that most classrooms are already equipped with, allowing them to participate easily without cost.

Not only does CHAT give teachers the opportunity to integrate technology into the classroom, but it also allows for students to come up with innovative and entrepreneurial projects that help them raise funds for their friends in Uganda. This engages students into a new kind of thinking, encouraging them to come up with ideas and solve problems. CHAT then ensures that the students have the skills and means to realize those ideas.

Currently, CHAT is working with a school in Colorado, who have partnered up with schools in Canada, Uganda and the Dominican Republic to create the One Million Lights campaign. Students at the Colorado school are 3D printing rechargeable lanterns that will be sent to areas where constant electricity is not a reality. Preston Middle School of Fort Collins, CO has made the prototype, while Riverview High School in New Brunswick, Canada worked on the electrical innovation.

These lanterns are being sent to CHAT House in Uganda as well as a school in the Dominican Republic to be tested and reviewed. After the reviews are in and the prototype is perfected, the designs and circuitry will be published for anyone to replicate. Of course, their Ugandan friends have already seen the prototypes over Skype.

What these schools are doing is an extraordinary example of the innovation, entrepreneurship, technological advancement, and global citizenship that CHAT to the Future is all about. Every year CHAT continues to see growth in our students both in North America and in Uganda. Connectivity in the classroom is important, and CHAT is happy to be a part of it.

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

_____________

Sarah is a CHAT to the Future intern completing her second summer with the organization. She is passionate about education and currently working her way towards her BEd. Other pieces by Sarah can be found at www.chattothefuture.ca 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform

Automaticity: How can it be sometimes bad, sometimes good?

**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 post by Bruce Deitrick Price

Automaticity means that you recognize something instantly. You see a neighbor’s dog and in a split-second you say, “Bucky!” That’s automaticity.

Curiously enough, the Education Establishment thinks that automaticity is sometimes evil, sometimes ideal. This strange paradox reveals a great deal about the intellectual chaos and corruption in our K-12 system.

This paradox is even more extreme and perverse than you may at first imagine. When automaticity is helpful, our experts say it’s bad. When automaticity is destructive, our experts say it’s good. That’s what ideology and secret agenda have done to the field of education.

Historically, children were expected to learn simple addition problems and the multiplication tables. You knew automatically that 7 times 8 is 56. You knew that 7+12 is 19. With just a small amount of such information, a person can readily solve the common math that we  encounter in everyday situations. Remarkably, all the so-called “reform” programs of the last 60 years specifically crusaded against this capability. New Math, circa 1965, emphasized all sorts of high-falutin activities (Boolean algebra, statistics, algebraic matrices) but denigrated any tendency toward memorizing arithmetic facts so you would have them as standard intellectual equipment.

Reform Math circa 1985, specifically forbade children to learn basic math facts. An early reliance on calculators was encouraged! Then we come to Common Core Math, which  brags that children will engage in higher-level thinking and creative problem-solving but doesn’t want them to know the multiplication tables. The pattern is relentless. Automaticity, with regard to numbers and doing arithmetic, is constantly denigrated.

Clearly, everything that was ordinary and desirable in all cultures for thousands of years has been deemed unacceptable by our Education Establishment. If you look at only this part of the story, you know that these people have a perverse love for whatever is inefficient. Why? Most likely, they are addicted to collectivist thinking. The worst possible outcome for these people (people like Bill Ayers) is that some children master math quickly and sprint ahead of their classmates. So our progressives use any trick to block that possibility. Leveling is the goal. Ergo, no automaticity in math classrooms.

Now let’s look at a situation where automaticity can be destructive.  That’s the process of learning to read. Public schools for 80 years have ordered children to seek automaticity in the memorization of sight-words. The essence of Whole Word reading instruction is that children are told to memorize entire words as graphic units. This  fundamentally absurd approach has a dozen different names (sight-words, high frequency words, Dolch words, look-say; don’t be confused by the interchangeable aliases). The basic idea is that children look at a word (for example xgfh) and they memorize it as a design. You might object that xgfhis not a real word. But a first-grade child would not know that or guess that. All the designs look the same to children (that is, they look bizarre and unfriendly just as xgfh now looks to you).

