Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, HBCU's, list, Matthew Lynch, Mississippi

4 Interesting Facts about Education in Mississippi

Mississippi is my home state, and an interesting state at that. Some time ago I wrote an article about what MLK would say about education in Mississippi, and I wrote it because of some startling realities about education in this state. I brought up that 24% of people in the state are estimated to live below the poverty line, and that many of Mississippi’s poorest residents are children of color — many of them are black children. For this reason, among others, Mississippi may need special attention when it comes to addressing P-12 education.

Here are a few sobering facts about education in Mississippi.

  1. Public education in Mississippi is ranked last in the nation year after year. Public education in Mississippi ranked last, yet again, on Education Week’s Quality Counts report . The state received an “F” grade for academic achievement, and a “D” for the chance of success for students.

There is no easy fix for this. Even academic programs targeted for at-risk students can only go so far. With a poverty rate of 24 percent in the state, the problems that impact student success in classrooms extend far beyond it. To really see a difference in student outcomes, the state needs economic initiatives that boost the life quality of residents and give more opportunities to students once they are done with school. Recognizing that these outside factors go hand-in-hand with student outcomes in classrooms is the first step toward moving Mississippi out of last place and putting it on course to be a P-12 leader in the country…

  1. Mississippi is short on education funding—by $1.5 billion. Durant Public School teachers in Mississippi spend their evenings on the Internet, browsing for math and other problems to give their students because the school doesn’t have up-to-date textbooks.

School leaders say that new books aren’t in the budget, nor are reading coaches to help improve the districts academic rating of “D.” To save money, teachers and their assistants have already been reduced and administrators took pay cuts.

The troubles in Durant, located about 60 miles north of Jackson, illustrate a picture of the state as a whole. Mississippi legislators have ignored a state law and spend $1.5 billion less on education than what is required; the cuts in the state are the deepest in the country.

State funding was originally cut as tax revenues plunged during the recession. According to early estimates, the state could fall $280 million short again in 2016.

Durant has 588 students in grades K-12. The teacher turnover rate is high, and when new teachers are hired they tend to be recent graduates who are inexpensive to bring on board.

Sanders-Tate, the superintendent in Durant, dreams of raising the schools rating from a “D” to “A,” but knows it’s a challenge.

“When you don’t have what you need, you’ve got to make do,” Sanders-Tate said. “I’m tired of making do for the kids when they deserve the best like everyone else.”

  1. Mississippi has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation, with 50 births for every 1,000 young women between 15 and 19 years old. Despite this, attempts to educate young people in the state about safe sex practices have been met with hostility.

Alarmed by the high rates of teen pregnancy, and high number (76 percent) of high school students who report being sexually active by age 17 in the state, members of the business community lobbied the state to make sexual education courses mandatory in public schools. Those lobbying won a partial victory — but actual implementation of the rule has been slowed down in the religious and conservative state.

The Los Angeles Times reports that mother Marie Barnard was pleased when Mississippi made sex education mandatory after many decades of disallowing it. She was less than pleased, however, when she found out one of the “lessons” involved students passing around an unwrapped piece of chocolate candy and observing how “dirty” it became with more contact. The message does not provide an educated view on sex, or show respect to young people who have been sexually active, she said.

The candy example is just one way the noble goal to educate Mississippi’s youth about responsible sexual activity has gone awry. Part of the enacted law requires parents to sign a permission slip allowing their children to take sex ed courses in the first place. There are also issues of enforcement and the exact curriculum being taught. Individual districts, for example, can choose to implement abstinence-only sex education classes.

So it seems the battle for a sexually-informed generation in Mississippi wages on, even in public school classrooms.

  1. Mississippi received a grade of “B” for its early childhood programs, compared to a national average of “D+.” There is a silver lining to every cloud. Despite being one of the worst-performing states in many categories of education, Mississippi ranks second nationally when it comes to Head Start enrollment (third nationally when it comes to Kindergarten enrollment and access to full-day Kindergarten programs). Getting kids signed up for early childhood programs is just the start of course. These children need to learn enough while in those classrooms, but getting them started as early as possible is definitely a step in the right direction when it comes to the future academic success of students in the state.

It is also one of the relatively few states in America that is pushing for mandatory Kindergarten. Representative Sonya Williams-Barnes, a Democrat from Gulfport, authored of “KIDS Act” that would change the mandatory school age for children in the state from 6 to 5 years old, in essence making Kindergarten mandatory for children in the state.

So how does Mississippi stack up against other states when it comes to the Kindergarten issue? There are only 15 states and the District of Columbia that require Kindergarten by law, and there are actually six states that do not even require public schools to offer Kindergarten. Despite the bad rap Mississippi often gets when it comes to student achievement numbers, the state does pretty well on Kindergarten access and has nationally high numbers for attendance. So adding in a Kindergarten requirement would not make a huge difference in the amount of kids who attended, but will just be more of a formality.

All this said, where Mississippi could really use the legislative boost is when it comes to pre-K education — an area where strides are being made. The Mississippi Department of Education reports that two-thirds of all the kids who entered Mississippi public Kindergarten in the fall of 2014 did not have the base-level skills required for adequate learning. In my opinion, the age of 5 is too old for mandatory education in the state, but it will probably be a few more decades before Mississippi, or any other state, requires it any younger. Hopefully this latest proposal will pass with no problems to show that state leaders are unified when it comes to early childhood education initiatives in Mississippi.

My home state of Mississippi needs to make some big changes as soon as possible. I want nothing more for the state to have sufficient money to put towards improving education, and to see the ratings improve drastically.

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

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

Standardized Testing for Colleges: A Necessary Evil?

Standardized testing in K-12 education is a perennial hot button issue. Proponents feel that measuring knowledge in these rigid ways helps lift the entire educational system. Critics say the measurements do nothing but encourage “teach to the test” methods and narrow the scope of what instructors are able to teach if they want to have acceptable test results. These arguments are nothing new, but they are now seeing a new audience.

What if the same principles of K-12 standardized testing were applied to colleges and universities? Americans spend over $460 billion on higher educational pursuits every year, yet there is no official worldwide system in place to determine whether students are learning what they should, compared to other schools. In June, the

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development unveiled research on whether a global testing system for college students is possible. The group will continue to review its findings and decide later this year if it wants to push for implementation of the Assessment of Higher Education Learning Outcomes test, abbreviated as AHELO.

Right now the comparison system for colleges and universities lies in the many rankings that are released each year by sources like U.S. News & World Report and hundreds of bloggers who weigh in on the topic. The AHELO would be a “direct evaluation of student performance at the global level…across diverse cultures, languages and different types of institutions.” It would provide institutions feedback meant to help them “foster improvement in student learning outcomes.” In a nutshell, the test would not actually measure student achievements as much as shine the light on instructors that need some improvement.

To K-12 students, this sounds familiar. To college faculty, the idea is fraught with landmines. How can one test take into account so many variables in higher education across the globe? Would instructors be punished by the institution, or even worse held to some misguided accountability scale by peers, if students did not rank highly enough on an AHELO, or some other test? If college is a time for fostering critical thinking skills, would a standardized test take away some of that freedom?

College instructors and administrators are right to have doubts, and particularly before any testing mandates go into effect. Take the classic college entrance exams – the SAT and the ACT. Though research has found little correlation between results on these tests and actual knowledge or intelligence, they are a standard part of college admissions. It is more difficult to reverse a testing mandate than to fight it off at the outset.

It is easy to see why colleges and universities are leery of standardized testing, but K-12 instructors should be too. Presently, K-12 instructors guide students through the formative education years, dealing with standardized tests and other demands of contemporary teaching. Success with those students is ultimately determined by two other numbers: graduation rate and college placement. At that point, a K-12 teacher’s job is done, at least in theory. Adding another layer of teacher testing (cleverly disguised as core knowledge testing) at the college level could have an impact on K-12 instructors too.

If the AHELO is designed to “foster improvement” in the higher education schools that are tested, who is to say that those ideals of improvement will not then be extended to the K-12 schools that came beforehand? A student who demonstrates below-college-level proficiency in language or math would in theory not be the product of college that failed him or her – that student’s incompetency would be a result of a previous school, or schools. Could a global test for college actually negatively impact the K-12 schools that preceded it?

As with any measurement of teaching and learning, the AHELO and other similar initiatives need close scrutiny before becoming global law. I am not sure of the necessity of such a system and it will take some hard arguing by the other side to convince me otherwise.

Are you in favor of standardized testing in colleges and universities?

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

Campus diversity: Are Ivy Leagues getting closer?

America has a love-hate relationship with its eight Ivy League universities. For the majority, these elite schools are seen as unattainable places, reserved for those with superhuman high school transcripts and the deep pockets to afford to attend. Graduating from one is generally viewed as writing the ticket to a comfortable life, though, and you’d be hard pressed to find someone who wouldn’t be impressed with your framed Princeton or Columbia degree.

Ivy Leagues are the butt of jokes where snobs are the punchline and often considered out of the league, in both price and performance, for the average American high schooler. Ivy Leagues are viewed as places for already-rich, white Americans to pat each other on the back on their way to acquiring even more wealth. As with most things that are generalized and over-simplified, Ivy Leagues have more complexity in student, faculty and alumni diversity than is often portrayed.

Look at our own President – a minority Harvard graduate who married another minority Harvard grad, made a name for his down-to-earth approach to politics, and went on to become the leader of the free world. Is President Obama an extreme exception, or are we missing the story of true diversity at these stereotypically elite schools?

The truth is somewhere between the extremes. With the right direction, however, Ivy Leagues could really make some headway in improving diversity on their campuses in the next half-decade and could set the example for the rest of America’s university landscape.

Smart recruitment

Ivy League schools aren’t just waiting for minority, first-generation and other disadvantaged future applicants to come to them – they are reaching out, and early. Every Ivy League school is a member of the Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success which offers a portfolio-type program for college admittance. This portfolio is intended to start in 9th grade and is often accompanied by guidance from university officials on high school academics and additional items that will boost their final file for consideration.

These portfolios are about more than test scores and report card grades. A “locker” portion allows room for creative work, like visual art and essays. By allowing this application system, Ivy Leagues are setting the stage for students early in their careers, giving them a better chance at earning admittance when the time comes.

It will be a few years before this portfolio system is proven to work, at Ivy Leagues and the other 70+ schools that implemented its use in 2015. The fact that these schools have pinpointed the need to approach and guide students so early in their high school careers is important though. It shows that the schools in the coalition are serious about being proactive in diverse recruitment and are willing to put in the work to make get more disadvantaged students on their campuses.

The reality stands

For all their apparent strides to be more diverse, Ivy Leagues can’t deny the facts of where they stand today. First, there is the issue of money that simply can’t be ignored. Admitting students without concern for whether they can afford the school or not is a luxury of Ivy Leagues, whose alumni giving dwarfs that of typical universities. They can afford to pay the tuition of students who could otherwise not find the money to attend, giving them an advantage when it comes to diverse recruitment.

Even with all that additional money, though, Ivy Leagues are still mainly made up of affluent students. Nationally, 38 percent of undergraduate students earn Pell grants, earmarked for students from low-income families. Only 12 percent at Yale and 13 percent at the University of Virginia received Pell grants in the 2013-2014 academic year.

It’s not all bad news though. Brown University has some promising stats when it comes to its ability to recruit and graduate more diverse students. In its class of 2019, 59 percent of Brown’s accepted students went to public schools. All 50 states are represented, along with 85 nations. Sixty-one percent will need some form of financial aid to afford Brown attendance, and 45 percent identified as African American, Latino, Asian American or Native American (which still means it is a Predominantly White Institution, but not by much).

Cornell’s class of 2019 includes 700 first-generation students, 45 percent female and 48 percent who identify themselves as students of color.

So what will the class of 2025, 2030 and beyond look like at Ivy Leagues? Will new recruitment methods finally bridge the gap between the ideal of diversity and the reality on campuses?

What do you predict will be the future of diversity at Ivy Leagues?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity

Black students suspended, expelled more than peers

According to a new study published by the University of Pennsylvania, black students make up nearly 40 percent of students suspended in Florida.

“The study details how black students in 13 Southern states receive school punishments disproportionate to their enrollments. In Florida, for example, black youngsters make up 23 percent of the public school population but 39 percent of those suspended.”

That number, unfortunately, matches with the trend of how many black men and women are sent to prison. Making up just 13 percent of the population, people of color make-up about 60 percent of the nation’s prison population. The school-to-prison pipeline is real, even if it is uncomfortable to admit. There IS a correlation between the way behavior issues are treated in our P-12 schools and the people in our prisons.

The Sentencing Project projects that 1 in 3 black men will likely see the inside of a prison cell at some point in their lives.

If that trend continues, suspending more black students will nudge them towards a path of incarceration.

But the study notes that black students are suspended and expelled more due to “unfair discipline practices” and appearing as “disrespectful or threatening.”

While the numbers for the state are bad, it gets worse in Orange County. Making up just 27 percent of the county’s public school population, black students represents 51 percent of the students suspended.

It’s much easier to learn while at school than away from it, and if schools are placing an unfair and undue burden of punishment on black students, our future workforce will suffer because of it.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's

HBCUs face peril under proposed education plans

From President Obama to Hillary Clinton, both Democrats have or will face backlash for their plans to make education more affordable.

Sounds crazy on the surface but the criticism has merit.

According to The Huffington Post, Clinton’s education plan would undermine the funding of some HBCUs and would likely force a few to close.

“Free tuition to any community college and reduced tuition to public institutions, will expedite the extinction of several HBCUs. Without federal and state investment in public historically black campuses which lack unique programs, modernized facilities and marketing resources, students of all races will flock to larger, more developed predominantly white colleges.”

In essence, plans presented by Clinton and other candidates who lean left would take federal and state money used to aid HBCUs and refocus the dollars towards a general fund that will help schools that traditionally serve the general population.

Hypothetically, schools that aren’t necessarily in need of more federal assistance would receive extra dollars and some HBCUs would be left in the cold.

This is likely an unintended consequence of ensuring that more low-income students have proper access to higher education. In doing so, Clinton and other candidates may end up isolating a voting bloc that they desperately need.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

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

Highly Qualified Teachers: Should Federal Requirements be Removed?

The federal provisions that define “highly qualified teachers” in the No Child Left Behind Act could soon be a thing of the past if U.S. House legislation is signed into law. The Student Success Act, drafted by Minnesota Republican John Kline, calls for removal of teacher hiring requirements at the federal level. Kline and other proponents of the Student Success Act, say the current outdated policies in place are actually hurting K-12 schools because things like credentials get in the way of hiring the best teachers. Individual states could still enforce stringent credentialing for teachers but the federal government would have no input. The term “highly qualified teachers” (HQT) would be removed from federal law.

Predictably, Democrats on the Education and the Workforce Committee that drafted the legislation hate it. Representative Pete Gallego, a Democrat from Texas, says the bill is a recipe for disaster when it comes to federal oversight and protection for disadvantaged students. He says:

“This legislation guts the core goal that all students should receive a quality education. It leaves children behind by taking resources from kids who need it most.”

Also at issue is the removal of funding for professional development for teachers and lack of protection for collective bargaining action.

A different K-12 bill supported by mostly Democrats has already passed the Senate that maintains the HQT policy but hands over a little more control of hiring teachers to states. The Strengthening America’s Schools Act would keep in place federal requirements that insist teacher evaluations, including student achievement, be used in personnel decisions.

Both bills allow states to use Title II funding to further develop teachers and administrators and for reduction in class size (though the House bill limits that to 10 percent of funds). Both bills also call for teacher evaluations to be used to determine equity in distribution. The biggest difference between the Senate and House bills is the inclusion and exclusion, respectively, of the HQT federal requirement.

At least on paper, the federal HQT provision looks good. HQTs must have state certification, at least a bachelor’s degree from a four-year institution and demonstrate competency in the core academic subject area. That seems pretty standard to me. If a state license, college degree and expertise on a subject being taught are somehow keeping qualified teachers from the classroom, what requirements should there be instead?

Critics of the HQT federal mandate say that the requirement focuses too much on the upfront status of the teacher. While those three conditions are a starting point, the real measure of a teacher should lie in student outcomes. To help K-12 teachers reach their full potential in the classroom, provisions that allow for continued training and development need to be emphasized, not taken away. Further, since the strength of college-level education programs vary and the licensing exams are different between states, how can the federal government really mandate what constitutes a HQT?

Proponents of the HQT provision concede that states must do more than the basic requirements when it comes to hiring and cultivating teachers, but that without that federal mandate, students will suffer – particularly minority and low-income children. The concern is that without the three HQT provisions, inexperienced and unqualified teachers will find their way into Title I schools. The promotion of equitable distribution of teachers in all classrooms – particularly ones with at-risk students – would be detrimentally impacted if federal HQT mandates are eliminated.

So what control should the federal government truly have over teacher qualifications? Should it be up to states to decide what their student bodies really need from teachers? To what end will disadvantaged students be harmed if either legislation is signed into law?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity

How many "Karen Fitzgibbons" are still teaching our kids?

**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.**

By Lisa Mims

Karen Fitzgibbons, a teacher at Bennett Elementary in Wolforth, Texas, wrote that she was, in all-caps, “ANGRY” over the officer’s resignation, blaming “the blacks” for causing “racial tension,” according to the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal. 

“I guess that’s what happens when you flunk out of school and have no education,” she continued. “I’m sure their parents are just as guilty for not knowing what their kids were doing; or knew it and didn’t care. 

“I’m almost to the point of wanting them all segregated on one side of town so they can hurt each other and leave the innocent people alone. Maybe the 50s and 60s were really on to something. Now, let the bashing of my true and honest opinion begin….GO! #imnotracist #imsickofthemcausingtrouble #itwasatagedcommunity” 

As an educator, when I read Ms.Fitzgibbon’s quotes, all I could think, well after my initial thought of, “What an idiot!”, was about the children of color who had the misfortune to be in her class.

Didn’t anyone know how she was? How could she have hidden it so well? Maybe she didn’t. Maybe she didn’t have to. The teacher’s Wall of Silence is just as pervasive as the police. You usually have to do, or say, something horrible, for another teacher to expose you. (If you see something, say something!)

After I did some research,  I realized she probably posted it because she thought she could. After all, Wolfforth, Texas is a red state, less than 2% of the school is African-American, and the population of the town is 2.5% black. Worrying about how others would respond probably wasn’t a priority.

If Ms.Fitzgibbons had chosen to speak to her friends privately about her #imnoracist viewpoint, she would have been fine. She would have continued to go to work, views packed away on a “need to know” basis. But, I guess she was so ANGRY, she was going to let the world know how she felt,(By the way, if you #imnoracist, you probably are), damn the consequences.

I don’t believe she really thought there would be consequences.She could say what she felt about “the blacks”, and everyone would cheer her on. Kudos to those who called her out, and kudos to her district for firing her!

Ms.Fitzgibbons, maybe you should have read your district policy before you posted your vitriol.

Here’s the thing, Ms.Fitzgibbons is not alone. In a world where the majority of public school students are children of color, and their teachers are white, there are one or more in many schools around the country. The only difference is, most have enough sense not to post it on Facebook. They save it for the Teacher’s Lounge, or vent in the privacy of their homes.

These “Karen FitzGibbons”, destroy children of color, one day at a time. Put-downs, insults, and sarcasm are their weapons of choice.They label them Special Education at the drop of a hat, dole out multiple suspensions, advise parents, (although they have no medical degrees), to medicate their children,  keep them out of gifted programs and AP classes, and/or tell them they cannot go to college.

It’s not difficult to get away with these attacks, because, for many reasons, parents of children of color, do not, or have no idea how to, advocate for their children.
So, it continues.

Reread Ms.Fitzgibbons’ views, they are so full of hate. What type of influence did she have on her students’ views toward people of another race? What chance would a student of color stand in her classroom? Do you think a teacher like Karen Fitzgibbons is a fluke?

GO!

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

_______________

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 has contributed posts to Free Technology for Teachers, Edudemic, TeachHub, GoAnimate, Edutopia, etc.
  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Four Forms of Forgetting That Affect Sustainable Leadership

The main challenge to educational reform is not to retreat to the past. Instead, we should build an intelligent relationship that acknowledges its existence, understands its meaning, and learns from it. An organization may choose to forget elements of the past. De Holan and Phillips introduced four kinds of “organizational forgetting.” They categorized them based on whether they were intentional or unintentional, or whether they applied to established or recently acquired knowledge.

Dissipation

Dissipation occurs when new knowledge is brought into the organization, but without goodwill or ability to make it stick in people’s memory toward the goal of organizational effectiveness. Dissipation is easily prevented by passing on the new knowledge to others. Most charismatic leaders find this difficult, refusing to face that they will be replaced, or the ultimate end to their position .

De Holan and Phillips suggest that new knowledge is passed not only through mentoring or succession; it can also be transmitted when leaders explicitly connect it to what people already know.

Degradation

Degradation occurs when well-established knowledge is lost accidentally. It commonly occurs when there is high turnover of critical personnel, who are unable or unwilling to create collective knowledge that would enable a successful joint action without their presence.
High turnover in teaching staff causes noticeable difficulties, mostly in innovative schools, where distinctive goals, practices, and structures are renewed as teachers come and go. The sudden downsizing in middle-level management can also cause degradation, since management losses and budget cuts reduce middle-level managers ability to support the principals in their running of schools.

Suspension

While organizational forgetting is usually accidental, some of it is deliberate, as part of a strategy for change and improvement. Collins and Porras found that one of the factors that leads to long-standing success in business is companies’ abilities to engage in diverse research, knowing when to keep successful innovations, and when to “forget” the rest.

Suspension is needed in educational policy in the U.S. This can be achieved by cutting back on the curriculum, exempting schools that succeed using other designs, reducing external accountability, putting less emphasis external testing, giving other personnel the administrative tasks that burden teachers, and improving school infrastructure in poor communities, making them better suited for student learning (Teachernet, 2005). While it is easy to abandon tasks and practices that one never wanted in the first place, it is harder to let go of those practices that they found comfortable. Hargreaves (2007) suggests that, to achieve this, a much more organized, and focused process is required to make suspension practical, deliberate, and desirable.

Purging

Purging is forgetting some of our poor practices, bad habits, and outdated ways of doing things that do not meet the needs of changing cultures and times. However, unlearning practices we feel are effective and exchanging them for new, unfamiliar ones can be uncomfortable. The temptation to cling to the past is normal and understandable.

According to Hargreaves, when purging involves teaching literacy, testing processes and attitudes, communication with parents, or school administration, there are two core issues that must be considered. First, we have to ask if the areas for unlearning have been diagnosed correctly, and whether this unlearning is for educational or political reasons. Second, we need to find out whether the knowledge transition is being managed in a supportive or a traumatic manner.

The emphasis of reform should be for the experienced teachers to improve their practices. Purging and other acts of forced forgetting lead to the wasting of the teachers’ wisdom as professional elders, and makes them discouraged and upset.

Renewing the Past

In the words of the great English romantic poet William Wordsworth, “let us learn from the past, to profit the present, and from the present to live better in the future.” Sustainable leadership therefore needs both a rear-view mirror and a windshield.

Leaders must sustain themselves and those around them to promote and support learning, persist with their vision. The must lead the charge in avoiding burnout, and ensure that the improvements they bring continue after their departure. Leaders should also consider the impact their leadership has on neighboring schools, how they encourage diverse teaching and learning in their schools, and their how the interact with their community.

Most school leaders want to do things that matter, inspire others to join them in their vision, and leave a lasting legacy. Often, leaders don’t let their schools down, but the systems through which they lead do. Sustainable leadership requires a collective effort from all stakeholders in the school. If change is to matter, spread, or last, sustainable leadership must be a central priority of education systems.

 

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

How to Improve Equity in K-12 Learning

Since amendment XIV of the U.S. Constitution mandated that “no state shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” no child can legally be denied the right to a public education in the United States.  As such, equity in education has long been an ideal and ensuring equity among all students, regardless of their personal circumstances, has been a primary goal of educators.

Unfortunately, the practice of equity in education has been less than effective.  Government steps that have been recommended to remedy the problem include having states specifically identify and report on the teaching staff, programs, and services they deem necessary for a quality education; and adopting and implementing a school finance system to provide “equitable and sufficient funding” for all students essentially to meet learning standards.  These recommendations follow a 2013 report called, “For Each and Every Child”, in which it was reported that “some young Americans – most of them white and affluent – are getting a world-class education” while those who “attend schools in high poverty neighborhoods are getting an education that more closely approximates schools in developing nations.” The problem of ensuring that every child in the United States receives a quality education is quite a substantial one.

Better resource allocation

Perhaps then, the first step to addressing this issue should be for some determination to be made about how, under general circumstances, education can be made equitable to all students.  This assessment should not directly involve teachers or administrators, whose assessment may be skewed, but rather the assessment should be through observation.  After all, the assumption seems to be that money – preferably money poured into schools – is enough to solve educational issues. That is, reassignment of resources to support schools in poorer areas will be sufficient, along with some reporting on considered needs, to balance the public education system.  This is problematic because the issue of equity, and perhaps equality, is far more complex than an influx of money can solve – but it is certainly a good starting point.

Better feedback on what’s working.

States should provide feedback on those programs and strategies that are most effective for equity building.  Part of the problem with the government’s solutions is that they assume states and ultimately schools can figure out what it is they need or what it is they need to do to provide a quality education.  There are many elements at play, not just the immediate financial ones. Students in certain affluent areas have the benefit of the best teachers, given that it is highly desirable to have a placement in this area. It is also decidedly competitive to even try.  Therefore, a compilation of feedback from the states should be gathered in order to rank the most effective programs so that they can be shared with all.

Analyze findings for better results.

School systems need to have an approach for analyzing findings about recommended shifts in learning approaches and objectives. These approaches should be designed to help teachers and administrators understand not just what they have to avoid but also what it is that they can do to achieve optimal equity moving forward. This will take massive amounts of data that will need to be centrally collected, understood, and used to improve equity in all K-12 public schools.

The goal of achieving equity in schools has long been a goal of the education system.  However, most attempts to date have fallen far short of the mark.

What do you think needs to be done to improve the balance of education for kids in this country?

 

 

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

The Top 5 Unexpected Benefits of Early Childhood Education

A trend is emerging when it comes to P-20 education: optional preschool is becoming a thing of the past. As a nation, we’re finally beginning to accept that preschool is beneficial—even necessary—for the success of most American children. It’s why Obama has invested billions in early childhood education, and Presidential hopefuls such as Hillary Clinton are emphatic about preschool’s importance.

As someone who has extensively written about preschool-related initiatives on this site, I’ve seen enough to uncover some unexpected benefits that come from early childhood education, and I want to share a few of them with you:

1. More preschool means a child is more prepared for Kindergarten.

A study has found that children who attend all-day preschool are much better prepared for Kindergarten than children who go to half-day programs.
Researchers from the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs studied 1,000 3-and 4-year-olds enrolled in 11 Chicago schools. Students who attended preschool seven hours a day were compared to those who attended three hour programs, then tested at the commencement of preschool to see if they were socially and academically prepared to begin kindergarten.

The study found 59 percent of the students enrolled in the half-day program to be ready compared to 81 percent of the all-day preschool attendees.

2. Even better, preschool means a child is more prepared for life.

Research shows that students who start the formal education experience, even one year earlier than Kindergarten, fare better long term in their academic careers.

3. Preschool may be one key to correcting the achievement gap.

Remember the study mentioned in point #1? Well, in that same study, researchers discovered that 78 percent of white students were prepared to enter kindergarten compared to 74 percent of black children and 62 percent of Native American and Hispanic students.

Last year, Minnesota contributed $40 million in funding for pre-K scholarships for low- income families. Thanks to those dollars, 5,800 students were able to attend preschool. About 15,000 more students still need access to pre-K scholarships, but Minnesota made an important stride.

4. Preschool can help the most at-risk ethnic group, Native Americans, achieve better success.

In education circles, we talk a lot about the way black and Latino students struggle in K-12 classrooms through a combination of cultural circumstances and inequality.
But the reality is that American Indian K-12 students are the most at-risk of any minority group for either dropping out of high school or never making it to college. The American Indian Fund reports that American Indians who earn a bachelor’s degree represent less than 1 percent of all of these degree earners. It is not shocking then to realize that 28 percent of American Indians lived in poverty compared to 15 percent of the general population, according to 2010 U.S. Census figures. A college education opens doors for a higher quality of life.

However, the path to college starts long before the application process.

Fortunately, the American Indian College Fund’s Early Childhood Education program recognizes this. They sponsored a meeting which brought together 45 representatives from four American Indian tribal colleges who discussed strategies for better early childhood education and family involvement in the community.

The representatives looked at how the American Indian community can better prepare children for long-term academic success, targeting learning opportunities from birth to 8 years of age.

5. Crime rates could drop in cities like Detroit—if more children went to preschool.

Jose Diaz of the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation conducted the study “Cost Savings of School Readiness Per Additional At-Risk Child in Detroit and Michigan” where the findings appear. The research was commissioned by the Max M. and Marjorie S. Fisher Foundation and it suggests that investing in early childhood education could cut Detroit’s crime rate and save taxpayers in the state millions of dollars, according to a story on the study by The Detroit News. The story says that Detroit taxpayers would save around $96,000 for each child who was enrolled in a quality early education program and Michigan taxpayers would save $47,000 for each child.

The figure was derived from adding cost savings to special education, public assistance, childcare subsidies, the victims of crime and the criminal justice system. The majority of the savings would come from the criminal justice system.

Currently, only 4 percent of prisoners in Michigan under the age of 20 years old graduated from high school.

As it is right now, thirty eight states offer free, voluntary preschool learning programs and nearly 1.6 million low-income families receive assistance from the federal Child Care Development Fund to pursue early childhood education. And imagine this: that fund is just one portion of President Obama’s $75 billion plan to expand early childhood learning in order to give American student a stronger foundation going into Kindergarten.

Granted, not everyone agrees with the idea of concentrating so much energy on early childhood education. Some critics think that universal preschool, for example, is just a way to add more education jobs (especially since some proponents want to insist that states accepting federal preschool dollars pay preschool teachers at the same rate as elementary ones).

But overall, I expect that in the next decade, our terminology will change from K-12 to PK-12 when we talk about student benchmarks. More states will lobby for pre-K funding and more families, from low- to high-income, will seek out early learning options to set their kids up for academic success.
So what do you think? Will preschool ever be considered as necessary as kindergarten through twelfth grade? What are some benefits (or even drawbacks) of increasing the number of early childhood education programs?

As usual, I am interested to hear from you, so please leave a comment.

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

5 Major Barriers to Sustainable School Improvement

School improvement is a central issue for educators today. Modern children and youth will graduate into a very different future from that of previous generations because of the numerous technological advances and social changes that are constantly pulling life into a drastically different direction. However the school community is slow to change and create the improvements that are essential to fostering growth and sustainable school improvement. Here are five barriers to school improvement that are hindering schools today.

  1. Expanded Administrative Duties – Since the task of leading a school has expanded and become more complex, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the responsibilities placed on principals far exceed their capacity to handle them singlehandedly. Though school leaders were traditionally only accountable for input into learning processes, they are now held accountable for all learning outcomes for both teachers and students. We now find that school leaders can only make a meaningful impact on student outcomes if they have sufficient autonomy to make decisions on issues such as the curriculum, teacher recruitment, and development. Administrators face an ever growing list of duties as school budgets tighten, staff levels decrease and student populations increase. Suddenly administrators are responsible for everything from fundraising to testing coordination to athletic development. Again, the main responsibilities left to school leaders should be those aimed at improving student learning.
  2. The Aging Profession – The average age of today’s school leader in the U.S. is 51 years, which means that most of the current crop of school leaders will retire over the next five to ten years. Therefore, while schools look toward improving the quality of current leadership, they should also develop clear plans for the future in terms of effective processes for leadership succession. The need for networking has also become increasingly important, with school leaders finding it wise to collaborate with leaders from other schools and districts in sharing resources and skills so as to deliver a diverse range of learning opportunities as the the valuable resource of experience begins to bleed away from schools. It’s essential for school improvement that the wisdom and experience of retiring staff is passed on to young educators through mentorship.
  3. Unattractive Working Conditions – In many developed countries (and this is not just confined to the U.S.) there is a remarkable decrease in the numbers of applications for the position of school principal. This is due to the negative connotations attached to the job, which it is seen as overburdened, stressful, offering inadequate training and preparation, having a meager salary compared to output, and generally poor working conditions. Most teachers and deputy principals feel that the additional incentives that are offered to principals are just too small to compensate for the burdensome workload. The simple fact is that quality professionals deserve the respect of quality compensation.
  4. Policymaking – Another demand in current school leadership is the need for policy and practice to work better together. This is because the government policy that is designed to change practice in schools can only work efficiently where it is synchronized with the school-level processes. Additionally, effective implementation relies heavily on the motivation and initiative of school leaders. These times require that policymakers engage school leaders in meaningful and ongoing consultation in the area of policy formulation and development, because school leaders who feel connected to the reform process are more likely to influence and involve their staff and students in the implementation process and also in sustaining changes.
  5. Constant Change – As noted earlier, schools are now being confronted by an increasingly complex scenario. In these rapidly changing environments, the major problem is that goals and objectives for schools and the means for their achievement are not always clear or static. Another challenge presents itself in the form of external pressure to change. School leaders must induce their teachers and students to handle the processes of change effectively. There is also a need for involvement of parents and the wider community in school processes. Additionally, current school leaders have to seek to improve the wellbeing of students by involving the private sector, sports clubs, faith-based groups, and community-based organizations in school activities. With the flurry of changes, there has been a growing concern that the role of school principal, having been designed for the industrial age, has not yet fully evolved to deal with the complexity of challenges in schools that involve preparing the youth to face the 21st century.

Changes in the school context give rise to myriad issues that require adjustment of both policy and practice of school leadership. The role of the school leaders is the key for improvement of school outcomes through influencing motivation and capacity of teachers and by affecting the environment in which they work. To achieve positive outcomes for students and for the future, a model of sustainable school improvement is essential.

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

Transformational vs. Contemporary Leadership Styles

Servant leadership, transactional leadership, and emotional leadership seem similar to transformational leadership. However, there are also some notable differences between these styles.

Servant Leadership

A servant leader shifts focus from his or her own interests to the people he or she serves.
The focus of servant leadership is not on the result, but on the means of achieving the result – primarily through expression and handling of other people’s needs. This assistance should be in the form of providing guidance in individual roles, empowering followers, and developing a culture of trust toward meeting organizational goals.

The concept of servant leadership, though popular and effective, has suffered tremendously because it has remained largely undefined. Some scholars have recently taken an interest in servant leadership and have attempted to make the theory more applicable at the organizational level. A side-by-side comparison between the transformational and servant leadership reveals relatively similar attributes; both styles of leadership are people-oriented.

Most notably, both types of leadership involve elements of integrity, trust, respect, delegation, vision, and influence on followers. Both leadership styles emphasize the appreciation, mentoring, recognition, and listening skills of the leader as empowerment tools for the followers.

However, there are certain points of departure between the two styles. While it emphasizes gaining trust and influencing followers, servant leadership calls for more sacrifice on the part of the leader. The pursuit of profits is secondary for the servant leader. Followers are more likely to have greater freedom under a servant leader than transformational leader.

Another principal difference is the leader’s focus. Though both styles call the leader to service, the servant leader’s ultimate focus is the follower, while the transformational leader’s greatest concern is to encourage followers to serve the organization diligently. The fundamental difference between the two styles is that the servant leader focuses on the followers’ needs, while the transformational leader focuses on organizational goals.

The servant leader’s followers achieve organizational objectives because they become the leader’s first priority. This is different from transformational leadership, where interests of the organization are the ultimate priority.

Charisma is a key ingredient for transformational leadership. Charisma refers to charm and power to inspire, motivate, and excite others. While transformational leadership relies on the leader’s charismatic power to achieve effectiveness, servant leaders create the same motivation and influence through the act of service, without grandstanding on the leader’s part.

While both styles of leadership are effective, there are risks attached to each. Both may fall prey to manipulation and corruption, since, with these kinds of leadership, the leader eventually garners some authority or power over the followers, which can be used for negative purposes.Some followers are too reliant on their leaders and establish strong links with them to satisfy their pressing dependency needs.

While both transformational and servant leadership may have negative applications, their benefits far outweigh these negatives.

Transactional Leadership vs. Transformational Leadership

Another historical leadership style is transactional leadership, in which a leader offers some valuable thing in exchange for the follower’s services. Most traditional relationships between leaders and followers are transactional, since most people believe “quid pro quo” (“something for something”) to be the ultimate purpose of negotiation. In such an arrangement, everyone is happy and thus there is no harm done.
The contract between employer and employee is mostly transactional.

Transformational and transactional leadership are different, but can complement each other occasionally, depending on circumstances. The combination of transactional and transformational leadership is best. Though it may be easy to augment transactional relationships, it is not possible to replace it with transformational leadership, since transactional leadership is also an effective motivation technique.

A transformational leader who fails to charm his or her followers will often resort to transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is a shortcut and is not as long-lasting as transformational leadership, because the reward promised may not always be available, but the charisma of the leader will never be depleted.
Transformational leadership transcends the transactional style. Motivation from within the follower produces powerful results.

Another trait of transactional leadership is “management by exception.” The active form of this type of management involves assessing employee performance and taking corrective measures where needed. In the passive form, the leader only intervenes where things have gotten out of hand. The last of the transactional traits is the laissez faire leadership, in which the leader allows employees to do as they like.

Emotional Leadership

Emotional leadership is loosely related to transformational leadership. Here, leadership involves tapping the leader’s emotional center to lead, where decisions are based on the feelings of the leader at the time. Some may assert that transformational leadership also involves a level of emotional influence. However, the two types of leadership are structurally different, because transformational leadership is, in essence, a rational process.

References

Transformational leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by James Burns (1978), and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of James Burns’ work on transformational leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts