Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 22, 2016

The Four Biggest Factors In Teacher Turnover

Teacher turnover is a major problem in education that affects student, teachers, and administrators alike. But what’s behind the massive migration and exodus of new teachers? And what’s to be done about it? Researchers have identified four major factors that should be addressed to reduce teacher turnover and to retain them for a longer duration in the profession.

1. Compensation

Some studies suggest that, contrary to popular belief, salary is not the number one reason for teachers’ leaving the profession, although sufficient evidence indicates that it plays a significant role. Those who teach in-demand subjects like mathematics and science are more likely to quit because they receive more attractive offers for opportunities outside the teaching profession. While salary is a major factor in attrition among young teachers who are beginning their careers, it also acts as a deterrent to the retention of experienced and well-qualified teachers.

2. Working Conditions

According to a national survey, teachers place a lot of importance on their working conditions and consider it a key factor in their decision to leave or continue in the teaching profession. Good working conditions include administrative support, availability of professional resources, freedom to express their opinions on matters related to their profession, and the empowerment to influence policy in their schools.

Research studies reveal that the teachers who work in affluent and advantaged communities experience better working conditions than those who work in low-income communities. These conditions include lesser numbers of students to teach and more decision-making power in their schools. Teachers who work with disadvantaged students experience less appealing working conditions, with limited administrative support, fewer textbooks and supplies, and larger student groups to handle. Thus, it is evident that working conditions play an important role in a teacher’s decision to continue or leave the teaching profession, and that they contribute significantly to high teacher attrition rates.

3. Teacher Education

It is evident from several research studies that better prepared teachers stay in teaching for longer periods of time. This is especially true for those who complete traditional teacher education programs, as compared to those who are trained for a few weeks before being released into the student community.

Not all alternative pathways are ineffective or poorly conceived. Some well-designed post- baccalaureate programs enable students to acquire the same high standards as those who graduate from traditional teacher education colleges. This is accomplished by combining traditional coursework with a well-established fieldwork training experience.

However, alternative routes that do not provide adequate training and mentoring to prospective teachers add to the “revolving door” syndrome that currently plagues the teaching profession.

4. Mentoring

Without good mentors, new teachers can feel lost, frustrated, and stuck. It’s much harder to get out of a problem not faced before without the guidance of someone who already knows the solution. It’s also much easier to keep making the same mistakes without the wise word of an outside perspective. Learn more about the importance of mentoring in reducing teacher turnover in future articles!

Are you interviewing for a new placement? Ask your prospective employers what they’re doing to reduce teacher turnover. Are you already working at a school? Ask your administrators what steps are being taken to address turnover at your site. If there’s no plan in place, look over the list above and come up with some suggestions of how to tackle the four big problem areas within your district!

Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 21, 2016

2 Ways Common Core Standards Can Put Us Back on the Map

I have written before about how Common Core has come under attack by almost every type of person you can think of, especially due to its politically-charged nature. Politics aside, though, the standards espoused by Common Core can help American students succeed in an ever-changing knowledge economy.

Consider this: in 1965, just 11% of jobs required post-secondary training, but by 2020, 65% of U.S. jobs will require post-secondary training, according to the Committee for Economic Development.

How can Common Core help us with this, exactly? Let’s look at how.

Common Core can be our gateway to education equity. To meet the growing demand for 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.

Common Core standards acknowledge the reality of our workforce today and in the future. Generally, in the education community’s frantic pace to stay accountable with each other and the government, I think some other aspects of our society get inadvertently left out of the education process. The business community is one.

However, it seems like the business community is not allowing itself to be left out of the process. You will notice that prominent business leaders, such as Bill Gates, are highly outspoken about educational standards such as the Common Core ones.

Yes, business organizations are concerned about the quality of education in our schools. And, if you think about it, they SHOULD be. These students are, after all, our future workers and the drivers of the American economy.

I’ve heard the argument that teaching our kids in a way that prepares them for the competitive global workforce is treating them as “commodities” and not like children. I suppose there would be some merit to that if science hadn’t proven time and time again that kids thrive in learning environments and that the economic status of your life impacts its quality immensely. Setting our kids up to succeed economically on the world stage not only benefits our nation as a whole, but provides those kids with lifelong skills that will elevate their own quality of life through adulthood. Common Core standards play a big role in helping students become ready for an improved quality of life.

What do you think? Is Common Core judged unfairly? Do you think a set of nationally-imposed standards will prepare us for the growing demands of our changing economy?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform March 20, 2016

Public versus Entrepreneurial Education: Who Will Win Out?

By Matthew Lynch

Imagine a country without public schools – one where schools were run as any other business, with no contributions from tax dollars? What if there were total free markets in education in the United States? Education would become a product for sale, just like any other product on the U.S. market. It may sound like something from fiction, but educational entrepreneurs would like the K-12 systems in the U.S. to be run closer to the model described above, and less like the regulated public schools of today.

Education entrepreneurs are driven by the belief that public education organizations are agricultural- and industrialization-era bureaucratic entities, far too enmeshed in familiar operational customs and habits to lead the innovation and transformation needed for schools today. They see themselves as change agents who are able to visualize possibilities. They want to serve as catalysts for change that will deliver current public educational systems from a status quo that results in unacceptable educational outcomes for too many children.

Within the group of educational entrepreneurs is a sub group of social entrepreneurs who are focused on transforming education for the underserved, to include children from low socioeconomic backgrounds and children of color – groups that have not been well served by the traditional public education system. It is important to note that education entrepreneurs do not see themselves as merely improving education – for them, improvement would be a byproduct of the larger goal of transforming the system of public education in the U.S.

The question then becomes: how do visionaries propose to influence a system that has seen no significant large-scale change for decades? The efforts of education entrepreneurs are evident in ventures such as charter schools, Teach for America teacher training efforts, and the preparation of principals through the New Leaders for New Schools project.

On the surface, it may appear that traditional school systems and education entrepreneurs are engaged in the same kind of work when, in fact, education entrepreneurs and traditional educators view the world of education from two radically different perspectives. Aspects of the public education system are severely resistant to change. Our schools’ dependency on other organizations for resources and other types of support has caused them to be a reflection of these organizations, rather than units able to maintain discernible levels of independence. Existing resources do not restrict thinking among education entrepreneurs, nor are they beholden to any particular organization for support. This status ostensibly frees them to consider unlimited possibilities for K-12 education.

So, where should accountability lie?

Another interesting difference between education entrepreneurs and traditional educators is the manner in which accountability is perceived. Education entrepreneurs view accountability from a customer-provider perspective, while educators, given the fact that they exist in bureaucratic structures, view accountability from a superior-subordinate perspective. Education entrepreneurs may speak of having an impact on the lives of children as a result of individual actions, and that the actions of a critical mass of entrepreneurial organizations will result in systemic change. Educators may speak of accountability in terms of meeting expected outcomes handed down from another organization.

Education entrepreneurs propose that educators are too entrenched in the day-to-day business of school operations to be forward thinking about possibilities for K-12 education, and most education researchers appear disinterested in investigating practical solutions to problems within the system. In fact the education entrepreneurial opinion of traditional education seems to fall somewhere between frustration and disdain.

There is a sense of urgency among education entrepreneurs for radical transformation that results in improved performance outcomes, particularly when it comes to children who have not been served well by public education systems. The lack of ongoing and prompt action by public education systems leads some entrepreneurs to conclude that public education systems either do not feel the same urgency, or, if they do, that the very nature of the system renders them incapable of putting effective changes in action.

Is there a happy medium?

Perhaps the larger question is whether or not two systems (i.e., public education systems and education entrepreneurship) with different approaches to accomplishing an end, a fair amount of mistrust (and perhaps a lack of mutual respect), and different visions of how organizations ought to work, can come together to work toward the improvement of the educational system. Partnerships that have been formed by public school systems and education entrepreneurs are evidence of a brand of customized education that appears to be acceptable to both. As long as public schools systems believe they won’t be totally enveloped by education entrepreneurs, a workable and innovative model for public education may evolve.

Which model of K-12 education do you feel is the most effective for this generation of students?

photo credit: aaronvandorn via photopin cc

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers March 20, 2016

What’s the Secret to High PISA Test Scores? Top ranking BASIS Schools Say its Teachers

Author: Dr. Q. Mark Reford

Dr. Q. Mark Reford was born in Ireland. He was educated at Oxford and taught there, as well as Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC. He is CEO of BASIS Independent Schools (http://www.basisindependent.com/), and is currently opening two new private schools this fall in Silicon Valley and New York City.

There is a war in American education. The nation is deeply polarized: charter supporters vs. traditional public school supporters; standardized testing supporters, and parents who find them a scathing and useless routine. And then, there’s PISA.

PISA, the Program for International Student Assessment, is a triennial test given around the world to 15 year olds in 60 countries. The OECD uses PISA to rate countries’ school systems. It doesn’t just test rote knowledge, but critical thinking as well. To be frank, PISA makes the US look like educational paupers. According to the OECD, American students are falling behind the rest of the world in math, science and reading. Even when US students make gains, they do not keep up with the gains made by others in Finland and Shanghai China and Korea and Poland.

And now with the most recent results released last month and being distributed to schools up through July, administrators at US schools that volunteered to take the OECD test are in a rare state of agita waiting for yet another ranking about which to brag or explain away. The scary aspect about PISA is that it precisely measures the deeper learning and problem solving skills that all agree are needed by students to thrive in their future lives and careers.

PISA is now used by many nations as a benchmark to help them improve their education systems. It has not had that effect in the US. Our poor showings have been absorbed into our parochial arguments pitting testing against deep learning; creativity against rote learning; or project-based learning against traditional cumulative exams.

With such recent attention as Amanda Ripley’s “Smartest Kids in the World,” the academic rankings of PISA are beginning to gain attention. There is another attribute to the test that is more obscure… and all the more crucial: student satisfaction with their teachers and how those teachers help them learn and grow in confidence.
What a surprise that asking students about their own learning could help us see how we might improve our schools!

Look at that data and the countries that do well on the academic side of PISA begin to slip in student satisfaction – South Korea and Finland, for example. Plot student satisfaction against student academic achievement and you have a fascinating picture – not just more data to argue about – but a road map to improving learning for all students.

The American family of BASIS Schools, as reflected in Ripley’s book, have been participants in PISA since first eligible, and achieved scores described as “stratospheric.” In PISA, they ranked academically with the very best in the world. And in other arenas as well: BASIS students perform brilliantly on content rich Advanced Placement tests – a BASIS student was one of 11 students in the world who made a perfect score on the AP Calculus-BC exam last year – when he was in 9th grade.

How do BASIS schools beat the best in the world – in particular, how do American students at BASIS defy all the stereotypes?

It turns out that what matters is the quality of the teacher in the classroom. We know that student academic achievement is driven by our teachers. But how? Is it just all work, all homework, the return of Grad grind to the faculty lounge?

No – what PISA shows and BASIS demonstrates is that the best education in the world is grounded in excitement, and inspiration and curiosity and what Yeats called the “fascination of what’s difficult.”

BASIS Schools recruit only teachers who are expert in their field, who have a passion to pass on their love of economics (or logic or physics or music) to another generation, and who like children. According to BASIS.ed founder Michael Block, the “secret sauce” of BASIS is the teacher who loves to teach.

PISA can help us re-calibrate the arid shouting matches of our parochial American conversation about education. It tells us to steer clear of the Scylla and Charybdis of traditional (standardized testing) and progressive (creativity) ideologues. It says, close your ears to the siren call of technology in the classroom. Does anyone seriously believe it is anything but an opportunity for capital to finally monetize education?

Focus instead on finding the best teachers and holding them accountable – and rewarding them appropriately. BASIS teachers earn bonuses based on student performance – they share accountability with their students, creating a partnership in achievement.

But above all, focus on culture. Inspiration, challenge, support, creativity – they are not mutually incompatible with rigor and standards and thoughtful external cumulative assessments. The schools our students deserve are schools that sustain a culture in which fascinated, engaged and supported students tackle and master difficult stuff.

You cannot have one without the other. They are a Mobius strip, a single side masquerading as two. America has its road map to the educational culture offering results needed to empower our young with the opportunity to make great choices in their futures – we need to move as fast as we can to the upper right hand corner of this PISA graph.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers March 20, 2016

Who Owns Knowledge? A Look At Curriculum.

The central focus of every curriculum is imparting knowledge in the best way possible. But who decides what “the best way possible” really is?

The K–12 curriculum is often referenced in abstract ways, with many schools and districts claiming to want to teach the “whole child.” But what does that actually mean in the context of contemporary classrooms? Not every student exposed to the same information will achieve the same success and life outcomes. Just what is actually considered knowledge is interpretive, at best. Educators must narrow information to the learning materials that will make the biggest positive impact on a particular group of students.

K–12 schools have four kinds of curriculum. Official curriculum is outlined by governmental or educational bodies as the framework for every student. Taught curriculum is what teachers actually pass on to the students under their care. Tested curriculum is what is examined in standardized and graded testing materials. Learned curriculum includes those items that may not show up on testing results but are integral to student development and the learning experience. Depending on whom you ask, any one of these categories of curriculum may be considered the strongest, while others may measure as weak or unnecessary.

Though there is some federal oversight on curriculum choices and the funding accompanying them, curriculum is generally chosen on a local level. Some of the factors that go into curriculum choices are the personal belief systems of the decision makers and their overarching worldviews. Some things are considered “absolute”—like the rules of grammar or the way math equations are solved. Many other parts of K–12 learning are interpretive and are influenced by the individual educator or by imposing views on a global scale. Even the “facts” of history may be presented in differing ways based on the type of curriculum believed correct by officials. Often what is left out of curriculum is just as telling as what is included.

When educators are involved in the role of choosing curriculum, there is an assumption that the best interests of a student population and its achievement are at heart. For the most part, this perception is true. There is a reason why teachers and administrators require degrees and continuing education courses to obtain and keep their licenses; a lot of expert thought goes into the material that is chosen for students. In recent years parents have started to become more of an influential force in curriculum choices of K–12 schools. A law passed in 2012 in New Hampshire allows parents to object to any course material presented in public schools, provided that they can recommend a suitable alternative. While this law affects a very small subset of the national student population, it represents a trend in all schools to cater to students, and more specifically to parents, as customers. If public K–12 schools are to remain equalizers, however, the demands of small, fringe groups cannot be met. While parents may believe they know what is best for their own children, curriculum decisions for the collective student body are best reserved for objective, expert educators.

As an educator, it’s your job to thoroughly understand the reasoning behind any curriculum you implement. Know the pros, so you can defend what you’re teaching, if necessary. But know the con’s, too, so that you’re prepared to explain how you’re handling or working around those. Be realistic. Be informative. Be a teacher.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers, Testing March 19, 2016

Should we grade teachers on student performance?

Should teachers be judged on student performance? Is it a fair assessment of their skills as educators?

A recent study published in Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis is the latest in a number of forms of research that cast doubt on whether it is feasible for states to evaluate teachers based partially on student test scores. Research shows us that little to no correlation between high quality teaching and the appraisals these teachers are given.

We have seen a sharp rise in the number of states that have turned to teacher-evaluation systems based on student test scores. The rapid implementation has been fueled by the Obama administration making the teacher-evaluation system mandatory for states who want to receive the Race to the Top grant money or receive a waiver from the 2002 federal education act, No Child Left Behind. Already the District of Columbia and thirty-five states have placed student achievement as a significant portion in teacher evaluations. Only 10 states don’t necessitate student test scores to be factored into teacher evaluations.

Many states also use VAMs, or value-added models, which are algorithms to uncover how much teachers contribute to student learning while keeping constant factors such as demographics in mind.

These teacher-evaluation systems have drummed up controversy and even legal challenges in states like Texas, Tennessee and Florida when educators were assessed using test scores of students they never taught.

Just last month, the American Statistical Association urged states and school districts against VAM systems to make personnel decisions. Recent studies have found that teachers are responsible for up to 14 percent of a student’s test score, in combination with other factors.

In my opinion, we need to make sure students are exposed to high quality teachers. But is it fair to subject teachers to tough standards based on how students test? I do not believe so, especially in underprivileged areas. If we continue to scrutinize teachers with these types of stressful evaluations, it will only discourage teachers from taking jobs in urban and minority schools – perhaps where they are needed the very most.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education March 19, 2016

Report: 11 states spend more on prisons than higher education

According to a new report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 11 states spend more money on correctional facilities than public research universities.

The report outlines how many states have cut spending on higher education while increasing budgets for jails and prisons.

Higher education spending didn’t start to fall once the recession started. Funding for higher education in many states begin toppling back in 1990 from 14.6 percent to just 9.4 percent in 2014.

Michigan, Oregon, Arizona, Vermond, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Delaware, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Colorado, and Connecticut all failed to make the cut. Each state has a higher budget for jails and prisons than public research universities.

Adjusted for inflation, spending on elementary and secondary education increased by nearly 70 percent while corrections saw an increase of over 140 percent between 1986 and 2013.

In Michigan, nearly 25 percent of the state’s spending from general fund expenditures went towards corrections compared to just 15 percent on higher education.

The percentages are much closer in other states like Rhode Island and Delaware but corrections spending still gets a larger percentage.

Oregon seems to be the worst defender. Less than 5 percent of general fund expenditures are dedicated to higher education but the state spends nearly 15 percent of that money on correctional facilities.

Bottom line is that too many states invest in faux rehabilitation methods and not enough on student engagement. Imagine if we invested that money upfront in our troubled youth instead of putting it towards locking them up. It takes a fundamental understanding that it NEEDS to happen though – something that generally is lacking in the U.S. education system.

Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education March 19, 2016

HBCU Insights: Changing the Discourse on HBCUs

A column by Larry J. Walker

Ensuring every American has the opportunity to develop marketable skills is critical. After graduating from high school, completing an associate degree, GED or serving in the U.S. military aspiring engineers, scientists and teachers seek reasonably priced colleges with supportive environments. However, post-secondary institutions with prohibitive tuition, room and board and fees prevent students from low and moderate income backgrounds from obtaining a bachelors degree. Fortunately, recent state and federal proposals are attempting to make college more affordable while increasing the number of minority, first generation, low to moderate income college graduates. Throughout their history historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) enrolled more students from predominantly low income and minority communities in comparison to predominantly White institutions (PWIs). For this reason, HBCUs are equipped to support students in need of academic, emotional and social support. Unfortunately the recent struggles of some HBCUs tarnish their distinguished history of educating students.

In 2002, Morris Brown College, a HBCU located in Atlanta, Georgia lost its accreditation because of a plethora of financial problems. The African Methodist Church founded Morris Brown in 1881 to educate Black students. Since Morris Brown’s inception the institution educated thousands of students who may not have attended college. More than a decade after losing accreditation the college continues to graduate a small number of students. Morris Brown’s struggles foreshadowed the demise of St. Paul’s College, a small HBCU, located in Virginia. In 2013, St. Paul’s, encountered financial problems that forced the historic institution to close. Some pundits suggested the loss of St. Paul’s and Morris Brown’s financial exigency signaled an end to HBCUs golden era. However, upon closer examination several HBCUs are continuing to thrive despite a variety of obstacles.

Hampton University has a Cancer Research Center that focuses on closing disparities and developing new research. Recently, the National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded Hampton a $622,000 grant to increase the number of African-Americans in computer science. The grant reflects Hampton’s ability to compete with larger institutions to secure vital funding. Similarly, Morgan State University signed an agreement with the New York Academy of Sciences, which will create opportunities for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors. The initiative is consistent with multiple partnerships the university has solidified over the last few years.

Several other HBCUs including Fisk University and Howard University have received funding to improve programs. For instance, a researcher from Howard was recently awarded a $1.1 million grant from the National Institute of Health (NIH) while Fisk received funding to maintain their archives. Each institution has a legacy that extends beyond the classroom. Fisk and Howard alumni have made major contributions in education, politics and science. Despite the success of HBCUs, collectively, they face a variety of challenges. Recently, South Carolina State University had to convince legislators not to temporarily close the university because of financial difficulties. Closing the university would have led to dire consequences for students including transferring to other institutions. Moreover, legislators would have resisted reopening the state’s only public HBCU.

While the problems facing HBCUs including South Carolina State University are genuine. There are factors that contributed to the disparities between South Carolina State and other public universities including the University of South Carolina. Unfortunately the media focuses on the financial struggles at HBCUs without examining the issues from a historical perspective. HBCUs struggle to fund programs, rebuild facilities and provide scholarships because of inequities. For instance, during the 1800’s several HBCUs were founded because of Morrill Land Grant Acts (I & II) yet they are not funded at the same level as PWIs. The uneven support for land grant and other public universities has forced HBCUs to file lawsuits to counter years of inadequate funding. Regrettably, some HBCUs have struggled financially which reinforces misconceptions including: 1) HBCU faculty members are not as accomplished as their counterparts at PWIs 2) HBCU’s are not as rigorous and 3) HBCU’s mission of educating Black students is no longer relevant in a post-racial society.

Changing the discourse regarding HBCUs has been difficult but advocates, institutions and stakeholders have taken steps to counter the deficient oriented focus. For example, Hampton University hosted the AARP HBCU Awards Ceremony, which recognizes the contributions of administrators, faculty, students and alumni. The annual event is a showcase that allows sponsors to challenge preconceived beliefs regarding HBCUs. Some of the awards include best: marching band, student government association, research center, alumni publication as well as student of the year (male and female) and faculty member of the year.

The AARP HBCU Awards Ceremony is part of a growing trend highlighting the accomplishments of HBCUs, alumni and students. For instance, the HBCUstory symposium sponsored by Fisk alumnae, Dr. Crystal DeGregory, is an annual event that brings together scholars to examine HBCUs historical significance. This year the symposium titled “Reconstruction in a New Age Resistance: Respecting our Roots+ Restoring our Rights” will be held at Fisk University. Sponsoring events that change the narrative on HBCUs is paramount.

For more than a century HBCUs educated Black students from predominantly low and moderate income families with limited resources. While some students from HBCUs come from affluent backgrounds the majority of students are dependent on federal and state funding. Thus, ensuring HBCUs have funding to educate students is important. Historically, Black students have encountered a variety of barriers including living in substandard housing, limited educational opportunities and pathways to success. HBCUs prepare students to break down obstacles by emphasizing concepts related to shared responsibility and political empowerment. Without these institutions thousands of Black students would face a cloudy future.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

____________

Dr. Larry J. Walker is an educational consultant focused on supporting historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). His research examines the impact environmental factors have on the academic performance and social emotional functioning of students from HBCUs.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Higher Education March 19, 2016

Diverse Conversations: MOOCs for University Administration

By Matthew Lynch

Massive Open Online Courses are often associated with topics that are normally taught within college classrooms and by college faculty. The untapped potential of MOOCs extends well beyond the basic academic reach though, and is showing promise to advance the success of university systems as a whole.

Austin-based digital marketing agency Tocquigny is launching a four-week MOOC that focuses on recruiting students for online learning programs. Instead of targeting the students themselves, the MOOC guides administration and admission personnel through smart marketing tactics to attract their audiences to their online course offerings.

The free Online Recruitment of Online Learners starts on October 15 and runs for four weeks. Enrollment is open by visiting https://recruitonline.eventbrite.com.

I talked with the company’s CEO, Yvonne Tocquigny, about the concept for this MOOC and the evolving role of online learning.

Q: These courses at Tocquigny are aimed at college administrators, as opposed to students, correct?

A: Yes, specifically the courses are aimed at admissions, enrollment and marketing staff responsible for acquiring new students within higher education institutions.

Q: How are colleges succeeding in online enrollment, and where can they improve?

A: Colleges are in fierce competition for the same students. Most colleges and universities are using the same strategies and tactics so there is very little discernible differentiation between the institutions. Colleges and universities can do a better job of creating distinctive brands that set them apart rather than “me too” brands that make them all look about the same. They can do a better job of segmenting their audiences and delivering tailored messages to resonate with specific groups of students. And, they can do a better job of using and optimizing digital marketing. Schools should have visibility into a quantifiable cost per acquired student metric, and they should have specific initiatives to consistently lower that cost through rigorous testing and by optimizing campaigns.

Q: Based on your research, what types of students are enrolling in online college programs the most?

A: Online learning is most popular with a group Tocquigny refer to as “career advancers.” These are people that are currently employed, but cannot advance because they lack the educational certification. Online education is also popular with mothers as they find more time to dedicate to their futures, as well as military personnel coming out of active duty.

Q: How important is a university’s digital branding when it comes to recruitment, particularly for online learning?

A: As students shop for their university of choice, they are likely to first investigate their options through online sources, often using their mobile device. The school must engage a student prospect effectively at this first touchpoint in order to move the student into the consideration phase and on to the submission of an application. Prospective students today will not only visit the school’s website, but will investigate the school through social media, videos and blogs. It’s imperative for schools to have an accessible, relevant differentiated brand online in order to engage prospects.

Q: How will online college learning evolve in the next 5 years and what are some factors leading to change?

A: We at Tocquigny believe online higher education options will continue to evolve to offer more variations that are both paid and free for an audience that is not able or willing to attend a brick and mortar school. We are pioneering our own MOOC because we see the power this form of education has in the marketplace. Integration with emerging online collaboration tools such as SubjectMatter will allow more direct contact with instructors to give the student a richer experience. We expect that new curricula around niche learning topics may spawn new certifications created to enhance specific skill sets required for jobs. This may lead to a proliferation of alternative learning paths that blur the edges between a traditional degree and other certifications.

Q: What university clients have you taken on already, and what campaigns have been launched?

A: Tocquigny has a seven year relationship with Regent University to handle its online student acquisition. We are also in the process of launching a social media campaign for Rice University aimed at recent graduates. I serve as an advisor for the School of Undergraduate Studies at The University of Texas at Austin.

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

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, Teachers March 19, 2016

4 Ways to Help Your Students Embrace Diversity

When you’re a culturally responsive teacher, one of your major goals is to help all students become respectful of all the cultures and people that they’ll interact with once they leave class. I admit: this can be daunting, given that the world at large is infinitely more complex and diverse than the microcosmic environment that the student inhabits.

In typical educational and social settings, students tend to show classic in-group/out-group behaviors. In general, most students are comfortable interacting with people, behaviors, and ideas that they are familiar with, and react with fear and apprehension when faced with the unfamiliar. Culturally responsive instruction can help you show your students that differences in viewpoint and culture are meant to be cherished and appreciated, not judged and feared.

How can you, a culturally responsive educator, overcome human nature’s fear of the unknown and help students become more respectful of cultures with different ideas? Fortunately, I have a few tips to make this a lot easier for you.

1. Provide students with evidence that people who don’t look or act like them are still people just like them.

You can teach this viewpoint by building a culture of learning from one another rather than a culture of passing judgment on differences in values and beliefs.
There are a wide range of classroom activities that can help students recognize the essential humanity and value of different types of people. For instance, providing students with an opportunity to share stories of their home life, such as family holiday practices, provides fellow students with a window into their peer’s cultural traditions.
Another thing you can do is show your students everyday photographs of people of different ethnicities, shapes, sizes, and garb. This gives students the opportunity to see people that look very different from themselves and their family engaging in the same types of activities that they and their family participate in. This can help humanize types of people that your students have never had an opportunity to meet.
Welcoming guest speakers into the class that hail from differing backgrounds and have all made a positive contribution to important fields can also help dispel any preconceived notions that students might possess about the relative competence and value of people from different cultures.

2. Teach your students about multicultural role models. This demonstrates that people of all genders, ethnicities, and appearances can have a positive influence on the world and deserve to be respected and emulated.

It’s important to avoid teaching students about the same minority role models repeatedly; after all, if students never learn about prominent African American citizens other than Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X then it’s likely that some students will assume that few other African Americans have made substantial contributions to American culture and politics. If students are taught about the contributions that people of various ethnicities, genders, and creeds have made to a variety of different artistic, scientific, and political fields, then they’re more likely to respect and value diverse culture backgrounds as a whole.

3. Craft the right environment for culturally responsive learning. Use your wall spaces to display posters depicting cultural groups in a non-stereotypical fashion. Students can also mark the countries from which their ancestors immigrated on a world map, and classroom signs can be hung in several languages.
These added touches might seem innocuous, but they go a long way in helping students absorb the rich diversity that surrounds them, both in the classroom and in the world outside the school walls. Such touches will help promote an environment in which students from diverse backgrounds feel more comfortable being themselves and will help insulate students from the cultural and ethnic stereotypes that pervade television and other mass media outlets.

4. Teach students to embrace their own culture and heritage. Another important goal of culturally responsive education is to teach students to respect and appreciate their own culture and heritage. Minority students can sometimes feel pressured to dispose of their cultural norms, behaviors, and traditions in order to fit in with the prevalent social order. When this happens it can create a significant disconnect between the culture of the student’s school and community lives and can interfere with emotional growth and social development, frequently resulting in poor performance in social and academic domains.

Providing opportunities for students to investigate unique facets of their community is one effective way to help students gain a greater appreciation for their own culture. Having students interview family members about cultural practices and traditions or write about important learning experiences that the student has experienced in his home community are just two of the many ways that students can explore their heritage.

Using a culturally-centered instructional approach can help facilitate cultural pride among diverse students. Given the current federal and state preoccupation with standardized testing in core subjects, it is particularly crucial that educators consider the impact of multiculturalism in core curricula such as math, science, reading, and writing. Providing diverse students with examples of diverse contributors to these fields and using culture-specific subject matter when teaching core topics will help them perform better in these highly scrutinized and important domains. Placing ethnically diverse students in a situation that emphasizes the strong points of their culture’s preferred means of learning may help provide them with a greater sense of self-efficacy and achievement.

How do you promote a culturally responsive, accepting classroom? I would really appreciate hearing your thoughts, so don’t hesitate to leave a comment below.

Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 19, 2016

5 Expert Tips on Working with Homeless Students

Homelessness is another step down on the ladder of poverty and it is a very real problem faced by 1.5 million children in the United States. Here are a few facts and tips that will help you work with any homeless students you happen to have in your classes.

Many homeless families live in shelters in rural or urban areas. With one income, high rent and living expenses, many families are just one emergency away from disaster. As a result, even children who still have a home to go to could lose it in a heartbeat.

For instance, a single mother trying to make ends meet cannot go to work because her child gets sick. She must be with her child, as she has no one to help. On top of this, she has medical bills piling up. Even if she has a job to return to, she may not be able to afford her rent.

Homeless children still need to receive an education. Yet, when they get to school each morning, they are often hungry and tired. Like many children living in poverty, homeless children move frequently, and are exposed to drugs, violence, crime and more. Also, transportation might be an issue for some homeless children and they miss a great deal of school.
When they are able to attend school, they may be teased for the clothes they wear and the fact they fall asleep in class. They may have difficulty making friends or a fear of participating in an activity in front of the class. Although many homeless children are with their families, older homeless children may be runaways or may have been kicked out of their homes. Many have been abused sexually and/or physically.
Teachers who have homeless children in their classroom need to know how to help and support children without a permanent home. Homeless children may be needy emotionally and due to lack of access to bathtubs or showers and little food, they may be unclean and unfed. Teachers can be an anchor for homeless children by showing them compassion and understanding.
It may also be a challenge to communicate with parents who don’t have regular access to a phone. Of course, the most important thing for homeless children is that their families find a home. Teachers might be able to help by working with local agencies, children, and their families to find a solution to their problem.

Homeless children deserve a quality education just like all students. Teachers are the first line of defense but we all have to pitch in and do what we can to ensure that all of our country’s children have the chance to lead happy, healthy lives. If you implement the strategies that I have outlined in this column, you will have no problem working with homeless students and their families.

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 18, 2016

3 Things We’d Rather Not Hear About Gender Bias in K-12 Classrooms

Think back to your own days as a student in the classroom. Do you remember particular times when you noticed a difference in the way boys and girls were treated by the teacher?

Whatever your own gender, you may have felt like you were punished more harshly, expected to do more, or even completely ignored as a result. You certainly did not imagine this—research backs up the theory that there are many differences in how boys and girls are treated in the classroom.

It’s true that different treatment of the genders in K-12 classrooms is certainly not something that teachers do purposely, but the subtle ways that girls and boys are treated differently has an academic impact later on. For this reason, it’s good to know how gender bias affects students in K-12 schools.

Listed below are a few things that most of us would rather not think about when it comes to gender bias—but is still rather important to know.

1. Teachers pay more attention to boys than to girls.

Teachers tend to pay more attention to boys than girls by having more interactions with them. They tolerate behavior in boys that is not tolerated in girls, and tend to provide boys with more criticism and praise. Differences in the extra attention given to boys are due in part to the fact that boys simply tend to demand more attention, while girls tend to be quieter and more reticent.

Boys not only tend to dominate classroom discussion, but also access and use computers and technology more often than girls.

2. Gender representation in textbooks still leaves something to be desired.

Gender representation in textbooks and other educational material is also problematic. This has improved greatly over the past 30 years, but is still a problem. Educational materials still portray women as being more helpless than men, and stereotyping, tokenism and omission are still prevalent.

3. Boys and girls still tend to gravitate toward different subjects in school.

The types and levels of courses predominated by males and females continue to differ as well. Boys are still more likely to enroll in mathematics, science and engineering than girls and are more likely to take advanced courses in these subject areas. This enrollment pattern is not true for biology, English and foreign languages, where girls tend enroll in more advanced courses. Overall, women are underrepresented in professions that center on mathematics, science, engineering, medicine, and business leadership.

Hasn’t there been some progress though?

There are those who believe gender bias no longer exists. Proponents of this perspective contend that boys are not more accommodated than girls in the classroom. They suggest that in actuality, boys’ needs are often overlooked, as they learn best when they have more frequent opportunities to get up and move around, and engage in classroom debates– classroom activities that are often discouraged.

There is also a strong focus on the fact that the gaps in education levels between boys and girls have virtually closed since 1970 and now, even though they still lag behind boys in mathematics and science, girls in high school do better than the male students in reading, writing and other academic subjects, earn more credits, are more likely to get honors, and are more likely to further their education at colleges or universities.

While it might be argued that it is difficult to see gender bias in schools, there can be no question that in terms of money earned there is a gender bias in the work force. The average earnings of women with a high school diploma is 85 percent of that of men with the same level of educational attainment, and that figure drops to 80 percent for college graduates. This means there is a level of gender bias, even if it is somewhat hidden in the school system. Gender bias is evident as students move into the workforce. Men are more likely to be given jobs with higher status and higher salaries than women.

So the problem of gender bias as it relates to success is one that extends well beyond K-12 classrooms, but it certainly originates there. As teachers become more aware of the ways that their actions impact the long-term success of their students, gender interactions will likely improve and equalize. It is just a matter of being willing to change traditional classroom models and interactions for the betterment of all students – regardless of gender.

What do you think about gender bias in K-12 classrooms? Are boys and girls being treated fairly in the classroom? Leave a comment below.