Children DO need to memorize the smallest units with automaticity, that is, the individual letters. Then they need to memorize the sounds represented by these letters with automaticity. That is the correct way to proceed (it’s known as phonics). But this approach is precisely forbidden in our elementary schools. Instead the children are told to memorize larger, more complex units than the brain can easily handle, i.e., whole words such as xgfh.

Please note, for the brain any memorization is essentially the same task. You look at an airplane in the sky and you say that’s a 757. You look at a  coin and you know it’s a nickel. No big deal, especially in the case of arithmetic  where there are only so many scores of helpful facts. On the other hand, memorizing many hundreds of sight-words is extremely difficult.

The more objects there are and the more similar they are,  the more quickly the project becomes hopeless. Imagine somebody put together a collection of 100 coins from around the world, all of them more or less silvery and all of them the size of our nickel and dime. Naming these coins with automaticity would be very similar to naming English sight-words with automaticity. Now imagine the teacher says you have to move up to 300, and then 500. That’s what learning to read with sight-words is like for  kids in elementary school. A nightmare. Not only is automaticity virtually impossible to achieve, but trying to do so is destructive to the child’s mind. The brain is asked to switch back and forth from phonetic reading to sight-word reading—two completely different mental operations.

The bottom line here is that  our elite educators are social engineers with ideological goals. They want an undifferentiated society. They don’t want educational excellence. So they pick the worst ways to do everything.

If  a child needs automaticity to be good at arithmetic, our commissars will forbid automaticity.

If automaticity with sight-words is the worst thing that could happen to a child,  the same commissars will demand automaticity.

Anybody even a bit fond of common sense has to be appalled by this. Anyone who has a heart has to be appalled by this.

We have millions of high school graduates arriving in college who’ve never been asked to memorize much of anything— arithmetic, science, history, geography, dates, presidents—because memorization is bad. The Education Establishment will tell you that there’s nothing more evil than rote memorization. They will tell you that again and again.

Meanwhile, these same students starting in K will be required to memorize sight-words. So we have a wonderfully screwed up society now where many people don’t know much of anything, and one main thing they don’t know is how to read.

With regard to Common Core, there is a lot of new verbiage and jargon, but this massive retooling of American public schools seems to have accommodated all the worst things from the past. The Education Establishment insists that this is a wonderful new reform. That’s what they always say.

 

—-

Bruce Deitrick Price explains education theories and methods on his site Improve-Education.org

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Computer Science in K-12 Classrooms Needs to Catch Up

It’s estimated that in the next decade the number of computer science jobs in the U.S. will outnumber qualified people by 1 million. That’s 1 million jobs for the taking that Americans will miss out on because of inadequate skill sets. Despite this, only 10 percent of K-12 classrooms have computer science programs. So what gives?

The Problem

Traditional subjects like English and math receive a lot of play time in K-12 classrooms and they are considered “building blocks” for other subjects, like computer science. So when a high school senior decides to seek out a college degree in English, or mathematics, he or she has a general idea of what to expect in the classes that follow. The same can be said for arts-based topics, like the visual arts or music. Feasibly a young person accepted to college for those topics has had several years of training in it and plans to build on that base knowledge.

The same is not necessarily true for computer science majors. If only 10 percent of schools are teaching computer science courses (and we don’t know how extensive those programs may be), then it’s a safe bet that many of the kids entering those college classes have no idea what to expect. Or even worse – young people who may show promise in computer science never realize their potential because there is never a primer class to alert them to it. Despite its prevalence in the “real world,” computer science classes on K-12 campuses are not much changed from a decade or two ago.

There is also the slow nature in which K-12 schools, especially public ones, adopt new technologies. Classroom computers are nothing new but the science behind today’s careers is constantly evolving. It is difficult for classrooms to find the resources to keep up with the changing face of computer science. In some cases, by the time a particular technology is obtained or curriculum purchased, it is already on its way out the door as being considered cutting-edge. It can feel overwhelming, and frustrating, and this red tape keeps technology from reaching students’ hands in a reasonable time frame.

The Solutions

To meet the computer science job demand, K-12 schools will need help from outside partners. This could come in the form of area businesses willing to donate needed technology to make more classes happen or curriculum partnerships with groups like Code in the Schools. If every computer science classroom tries to re-invent the wheel, a lot of time and resources are wasted. So asking for help is the first step.

There also needs to be a larger focus on computer science at a younger age. This does not just mean computers and mobile devices available in K-12 classrooms but should include lessons on the “how” of the technology. The site Code.org has basic coding activities for children as young as Kindergarten – so teachers should be taking advantage of these resources. Waiting until middle or high school is simply too long to wait to spark an interest in K-12 students in computer science.

Finally, special attention should be paid to getting young women interested in computer science learning. Research tells us that girls are just as adept as boys at learning STEM topics, computer science included, but their interest tends to drop off in late elementary or middle school. Knowing this, educators should make sure girls are exposed to the same computer science learning as boys and encouraged through organizations like Girls Who Code. It may still take a generation to get to the point where young women feel completely comfortable seeking out computer science opportunities, so in the meantime support systems need to be there.

What solutions would you suggest for the lack of computer science in K-12 classrooms?

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation

Why "anti-tech" teachers irk me

**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 post by Lisa Mims

The conversation went something like this:

Teacher: Do you know he suggested using Tagxedo at Reading Night?
Me: What a wonderful idea!
Teacher: I don’t see why they want to use technology. (said with disdain)
Me: Why not? The kids and parents would have a good time.
Teacher: What if it doesn’t work? What if it doesn’t print? Then what are we supposed to do?
Me: What do you mean doesn’t work? It’s really easy to use.
And the conversation continued...

“Technology” is not something you can pick up or put down, it’s not a solid object. That is what frustrates me so much about people who are “anti-tech”. It makes me want to scream at the top of my lungs every time someone says to me, “See, I used the Smartboard today, I used technology.”

Or, after typing an entire paragraph on a web page, it’s deleted, and the person yells, “See, that’s why I don’t use technology!”

Technology is not a subject!!!  It is a tool that is not going away. It’s not something extra that you add to a lesson, it’s just part of your lesson. You know, the way you use the textbook. I had a hard time wrapping my mind around the question, “What if it doesn’t work?” So does that mean that we shouldn’t use it? What isn’t going to work? The Internet? The computers? Tagxedo?

Yes, there is a chance any one of those things might not work, but there is a greater chance they might. And what an experience that would be for those who use it! It reminds me of when my principal, who asked us to think outside of the box after a tech conference, asked me to put my Sliderocket presentation on a flash drive because the “Internet” might not work that day.The “Internet” worked just fine.

When I was thinking of a way for my kids to creatively describe themselves, I chose Tagxedo as a way to do that. While planning my lesson, I did not begin with, “How can I use Tagxedo today?” When I want to connect with students in another state or country, I use Wallwisher, Edmodo, Twitter, etc… because it’s a way to connect beside pen and paper.  When I want my students to share their thoughts simultaneously about the novel I am reading aloud, “Today’s Meet” is a wonderful tool. And, I don’t only use the Smartboard during observations, just to prove that I am using “technology”, because that’s what “they” want to see.

All the wonderful things I do with my class is not done to “show off”. It’s because it engages my students and makes teaching enjoyable. And yes, I do have a life. There are so many great ideas I get from so many different people in my PLN, so there’s no need to spend every waking hour trying to find them on my own.

We have to let go of this fear of the unknown , the fear of change. We have to remember that we should be lifelong learners, and not be scared to share our knowledge, even in a way that might not be comfortable for us!

This post originally appeared on Diary of a Public School Teacher, and was republished with permission.

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

_______________

Diary of a Public School Teacher is a blog where Lisa Mims shares her  thoughts about any aspect of the teaching profession. She is a DEN (Discovery Education Network) STAR Educator! She loves writing and I has contributed posts to Free Technology for Teachers, Edudemic, TeachHub, GoAnimate, Edutopia, etc.
  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform

Why the U.S. economy needs strong educational standards

In 1965, just 11% of jobs required post-secondary training, but by 2020, 65% of U.S. jobs will require post-secondary training. That’s according to the Committee for Economic Development that has put together a video series on how high academic standards positively impact the economy. The video below talks about how high educational standards are important for all workers — from entry level to upper management. Take a look:

 

In order to accommodate the need for these post-secondary educated workers, P-12 schools must have rigorous and effective academics in place like the Common Core benchmarks. I’ve always said that our public schools should be the great equalizer when it comes to giving all of our kids the American Dream. These classrooms SHOULD provide access to the same educational opportunities, no matter what the color of the child’s skin or how much money that child’s parents earn. That’s the ideal but it’s far from reality.

Implementing Common Core Standards is one way to improve the equality of quality education in our K-12 classrooms. States are still free to create the curriculum that makes the most sense for their students, but the basic agreement on what kids should learn, and when, should have some national guidance. We also know that to accommodate the rising demand for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math jobs, strong STEM learning initiatives must be in place in our classrooms. We owe it to this generation of students to equip them with what they will need to succeed academically and economically and Common Core Standards are designed to do just that.

You can read my commentary on the entire CED series here.

Check out:

How Common Core Standards level the K-12 playing field

Why the business community cares about Common Core Standards

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Matthew Lynch

Life Skills, Cloud Technology and Branding: K-12 Trends for 2014 — Part I

Even though the traditional K-12 calendar is over, the summer is a time for reflection and goal-setting for educators. The year 2013 has certainly seen a lot of advancement in pedagogy and technology in the classroom, but 2014 is poised for even more changes. While every district, school and individual classroom operates in its own way, these are some sweeping trends that will impact K-12 education across the board.

Today I look at three of those trend in the first part of this three-part series. I’m interested to hear your thoughts on these trends in the comment section as well.

Life skills. Public schools have always been more than places for book learning and have been a socializing agent too. Now even the most elite, expensive school systems are recognizing the need for training students beyond academics. It is no longer assumed that parents in middle- or high-class homes will bridge the gap between academics and real-world applications – schools are expected to shoulder that responsibility.

As a result, it seems that educators everywhere are placing greater focus on “life skills” and how they relate to well-rounded students. From the public Eugene School District in Oregon to the $26,000-per year progressive, private Wildwood School in Los Angeles, a rise in emphasis is obvious in areas like integrity, curiosity, problem-solving and interpersonal skills. Schools are not just teaching the skills out of social responsibility; parents have come to expect them as a normal part of the K-12 learning experience.

Movement to the cloud. As technology becomes more customized within classrooms, educators will continue to look for ways to access vital classroom information outside its walls. Cloud computing and storage make it possible for everyday lessons to be revisited from home, for parents to follow along more easily and for teachers to access their files away from their desks. The convenience offered through cloud applications mean that every member of the educational team can work seamlessly toward the same goals without boundaries or having to wait on each other.

Schools are just one industry jumping on the cloud bandwagon. Experts predict that by the end of 2015, the cloud market will be globally worth $180 billion, with 50 million physical servers in the world. Unlike technology developed specifically for classroom use, cloud applications are facing mass adoption in 2014, making it a more affordable and convenient technology for K-12 use.

School branding. There is a lot of talk of “school choice” these days. With more than 2 million students enrolled in charter schools and 16 states with private school choice programs, the days of settling on school because of geography (or paying a hefty premium to avoid it) are past. As a result, competition for students is on the rise and a type of branding is taking place, even at public schools. Consider it school team spirit – on steroids. It is not enough to simply claim education in vague terms as a reason to attend a particular school. Schools must “prove” their worth in the broader educational marketplace.

Expect educators to band together and come up with niches or specialties that set their schools apart in some way. In the case of magnet schools, a specialty is often already established – but there is still room for even more customization of a particular school’s brand or identity in its area. Schools will continue to flock to social media as tools for outreach and will become more invested in community events that feature that particular school as an integral part.

Are you seeing these trends take shape at your own schools?

 

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Diverse Conversations: Is Higher Education Worth It?

Recognizing the trends of higher education is important for those of us who are involved in it on a professional level. But what are the trends? Today, I’m speaking with Yvonne Tocquigny who is CEO of Tocquigny, a company that specializes in brand management and development for colleges and universities.

Q: To provide some context, what are the principle reasons for the rising cost of attendance for higher education and are costs going to continue to rise in the event that no one in higher education takes steps to curb them?

A: Costs are being driven by the fact that higher education is increasingly competitive. Schools are competing for the best teachers, so the cost of acquiring top talent continues to rise. Schools are also competing for the best students. Students no longer look primarily at the educational benefits of a school in their assessment. They consider the experience the school provides them as students. If you compare the experience of attending the University of Texas at Austin, for example, in the 1980s to the experience today, you would see a drastic difference. Today, the University has all the amenities a student could ask for. The ability to offer students the lifestyle experience they want is extremely expensive. At some point, it will become too expensive to offer increasingly luxurious amenities and excellent teachers at a cost that a middle class American can afford.

Q: Based on your experiences in higher education, do you think the value of education is still allowing a viable return on investment and if so (or if not) why?

A: In my experience the cost of an education usually provides a viable return on investment, particularly if that investment can be made up front and without going into major debt by acquiring student loans. Of course, some degrees provide a higher ROI than others, and students who care about this return may choose a career path that leads to a job that will provide a higher salary. It is becoming more of a luxury to follow one’s heart and pursue learning for the sake of learning. This gets to the critical point of disagreement among educators, some of whom believe that an education is valuable for its own sake in bettering the individual and culture as a whole, vs. those who believe education should prepare the individual for a specific career or trade.

Q: What, if anything, is being done or being considered to start curbing the cost of college attendance and what can students and parents do to help ensure the return on investment for college attendance?

A: The first thing that students and parents can do is to be prepared for college. A high percentage of freshmen who are admitted each year don’t have the skills to succeed in college. This creates a need for remediation, which is another expense for parents and for the schools. Low student persistence is aggravated by the fact that students are not prepared to succeed. Many schools are struggling to put student remediation programs in place to address the persistence problem. This is a growing issue for many schools, students and parents.

Q: What strategies do you think might develop in the future? How do you think the cost of attendance may, in fact, be curbed?

A: Online learning and MOOCS will provide innovative ways for schools to cut costs by curbing the cost of labor (the #1 cost for most schools) and amortizing their investment in the best teachers. This will have to be balanced with the need to continue to convince students that the value of an online course from their school is somehow superior to that of a less expensive institution. Many people believe that in a few years, one will be able to acquire online learning through Amazon. So schools will have to do more over time to define the value of a degree from their particular school. They will have to become more efficient at attracting the right students to their school. The students who will succeed and graduate with a degree are the best prospects. It will be better business for a school to focus on attracting the right students as opposed to as many students as possible.

We would like to thank Yvonne for sitting down with us.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Policy & Reform

How to Put Together a District-Level Reform Team

By Matthew Lynch

Successful school systems share a number of common traits. These include: effective administrative leadership, safe learning environments, strong family and community partnerships, opportunities for increased time on task, incorporation of instructional best practices, interventions for underperforming students, continuous assessment of student achievement, and lofty expectations for all students. These successful schools exist in a number of different school environments. Schools should keep these traits in mind as they begin the school reform process.

Steps to a district level reform team

When attempting school reform, the school must first assemble the district restructuring team. Groups no larger than seven usually work best. The team can be made up of a variety of district personnel and staff. Restructuring teams normally consist of a school board member, the superintendent and assistant superintendents, principals, teachers, and other pertinent individuals.

Once the team is created, efforts must be made to assess the district’s capacity for implementing and sustaining school reform. The team must ask itself whether the district has all of the resources needed to implement and sustain a successful school reform. In extreme cases, when the district feels it is unable to coordinate its own reform effort, the team might want to consider allowing the state department of education to oversee the reform process.

Another option for schools that feel they are lacking in the area of certified and experienced reform personnel is to hire an educational consulting firm. There are many well-qualified firms that will be able to either work in conjunction with a restructuring team or oversee the process themselves. Note, however, that this can turn into an enormous job with an enormous price tag. It will require resisting the urge to compromise on any phase of the restructuring process.

The consulting team or team leader must be committed to finding and implementing innovative strategies that have the potential to effectively produce educational change. Assembling a top-notch team is simply not enough however. All of the major administrators, including the superintendent and school board, must fully support the decisions of the district restructuring team.

Remember that parents, community leaders, and policymakers must be included in the school reform process. Many parents are involved in their students’ educational plans and simply want to be informed of any changes. The reform task force will need to decide if parents and community leaders should be included as formal members of the districts restructuring team, or to simply illicit their advice and expertise as needed. When making decisions concerning what individuals will populate the task force, remember to include members have the expertise to be taken seriously within the district.

Extra reform committee considerations

Prepared agendas are essential for smooth meetings and excellent communication among the team. Preparing agendas are the team leader’s responsibilities. The leader of the task force must remain patient, but a sense of urgency must be the catalyst of all meetings. Outside consultants could be considered, but are not necessary for the success of the reform. Since the team will be made up primarily of school district personnel and various other community members and parents, having an outsider on the team will give the team valuable expertise, in addition to an objective lens with which to gauge progress.

It will be helpful to determine what viable options of reform the team is able to utilize. If the reform is district-wide, each school will need to analyze its individual needs and the options available. A district-wide plan must be developed, while bearing in mind that each school will need to modify the plan based on the needs of the students. Once the system of reform is created and approved by all team members, the plan will need to be approved by the superintendent before it is presented to the school board. The same rules apply whether reform is needed by one school or by all the schools in the district.

A concern, alluded to in above comments, is the need to assess the district’s capacity for implementing and sustaining educational reform. To appropriately assess the abilities of the district or school, the leader will need to complete an inventory of the qualifications and areas of expertise the team members have. If the inventory concludes that the district or school does not have the capacity to implement or sustain the plan for reform, state takeover may be the only option.

It’s important for reform teams to work together to effect positive change – but it doesn’t happen overnight. Careful planning must be part of the plan and input from several sources for the best results to take place.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Why the U.S. College Landscape Still Needs HBCUs

It’s no secret that Black, and other non-white, students in the U.S. have always faced an uphill struggle when it comes to education. Even today, the achievement gap between white students and their peers of color is wide – with the latest National Assessment for Educational Progress report What are now called HBCUs were at one time the only route many young scholars could take to obtain a college degree and elevate their lifestyles. This is not to say that these HBCUs were second-rate; the education received at these establishments has always rivaled that of institutions without the same label, producing such graduates as Thurgood Marshall, Toni Morrison and Spike Lee. Traditionally, HBCUs have also had a strong alumni presence, with the great minds of the graduates giving back to the institutions that taught them so much.

What was once a role built of necessity has slowly disappeared, however. The Civil Rights Movement, affirmative action initiatives and more recently, the popularity and legitimacy of online degree programs, have all chipped away at the core reason HBCUs were developed in the first place. Declining enrollment has unsurprisingly led to a domino effect, reducing the resources available to students on-campus, and making the HBCU experience less attractive to students choosing between a plethora of higher education options.

There are standouts, of course – HBCUs whose reputations have sustained them through the changing landscape of Black college education in the U.S. Atlanta liberal arts powerhouses Morehouse College, often referred to as the “Black Ivy League,” and Spelman College continues to attract the top talent in the country to their programs. Morehouse boasts an 83 percent freshman retention rate while Spelman is the largest producer of black graduates that go on to medical school (of ALL U.S. colleges).

For every Spelman or Morehouse, however, there is a Saint Paul’s College, forced to close its doors in 2013 after an unsuccessful merger attempt and unsustainably low enrollment figures. Atlanta’s Morris Brown College filed for federal bankruptcy protection after finding itself $35 million over its head.

Not surprisingly, these headline-grabbing instances and others like them have called HBCUs to the table. Are these colleges still a necessity in the growingly accepting and diverse American culture? Do these colleges help their students reach graduation effectively? Why, when considering all the other educational options available to students of color, should an HBCU be chosen? Are these schools still relevant?

Despite the struggles of some HBCUs, I think that these institutions are actually more relevant than ever – and for a larger pool of students than ever before. Instead of closing the door on these schools or questioning their relevance, the educational community should be encouraging them to remain open, and for more reasons than one.

Safe havens for students of color

Though traditionally “white” schools now accept students of color, they often do not do enough to ensure that those students, particularly first-generation college attendees, have the resources to make it to graduation. With some exceptions, retention, mentoring and cultural programs often do not exist on non-HBCU campuses. Though subtle, racism still exists on non-HBCU campuses too. HBCUs have always provided more than the curriculum in a textbook, or the expertise of the professor in the classroom. They have been safe havens for young adults, struggling with the demands of a college education and to rise above the insidious inferiority complex society places on them. HBCUs don’t just include students of color out of obligation; HBCUs encourage, strengthen and celebrate Black and other minority students. Even though “times have changed,” HBCUs still remain pillars of holistic creation of students who succeed not only academically, but in every aspect of their lives.

How HBCUs can stay relevant

For HBCUs to keep their doors open, and their educational offerings relevant in an increasingly competitive higher education market, they need to keep one foot grounded in tradition and the other pointing forward. By “tradition,” I do not mean that they need to hold on to the exact practices of the past, or foolishly cling to a culture of exclusion, but I believe the purpose of HBCUs should remain steadfast: providing student-centered experiences with strong academic backgrounds.

While it is certainly impressive to make “top” lists in academic areas, HBCUs have a secret weapon when it comes to student retention, graduation rates and lifelong success and it lies outside what is in the textbooks. Can HBCUs survive without strong academic performance, and a competitive staff of the leading scholars in the nation and world? Of course not. But I’d argue that even with those things, HBCUs cannot survive without remaining grounded in the student-focused, “under our wings” mentality that have always made them a different sort of college education – one that is fulfilling on many levels beyond what is printed on a transcript.

HBCUs should also continue to embrace a spirit of diversity, particularly outside its traditional student body demographic. Black students should not make up the entire student body – or even a majority of it. Students from all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds should be welcomed in. The first-generation college students looking to elevate their family status. The student immigrants who are still assimilating into U.S. culture. The underdogs from every race, creed and color who need that extra bit of encouragement in a close-knit environment to accomplish their educational aspirations. It is this pool of students who have the highest potential to be innovators and to step outside their comfort zones to build a better future for themselves and our country. HBCUs can play that pivotal role in getting these students to that point.

So while the historical part of HBCUs should stay in the past, the future of these institutions of higher learning depends on leading through a diverse example that puts student needs above all else.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership

Invitational Leadership: An Essential Guide

As today’s school leaders seek to acquire the skills and knowledge that are necessary for effectiveness in current educational institutions, they should know that there are no simple answers or shortcuts to achieving leadership excellence. The most important task is to find the right combination of qualities and characteristics that will consistently provide the leader with the skills and knowledge required to succeed.

Purkey and Siegel made an attempt to blend several leadership qualities, values, and principles when they created the invitational leadership theory. They described the model as shifting from emphasizing control and dominance to focusing on connectedness, cooperation, and communication.

Invitational leadership aims at “inviting” all interested stakeholders to succeed. It involves sending positive messages to people, making them feel are valued, able, responsible, and worthwhile. The messages are often delivered through the institution’s policies, programs, practices, and physical environments. These are referred to as the five Ps of invitational leadership.

The personality of a place is noticeable at the first glance. Is the environment empty, sterile, and lifeless? Or is it warm, exciting, and filled with the personalities of the inhabitants? Physical environments are the easiest to change, and offer a direct opportunity for immediate improvement.

Policies are also a component of success or failure in invitational leadership. School leaders must create productive opportunities for the institution, without stifling creativity and individuality. School policies that are both successful and create a positive school culture seek to encourage a win/win result.
Schools with a positive school culture appear to make greater efforts to provide a variety of creative and attractive programs. Rigorous and comprehensive academic courses taught by outstanding teachers serve to increase the effectiveness of the instructional program while raising the standards for academic.

Another important component of the invitational leadership model is processes. In most schools, the participation process is confined to “here’s the deal, take it or leave it.” Effective leaders will forgo the quest for absolute power, however. Schools that have a positive school climate encourage decision-making through participation, cooperation, and collaboration. Students feel encouraged to take responsibility, be involved, and speak their minds.

The most crucial element for building a successful school is the people who comprise the school. Investment in people often results in effective change. Therefore, we find that involvement of people in many cooperative activities is an excellent way to build strong teams. Involvement helps develop a more positive working and learning environment. It is important to provide people with the recognition they have already earned, and to encourage the formation of positive relationships.

These P’s also assist in making invitational leadership a unique and holistic leadership model. It is the connection between the five P’s and the four basic assumptions that makes the invitational leadership model comprehensive. There are four basic assumptions, which exemplify the characteristics of invitational leaders:

● Optimism – The belief in people’s untapped potential for growth and development.
● Respect – The recognition that every person is an individual of worth.
● Trust – Possessing confidence in the abilities, integrity, and responsibilities of ourselves and others.
● Intention – A decision to purposely act in a certain way to achieve and carry out a set goal. It’s knowing what we intend to accomplish, as well as how we intend to go about it.

It can be said that the prime function of a leader is to keep hope alive. An optimistic leader sees difficulties rather than impossibilities, embracing challenges and change. Respect among organizational members leads to an inviting, inclusive workplace where diversity is seen as the norm and every individual can flourish. Trust is an important value, contributing directly to an organization’s success. Conversely, lack of trust is a barrier to teamwork- making trust a critical part of effective leadership. Developing and maintaining specific, clear intentions facilitates organizational growth and success.

When implemented in the educational setting, the elements of invitational leadership combine to create an environment that is cohesive, efficient, and conducive to learning. Invitational leaders “invite” everyone who has a stake in the success of the school to participate, and synergy is generated as all work toward a common goal.

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform

The Japanese Philosophy of Kaizen and U.S. School Reform

Education may very well be the single most important ingredient in allowing a person to achieve success in life. The ascendancy of each individual defines the prosperity of our society; school reform is the backbone of a continuously developing education system. As G. K. Chesterton once said, “Education is simply the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another.” Education is a continuous process of converting information into knowledge that can help students develop and explore further information.

In order to learn, a student must take new information and process it in a way that relates it to what is already known, and in the process form a newer, deeper understanding of the material. Just as learning involves changing one’s understanding of concepts and ideas over time, social phenomena such as education must also be subjected to ongoing scrutiny, evaluation, and change. It is necessary to recheck policies and practices upon which education systems are based, and continually strive to make improvements.

Constantly improving

The Japanese have a philosophy of continuous quality improvement called “kaizen,” which they apply to many areas of their life. Kaizen is the idea that one does not need to wait for something to be broken in order to fix it. Rather, one should always look for opportunities to improve upon current processes, making things incrementally better as time passes. This drive for continuous improvement should apply to our educational system; we need to constantly be striving to make things better, reevaluating how we do things, looking at the results we are achieving, and taking steps to improve things incrementally.

In the same way that kaizen theory speaks to improving life in general, we should apply the same principles to U.S. K-12 education. We must consider ways in which our educational system can and should grow, change, and continuously improve in ways to best serve our children. In order for the United States to continue to progress toward a knowledge-based society, it is necessary to reform and streamline our education system to enable the development and assimilation of information as knowledge. Our schools are the primary institutions to facilitate transference and conversion of information into students’ knowledge base. It is our duty to keep a watchful eye on the schooling processes, and to change educational policies and practices to ensure improvement.

Reform, or consistent improvements?

Over the past century, many reforms have taken place throughout the U.S., and on a continuing basis. Despite the constant need for change, very few, if any, of these reforms really made their way to the school level. Most of the initiatives that led to reform originated from dynamic leaders who were capable of implementing these changes in an extraordinary fashion, despite the presence of various radicals in strong opposition to these changes. However, as soon as the leaders moved on to their next challenge, these radical individuals returned to their old ways. The reform was diminished, and eventually there remained no trace of it.

Study after study has shown that the American educational system is not just in need of regular, continuous quality improvement. Something very different is needed since the system is in a state of fundamental disrepair. Our children are performing poorly compared to other developed countries. Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds are performing even worse.

Whether you believe that continuous improvement is good for our educational system or not, what is certain is that our educational system needs to change. Rather than always calling for radical reform when the numbers don’t work in our favor, always striving for improvement and never letting our classrooms become comfortable is a better route to K-12 success.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts