**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.**
Attending a new college in an unfamiliar place can be daunting. When it’s in a new city, it can be simply terrifying. The best way to get acquainted with your new city is to get out and explore. With a little common sense and some preparation, you can get out and see the city safely and get to know your new surroundings.
Bring a Cell Phone Charger
Your cell phone has a host of life-saving features that can keep you out of trouble. When you’re out and about, the last thing you want is for your battery to die on you. Bring along a mobile charger and you can ensure that if you do get lost and your phone dies, you can recharge it to find your way home using the built-in GPS and Map apps on your phone.
Go to the Highest Point in the City
There are few ways to help you get your bearings better than going to the highest point in the city. From here, you should be able to see your college and get a good view of the surrounding areas. This will make it easier for you to start to visualize the streets and neighborhoods, and it can also help you get some good ideas for where to go.
Learn the Transit System
Get to know the transit system even if you have a vehicle. Pick up a tourist map for your city, and visit the main sites during your first month at your school. This not only helps you get a good feel for the city, it can help you to appreciate the community you’ll be living in for the next few years. An understanding of the local culture can even help improve your relationships with your professors and make local friends.
Store Your Belongings Safely
Until you really get to know your roommates, it’s not a bad idea to keep your valuables in storage unit near you. A unit can also be useful for when you go out of town or back home for the holidays and don’t want to renew the lease on your apartment. You’ll be able to store all your stuff and not have to worry about it getting lost or damaged while you’re out enjoying the break. Dorm rooms are especially space-limited, so grab a storage unit to help you to bring more of the things that matter to you.
Don’t be afraid to get out and experience the new city your college is in. Your college experience is partially about learning how to take care of yourself while being out on your own. With the right attitude, you’ll develop your independence and excel in school.
_______________________________
Brooke Chaplan is a freelance writer and blogger. She lives and works out of her home in Los Lunas, New Mexico. She loves the outdoors and spends most her time hiking, biking and gardening. For more information contact Brooke via Twitter @BrookeChaplan.
When initiating reform, an action plan must be developed before the school can determine how the reform will be carried out and how it will be measured. Too often, administrators become anxious and feel the need to change the reform before any data has been collected. More patience is warranted because if a plan is not working, it can be amended. The school team, which consists of educators, administrators, and other stakeholders, must make the necessary amendments without hindering reform efforts. Creating too many changes within one reform plan would be counterproductive and frustrating for all parties involved.
Many new administrators enter the field hell-bent on making a name for themselves and refusing to live in the shadows of their predecessor. Often, they feel as though their only choice is to go in a totally different direction, making the previous reform null and void. This situation creates frustration among the surviving faculty and staff. New administrators often make changes before they fully think about the consequences or repercussions of their actions. Perfectly competent adults massage their egos instead of thinking about what is in the best interests of the school and the children.
It is counterproductive to start one reform and then decide to start another several months later. Once a reform has been implemented, all parties involved must show fidelity to it until there is concrete data or evidence that indicates that it is ineffective. Reform is about creating an environment in which students are the priority and we as their teachers assist them in starting and finishing their journey to becoming educated citizens.
It is hard for many administrators and educators to grasp the fact that frustrations may worsen as the reform is being implemented. Often, issues arise because people do not welcome change. Some educators need to see that change is for the better before they completely support the reform. Once the rebellion to change has subsided and the reform has been implemented correctly, the waiting game begins. During this time, educators and administrators must go about the business of collecting data for analysis. The findings will give them a clear indication of whether or not the reform has served its intended purpose. If students are not progressing under the implemented reform, then it may not be fulfilling the needs of the students or faculty.
Strategic planning and the implementation of school reform sometimes require schools to absorb temporary setbacks in order to reap the benefits of long-term gains. Student progress might dip for a month or two before teachers and administrators see a significant gain in student learning and performance. Teachers and administrators need to allow change to take place and not panic when instant changes are not apparent. In many school reform efforts, educators and administrators must understand that policies and practices that met the needs of the past, do not necessarily address current needs or the needs of the future. They must realize that in order to obtain a great future you must let go of a great past.
Some administrators fall into the trap of emulating model schools. Model schools can be found in every major city, but when trying to recreate their success, many schools fail to achieve the same results. Trying to recreate another school’s success is potentially dangerous, even when schools share similar characteristics. This is because, regardless of the similarities, every district is unique. Often, after a large amount of time, energy, and money has been spent, the school declares the plan a failure and has nothing to show for the efforts.
Strategic planning, which is widely used in the educational arena, can assist districts in setting goals and implementing school reform. You would be hard pressed to find a school district that does not have one or more strategic plans awaiting execution. Strategic plans are a district’s consistent road map, even in the face of adversity. In the end, a strategic plan that reflects the culture and needs of each individual school is a better route than attempts to replicate the success another school.
From coast to coast, elementary and high school libraries are being neglected, defunded, repurposed, abandoned and closed.
The kindest thing that can be said about this is that it’s curious; the more accurate explanation is that it’s just wrong and very foolish.
A 2011 survey conducted with my graduate students of 25 separate statewide studies shows that students who attend schools with libraries that are staffed by certified librarians score better on reading and writing tests than students in schools without library services. And it is lower-income students who benefit the most.
This clear empirical evidence has had little impact on budget cutters, however. They act – mistakenly – as though there is no link between libraries and educational achievement.
Here are the numbers and the arguments to which they need to pay attention.
A dramatic decline in school libraries and librarians
And, finally, in my own home state of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia provides a dramatic story. In 1991, there were 176 certified librarians in Philadelphia public schools. Today there are 10. It appears that 206 out of 218 classroom buildings in the school district of Philadelphia have no librarian. Two hundred Philadelphia schools do not have a functional library book collection. A majority lack the technology to access necessary e-resources. And 85% of these children come from homes in poverty.
Proven impact
This is happening despite the fact that we know school libraries are highly effective.
A 2011 study using data from the National Center for Education Statistics revealed that “..states that gained librarians from 2004–2005 to 2008–2009 — such as New Jersey, Tennessee and Wyoming — showed significantly greater improvements in fourth grade reading scores than states that lost librarians, like Arizona, Massachusetts, and Michigan.”
So why, in the face of readily available evidence, are so many budget cutters targeting school libraries?
A vulnerable institution
One reason they cut is because they can.
For example, look at my state of Pennsylvania, where schools are not required to have libraries. Prisons must have them. Barber and cosmetology schools must have them. They are compulsory in nursing programs. But in public schools they are optional.
Or consider the city of Houston, Texas, where decisions on school staffing for certain positions, including certified librarians, are left to the discretion of school principals. It is not alone in that.
Also at work in the minds of budget cutters may be the hoary falsehood that the internet has made the need for libraries obsolete.
But those who think that the internet replaces a library must think it is okay to use WebMD instead of going to a doctor.
Librarians teach information literacy – how to separate the useful from the less useful, the credible from the inaccurate, and how to navigate the internet safely.
Capitol Hill to the rescue?
There is some hope, however, and it comes from legislation unanimously passed on July 8 by the US Senate.
In a bipartisan amendment – sponsored by Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Thad Cochran (R-MS) – to Senate Bill 1177 that reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act/No Child Left Behind (renaming it the ESEA), school districts would be authorized to use federal funds “…to develop and foster effective school library programs…programs with certified school librarians at their core.”
The Pennsylvania School Librarians Association and the Pennsylvania PTA, who have been active on this issue, lobbied both of their state’s senators aggressively. But presumably party pressure played a factor, as 100% of the senators voted unanimously for the amendment.
However, in the narrowly passed reauthorization of its version of ESEA (the Student Success Act), the House of Representatives included no language about school libraries or librarians.
When the Senate finishes its deliberations and (presumably) passes S1177, a conference committee will need to meld the House and Senate versions together.
Will the language supporting school libraries and librarians survive this process?
In his State of the Union Address, President Obama said that “In the 21st century, one of the best anti-poverty programs is a world-class education.”
The research is clear. School librarians are an integral part of a world-class, 21st-century education.
Congress needs to step up
It is time for a rethinking and redirection of federal policy in education. Former President George W Bush and President Barack Obama have called education the civil rights issue of our time.
However, allowing each state and each school district to decide how funds should be expended to educate students and provide library services has brought about huge inequities particularly in impoverished communities with resource-starved schools.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the now 50-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) pumped millions of dollars into building school library collections for school students. Since then, only a few competitive grant programs have been available from the federal level to fund any improvements to school library programs.
Yet, until now, federal education policy and legislation have neglected to support the role of school librarians. That needs to change. We need a national agenda and our elected officials to take a stand and ensure equity of library services and certified school librarians to teach the next generation to find and apply information to solve problems, think critically, and develop innovations.
Until such time, we shortchange our students and our future.
Just when it seems like most trends are predictable, you find a few that just run against common knowledge and intuition.
Read on to discover five study results that might shock you.
Too much homework makes students poor.
Seriously.
This is a finding from Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Gerald K. LeTendre, an education professor at Pennsylvania State University, explains how homework can be economically stressful.
“If we step back from the heated debates about homework and look at how homework is used around the world, we find the highest homework loads are associated with countries that have lower incomes and higher social inequality.”
The study also found that homework has no correlation to “high academic success.” So just because a teacher assigns it, and the students follow the assignment through to completion, does not automatically indicate that a student will do well.
Staying with that theme, the study shows that if kids receive too much homework, they become sleep deprived and stressed out.
What makes that information worse is that many of the students who may fall under that umbrella are just in elementary school.
More college students are getting high—every day.
A newsurvey released by the University of Michigan shows that marijuana use with college students is on the rise.
“Daily or near-daily marijuana use was reported by 5.9 percent of college students in 2014 — the highest rate since 1980, the first year that complete data was available in the study. This rate of use is up from 3.5 percent in 2007.”
Even for students who only use it socially or just occasionally, there has been an uptick in the numbers.
“The percent of students using marijuana once or more in the prior 30 days rose from 17 percent in 2006 to 21 percent in 2014.”
If this seems like bad news, there is a silver lining attached. College students no longer smoke as many cigarettes as they used to. Just 13 percent of college students said that they smoked a cigarette in the last thirty days.
For-profit institutions are the major offender when it comes to student loan debt.
A new report by the Brookings Institute asserts that a good chunk of student loan debt is held by students who attend for-profit institutions.
“The so-called student loan crisis in the U.S. is largely concentrated among non-traditional borrowers attending for-profit schools and other non-selective institutions, who have relatively weak educational outcomes and difficulty finding jobs after starting to repay their loans.”
That’s a fairly significant finding.
Students who attend non-profit private schools or public universities do not face the same debt issue because their job prospects are much higher upon graduation.
“[T]the median borrower from a for-profit institution who left school in 2011 and found a job in 2013 earned about $20,900—but over one in five (21 percent) were not employed; comparable community college borrowers earned $23,900 and almost one in six (17 percent) were not employed.”
The report also finds that students who attend the University of Phoenix hold the most debt. In 2014, students there held over $35 billion dollars in student loan debt.
11 states spend more on prisons than on higher education
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, Vermont, 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 corrections increased over 140 percent between 1986 and 2013.
Oregon seems to be the worst offender. 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.
Teaching observations performed by submitting a video might be as effective as the traditional in-person observations.
An interesting study released by the Best Foot Forward Project, a part of the Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University, examines how effective classroom observations may be if conducted by video.
400 teachers from California, Colorado, Delaware, and Georgia participated in a two-year project to analyze if “video technology can make the classroom observation process easier to implement, less costly, and more valid and reliable.”
This has had positive results. After reviewing the video,teacherswere more “self-critical” and “rated their own instruction lower than comparison teachers, particularly in terms of time management and their ability to assess student mastery during class.”
But maybe two of the biggest wins from the study were found in the interaction between teachers and their supervisors as well as teachers finding ways to improve.
The study found that “63 percent [of teachers] reported that video was ‘quite helpful’ or ‘extremely helpful’ in identifying areas where they need to improve.”
Regarding teachers and supervisor interaction, the project found that there were “fewer disagreements on the ratings they received and were more likely to describe a specific change in their practice resulting from their post-observation conference.”
Overall, this study was loaded with good and useful information regarding how teachers are observed and the wins received when video is used instead of an in-person observation.
Did any of these results surprise you? What do you think these findings mean for the state of education in our country?
There are many external influences that impact public education. In this series the top four will be reviewed including the influence of professional education organizations, the involvement of parents, the businesses, and the federal government and court systems. For this part the influence of businesses will be discussed to reveal their direct impact on public education.
Since the 1980s, large corporations have formed the vanguard in improving public education, a movement stemming ostensibly from a concern that schools are not graduating students with the skills and knowledge necessary to be effective members of the workforce. This has led to the formation of more than 100,000 business/educational partnerships since 1983, with companies becoming both the strongest supporters and the greatest critics of the educational system. The CEOs of several large corporations, including the giants IBM, Apple, and Coca-Cola, have advocated for educational improvement at the highest levels of government and since the early 1980s have donated millions of dollars to revamp public education.
The Business Roundtable is one example of the corporate world’s attempts to reform education. The Roundtable is an association of CEOs from several major companies who advocate improvements in education that will raise the standards, skills, and knowledge of basic education, to ensure that education will meet the requirements of the burgeoning workforce.
Some have criticized businesses’ intrusion into education, fearing that schools and students may be intentionally molded to meet certain business requirements, while being subjected to the unbridled influence of corporate advertising. Business leaders refute these claims, stating that they are compelled to spend billions of dollars annually on remedial education for their workers, in order to bring their workforce up to standard and to maintain their competitive edge in the world’s markets. They argue that channeling funds into the education system may lessen the need for corrective education later in life. Some opponents of businesses’ involvement in schools point out that the purchasing power of school-age children, estimated to be in the range of $500 billion per year, is the incentive that drives businesses to approach schools by offering gifts of products or services to teachers and students. Others are opposed to the exclusive contracts that some companies, such as Pepsi or Coca-Cola, impose on schools. To receive extra funds from the business provider, schools agree to sell the businesses’ product exclusively, which in effect promotes brand loyalty in young consumers.
Businesses have also influenced education by promoting the privatization of public schools, whereby certain schools are no longer administered by the local school board but are under the management of private enterprise. Some school districts have hired companies, such as Edison Schools or Sylvan Learning, Inc., to administer schools, with the expectation that student grades will improve on assessment measures. Some claim that private corporations can more efficiently and effectively manage school administration, at a lower cost. Opponents of this design, most notably teacher’s associations, claim that the welfare of students, often evidenced by the hiring of inexperienced or nonlicensed teachers, may be secondary to the company’s desire to make a profit. In reality, the privatization movement has led to smaller teacher–student ratios and to greater access to various materials and devices, although definitive results about improvement in academic achievement remain unproven.
Businesses influence what occurs in the classroom, in ways that are, at times, less than subtle. The role of businesses in education should never be underestimated. Just as education is important to the local community, businesses near the school district are also beneficial to the success of students and community. Businesses are only one type of influence, hence continue to read about the top four influences on public education.
There are many external influences that impact public education. In this series the top four groups will be reviewed including the influence of professional education organizations, the involvement of parents, the businesses, and the federal government and court systems. For this part the influence of the federal government and federal courts will be discussed to reveal their impact on public education.
Even though the federal government has no direct control over education, federal authority does have a far-reaching influence over educational matters. Laws passed at the federal level impact schools and their administration. Also, federal courts make rulings that necessitate change in education on multiple levels, while the U.S. Department of Education leaves an indelible mark on the educational system.
The federal government’s interest in education shifts depending on the politics of the political party in power. Traditionally, Republican administrations seek to withdraw federal influence from education, leaving education as a matter for individual states to address. Democrats, on the other hand, generally tend to be more interested in improving the state of education across the country.
Many court decisions have shaped education nationwide, affecting the responsibilities and accountability of school officers in areas as diverse as desegregation, school finance, prayer in the schools, and the rights of individual students. Some oppose the federal court’s involvement in what they consider to be a state matter, whereas others feel that the involvement in education at the federal level ensures that education is brought into alignment with the principles of democracy, guaranteeing that education is truly accessible to everyone.
The influence of the federal government and federal courts are beneficial to understand when reviewing external groups that impact public education. Make sure you are aware of the changes in these groups because they can impact your school district. Remember this is only one type of influence, therefore continue to read about the top four influences on public education.
Educational funding is necessary for the development of any school including the availability of resources for students and teachers. However, do some school receive more funding than others? If so, who and what determines which schools are adequately funded? This articles answers both questions and discusses the controversy of issues within educational funding that are steered due to ethnicity in school systems resulting in what appears to be inequality.
Minority groups tend to live in poverty in proportions that exceed their representation in society.
Communities of specific racial minorities tend to be areas with a lower tax base. In poorer communities, a lower tax base results in less funding for the schools in those areas.
Running schools costs money. Paying teachers and the school staff; purchasing textbooks, equipment, and computers; and the upkeep of buildings and school grounds all need to be paid for. Because wealthier communities generally have more funds, it makes sense that their schools have a funding advantage. The question then becomes, where does that leave schools attended by racial minorities who live in poverty?
The inaccessibility to resources by specific groups is tantamount to social and economic injustice. One of the most fundamental bases for these injustices also appears to be ethnicity. Social injustices against ethnic minority groups continue to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. Some laws and policies, unfortunately, continue to encourage advantages of particular ethnic groups and disadvantages for others. While universal declarations of human rights were designed to protect the rights of all human beings and limit oppression, oppression by ethnicity and class continue to permeate American culture.
While the federal government contributes relatively little to the schools, more and more state generated revenues are being directed toward these schools. In some states, the state government contributes as little as 20% to schools in local communities, and in others, the state contributes as much as 80%. This can still leave a wide gap between funding for schools in the poorer communities, versus funding for schools in wealthier communities.
Is this method of financing schools discriminatory? Many think so, including the California
Supreme Court, who ruled in the case of Serrano v. Priest in 1971 that a system of financing a school that is based on the wealth of the community is discriminatory and violates the state constitution. It might be fair to say that it violates the U.S. Constitution by denying children equal access to education, but not everyone feels this way. In fact, in the 1973 Texas case of the San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the ruling was five to four that disproportionate school financing based on discrepancies in property taxes could not be challenged. Justice Lewis Powell was instrumental in this ruling, providing the following arguments: as long as everyone is getting a basic education, the differences are not unfair; whether or not the amount of money affects the quality of education is not clear; and education is not a right guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Those who have disagreed with Powell suggested that despite the fact that the U.S. Constitution does not protect the educational rights of children, the constitutions of most states do. At this point, educational rights are not an issue likely to get voters’ attention, however, due to the fact that a majority of voters are Americans of European descent and are generally wealthier individuals whose children have access to the best schools. As a result, school quality often differs, even within the same metropolitan area, and between cities and suburbs.
It has been pointed out that equalization of per-student spending is only a part of a total solution for ensuring quality schools for all children, particularly when the amount of money available for all the schools has decreased. This may be the case, but in many states there is obvious bias. Consider the state of Connecticut, which is near the top of the list in the amount of money spent on students. In the 1990s, the average amount spent across the state on books and other learning materials was $147.68 per student. In Hartford, however, where the student population was more than 92% minority, the funding for instructional materials was $77 per student. This was a mere 52% of the state average. A clear message was sent that these students were not as important as other students in the state.
It’s not uncommon for parents and educators to seek political allies on school boards and legislative support to ensure that better funding for schools is found and delivered. Parents and educators often look for adequacy in school funding rather than equality in school funding.
Basically, they want each school to receive the minimum level of funding that is adequate to fully meet the needs of students. This adequate amount was defined in New Jersey as the average amount spent on education by the 130 wealthiest districts in the state. Once school funding in New Jersey was adjusted based on adequacy, and extra funds were added to schools in poorer areas, the results were perceptible. Younger children gained access to high-quality prekindergarten and kindergarten programs, and the gap between math and language arts test scores of urban and suburban students decreased by 50%. New Jersey also has the highest high school graduation rate in the country, and this distinction includes students from minority groups. The difference this funding has made is certainly measurable.
Although more work needs to be done in the area of school funding, the New Jersey example provides a model for states interested in using funds directed toward education to ensure quality educational experiences for all students. A possible next area of focus is not the amount of money spent, but how that money is being spent, with a focus on ensuring it is applied in ways that will create programs that benefit all students.
In closing, do believe that educational funding has hidden issues of inequality when it comes to providing funding? What can you do as an individual to rectify this problem in your jurisdiction?
Are you aware of the governing educational structure of your state? Many components of this structure are affected by regulations while still enabling academic freedoms. In this article the basic state structure of K-12 school systems in the United States will be observed.
The educational system in the United States can best be described as extensive (due to the large size of the country), decentralized (determined by the individual states or even, at times, local areas), and diverse (the children to be educated come from a variety of ethnic and cultural backgrounds). In 2007–2008, approximately 49 million children were enrolled in K–12 schools, while 6.9 million teachers worked in the nation’s 99,000 public elementary, middle, and secondary schools.
The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives individual states control over education within their boundaries, and many state constitutions state that all children have a right to minimally adequate education or include similarly worded clauses. States have the right to determine policy, to set curriculum, and to decide how to spend the majority of funds allocated to education. Furthermore, states are responsible for setting the minimum requirements that a student needs to meet in order to graduate high school. Slightly more than half of the states (26) require students to complete state-regulated exit exams, although these may not be considered particularly rigorous because they contain knowledge and skill levels comparable to proficiency at the eighth- or ninth-grade levels. Finally, states are ultimately responsible for the selection and the evaluation of educational personnel. Chief educational officers or state commissioners of education may be appointed or elected. When elected by the voting public, the chief educational officer is wholly responsible to the public for his or her decisions and policies.
The governance structure can vary from state to state; the governor is typically the head of education, although the members of the state legislature are equally as powerful when it comes to setting statewide policies and regulations. Many states have a state board of education (SBE), which is either appointed, elected, or a combination of both, with some members appointed and others elected. Certain other states, such as New Mexico, Minnesota, and Oregon, have alternate bodies. Check the National Association of State Boards of Education Web site to see what entity exists in your state. Many states have a chief state school officer, who is directly responsible to the SBE and normally serves as the head of a state department of education. At the local level, school districts are governed by school boards. School board members may be elected or appointed. School boards are normally responsible for hiring a school district superintendent, who is responsible for implementing educational policies at the local level. The superintendent is also responsible for managing principals and schools located within the district. Principals are the onsite authority for education in their buildings. Teachers are directly responsible to principals.
Since each state has some leniency with the governance structure it is important to understand your individual school system. Know thing proper protocol will enable you to stay involved and in communication with your local district leaders and provide the appropriate method for addressing concerning about your school system.
Each administrator has his own unique personality traits. So as can be expected, some leadership models will appeal more to some administrators than others. The natural differences in personality among various leaders lead to preferences that run below the leader’s awareness.
What often happens due to these personality traits is that a leader develops judgments, and responds to his or her environment by focusing on certain leadership aspects more than others.
Variations caused by factors such as age, upbringing, and gender have been shown to affect the way personality is developed and expressed. Practices are also influenced by the interaction between personality and contextual aspects associated with the workplace. Examples of these contextual aspects include the perceived nature of work, the leadership experience, the school level, and the leader’s position.
So which is the best way forward? What can school administrators do to find the leadership style that simply clicks for them and leads to unbridled success? Here are a few tips.
1. School leaders and administrators should first acknowledge their inborn, natural tendencies toward some practices over others. They should then reflect on whether these preferences affect their leadership practices. Honesty and transparency in admitting personality differences would motivate the leaders to consider ways to satisfy the various needs of their schools. Self-awareness is a necessary step before leaders can really engage in effective team-building.
2. Delegate, delegate, delegate. Many researchers consider delegation vital for leadership success. Research has shown that delegation is dependent on personality preferences, which translate to foregone conclusions in leadership behavior and in competence. The leader’s preferences are heavily influenced by what is natural, comfortable, and enjoyable for the leader.
Delegation allows the leader and team members to do what they do best.
3. School leaders need to consider the administrator’s preferences when it comes to shaping school leadership responsibilities. They will end up attempting more modest efforts, which sounds counterintuitive—but the success of this practice is actually based on sound research. While this may be more supportive of a differentiated rather than instructional leadership style, the importance of including varying differences of opinion is vital for any leadership model.
4. School leaders should embrace their differences as assets when working together. As schools seek to redefine themselves as learning communities, its members must work together in a friendly, cooperative fashion, by challenging and engaging with each other. Jungian theory finds that diversity generates synergy and innovation. Most leadership researchers and theorists have noted that human differences provide the creative tension needed in the forward movement and growth of any institution. Models of leadership that ignore the nature of leaders tend to be far less effective.
As school principals work to close the achievement gap in learning, they should strive to build a conscious understanding of their own natural preferences, in relation to instructional leadership.
Human differences are often depicted as weaknesses, and are quickly pushed aside. Seeking to address them in a meaningful way, instead of dismissing them, can be a seed for success in educational leadership.
Do you think that leaders need to be aware of and develop their unique leadership qualities to be successful at school? Why (or why not)? Please leave a comment below and share your thoughts.
Universities are usually credited with being centers for progress in society, with the perfect combination of youthful optimism and the encouragement of the quest of knowledge. With a total student population of more than 110,000 between eight campuses, Indiana University is instrumental in setting the tone for progress in the state and the surrounding region.
With all of the attention lately on Indiana Governor Mike Pence signing the Religious Freedom Act, essentially giving business owners the option of not serving people who do not align with their own religious beliefs, the voice of IU and other colleges in the state are more important than ever.
Dr. James C. Wimbush is the Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Multicultural Affairs and the Dean of the University Graduate School at Indiana University. The goal of the DEMA office is to “foster an inclusive environment that promotes and nurtures diversity, broadly defined on all campuses of Indiana University.” This is accomplished by strategically focusing on three critical areas:
recruitment and retention of faculty and staff, and recruitment, retention, and timely completion of undergraduate and graduate students;
promotion of a welcoming and positive campus climate;
engagement in outreach and advocacy locally and nationally.
I asked Dr. Wimbush about the vital role IU plays in diversity progress in the state, and where he sees initiatives heading in the next few years.
Question: Describe the cultural landscape/demographics at Indiana University.
Answer: In Fall 2014, IU Bloomington witnessed a landmark event for the first time enrolling 1,042 new students who identify as Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or as multiracial. The number of African-American students increased approximately 7 percent and Hispanic students by 10 percent. We are seeing some progress, but recognize that there is much more to do.
Q: In 2013, IU joined Freedom Indiana to take a stand supporting same-sex marriage. Since then, the school has come out against Governor Mike Pence’s signing of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. What important role do colleges and universities play in progressing society on issues like this?
A: Important societal concerns such as the one we faced last year create opportunities for the University to advocate for issues that might otherwise have a deleterious effect on our community and university. We feel it is appropriate and essential to take a stand on these types of issues.
Following Indiana Governor Mike Pence’s signing of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, IU’s President Michael A. McRobbie released a statement reaffirming the university’s commitment to hiring, promoting and educating without regard for age, race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or other often-discriminatory factors. That statement also urged state lawmakers to take another look at the RFRA and to reverse its discriminatory stance. My office firmly stands behind President McRobbie’s statement and plans to keep IU moving toward greater progress for the entire state on these and other issues of equality.
Q: Is being positioned in the Midwest helpful or hurtful to diversity? How do you make a predominantly white institution like IU more diverse, year by year?
A: We are always looking at recruitment opportunities within and outside the state of Indiana to try to attract a more diverse student, faculty and staff population. We do this in a number of ways including participation in recruitment fairs and building and nurturing relationships with our external partners. While recruitment is a responsibility of the Office of Enrollment Management within Indiana University, we work closely with them to help support their efforts. We have been working with schools and school systems to create a pipeline from K-12 classrooms to Indiana University.
Q: How does Indiana University recruit diverse faculty?
A: Our Bloomington campus has a strategic recruitment fund designed to help with the recruitment of minority faculty and senior women underrepresented in their fields. Minority or women candidates for an opening can be flagged as qualifying for this funding, which covers 75 percent of base salary for underrepresented minorities and 50 percent of base salary for women in select fields where they are underrepresented. The funds for the salary are transferred to the department where the person is employed for as long as they work at the university. Last year, the program was revamped resulting in a hearty yield of underrepresented minority hires. Out of approximately 80 new faculty hires on the Bloomington campus for the 2014/2015 academic year, we were able to use the strategic recruitment fund to hire 11 underrepresented minority faculty members.
Q: What diversity/multi-cultural initiatives are in the works at IU?
A: We have a number of initiatives underway that we are excited to share that include increased funding to our Group Program that assists low-income, first-generation students. The program has been in place since 1968 and used to be funded one year at a time; that has switched to four years at a time. We are also developing a program in conjunction with Indianapolis Public Schools to streamline K-12 students to the campus of Indiana University. We are also continuing to cultivate our relationship with the nationally renowned Stax Music Academy of Memphis that trains middle-school and high-school musicians through after-school and summer camp programs. We have already seen applications to IU for fall 2015 admission from this initiative.
We are also currently expanding our network of historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and Minority-serving institutions (MSIs) to enhance recruitment. We have recently added the GLBT Support and Services Center as one of our culture centers within my office. This past academic year we held highly successful diversity-oriented receptions at IUPUI and all the regional campuses. Attendance comprised of campus and community constituents.
We place tutors in all the culture centers, which include tutoring sessions on evenings and weekends. We will continue radio and digital campaigns targeting underrepresented populations in central Indiana and the communities where IU campuses are located. We are beginning a collaboration with the Maurer School of Law for qualified students in Office of the Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Multicultural Affairs programs who are interested in a law degree to receive pre-law mentoring from the School, and if admitted to Maurer, to receive substantially reduced tuition.
I’d like to thank Dr. Wimbush for this insight and for taking the time to share his expertise on the role IU, and other colleges, play in promoting diversity in their home states.
Under proposed budget changes for the 2014 fiscal year, many STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) educational initiatives may no longer exist. Though overall funding for STEM programs is actually slated to rise by $3 billion, or 6 percent, consolidation of STEM education may leave specific programs out in the cold. The annual $15 million in funding for the Science Education Partnership Awards that are funded by the National Institutes of Health, for example, are not included in the proposed budget changes. Every year the awards provide over 75,000 K-12 students with informal, hands-on science education intended to spark lifelong interest in an area where America consistently lags behind other developed countries.
While the knee-jerk reaction is to blame lack of prioritization of STEM education on the Obama administration and the budget advisors on this particular project, I think the issue is much, much bigger. A report released in December 2012 called Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study showed that just 7 percent of U.S. students had advanced level eighth-grade math skills, compared with 47 percent in South Korea and 48 percent in Singapore. Further, the U.S. was ranked as 11th in fourth-grade math and 9th in eighth-grade math. American students ranked higher in reading, but still fell behind Hong Kong, Russia and Finland.
It seems that when these test results are released, there is an initial public outcry about the slipping state of the American public in science and math. Those voices quickly fade, however, content to download another smartphone app that does metric conversion or even one that is advertised to complete math homework with a few taps of a touchscreen. It is easier to utilize technology than to learn how to perform equations; it is simpler to grab produce from the grocery store shelf than to question where that food came from or what went into its production.
It would be great to blame this indifference towards STEM initiatives on the uneducated public, or the convenience of Internet technology, or even the media (why not?). The truth is that this uncaring attitude is a byproduct of academic disengagement, fueled by the way children are taught in American K-12 schools. As interactive technology becomes commonplace in classrooms, education becomes more of a form of entertainment. Yes, educators should find innovative ways to reach students with educational messages but there is a blurry line between creative learning and babysitting tactics to keep students from declaring boredom and simply not trying.
Are math, science, engineering and technology topics too complicated for the short attention spans of today’s American K-12 students – and do educators add to this problem by spending too much time trying to put on a song and dance? I think the answer to both of these questions is “yes.” This is not to say that it is the fault of educators but merely to point out that they are in a quandary made possible by screen-culture and an education system that favors standardized learning over intellectualism. By emphasizing fact memorization, and placing no priority on hands-on math and science experiences, it is no wonder that 46 percent of Americans believe young people do not pursue math and science careers because they are “too hard.” In the same Pew Research study, 20 percent of Americans said careers in science and math are “too boring.”
Clearly something is being missed along the way in our K-12 system. How can science, the intricate study of how things work with and without our known universe, be boring? How can math, the way things balance out and make our world run smoothly, be too complicated to pursue? It seems these questions just bring up even more questions and there are not enough people who care enough to seek out answers.
What factors do you think contribute to indifference in STEM education?
A principal set out to find a literacy tool to help dyslexic students but ended up revolutionizing her early literacy curriculum.
By Dr. Christy Hiett
According to the International Dyslexia Association, approximately 15% of the general population has some symptoms of dyslexia, with a significant number of them going undiagnosed. Many young students with dyslexia struggle silently and have lifelong literacy issues. To help these students, in the fall 2015, the Alabama State Board of Education voted to define dyslexia as a learning challenge. This means every school in our state is required to screen students for dyslexia, and provide accommodations and intervention so they have the resources to become successful readers.
As part of the new requirements, Alabama schools provide assistive technology so students with dyslexia have the option of having text read to them and using speech-to-text software instead of writing. Last fall, I was informed our first dyslexia-diagnosed student was planning to transition to Fruithurst for the following school year. At the time, Fruithurst didn’t have assistive tech meeting the requirements for dyslexic students, so I began my search for the right technology tool.
Building a Foundation of Phonics
To prepare, I took a trip to a nearby school in Georgia to see what tools they were using to help students who were classified with dyslexia and other reading disabilities. There, I discovered a phonics-focused, blended learning print and digital curriculum called Reading Horizons that is designed to help students with dyslexia and a wide range of reading difficulties.
Fruithurst is a rural school where 76% of students are considered at poverty level, and getting students to read at or above grade level has often been a difficult task for us. After seeing a steady decline in student reading levels over my eight years as an administrator, I finally found the key to reversing that trend: ensuring that all students receive a solid phonics foundation.
In January 2016 we overhauled our entire K–2 reading curriculum to include Reading Horizons Discovery® direct instruction and software. Our goal was to serve students with reading disabilities as well as provide all of our students with a solid reading foundation.
The Blended Approach
Fruithurst uses Reading HorizonsDiscovery as its main reading program for students in grades K–2, and as reading intervention. Lessons typically last 30-40 minutes per day and incorporate whole-group instruction, small-group work, and individual work time. Many of my teachers use print resources like word list cards for dictation and transfer activities during whole-class instruction. Then, they use the digital program during reading stations so students can practice and reinforce the skills they worked on as a group.
Within two weeks of overhauling the K–2 curriculum, Fruithurst saw increases in student test scores, especially through spelling tests. I saw students as young as kindergarten learning how to decode words and, ultimately, to read. The decoding process actively involves students in their own learning: Students stand up from their desks and use whiteboards to decode words using the phonetic skills. We’ve found the phonics-based curriculum is a great solution for a classroom of children with a mixture of ability levels because it challenges those at a higher level while reinforcing phonics skills for children who are still struggling.
The engaging and comprehensive program helps children truly learn phonetic skills as opposed to memorizing spelling words for a test and forgetting them the next week. Before, many students were not doing well on spelling tests because they couldn’t grasp the concepts of the English language “code”. A handful of students were constantly making zeros and lacked the most basic foundations for spelling. I’m happy to report even students who were making zeros were making 100s after only a few weeks!
A Literacy Success Story
A great example of how our new approach works was a first-grade student who entered Fruithurst after completing kindergarten, twice. After multiple moves between family members and foster homes, he transferred to Fruithurst with the hope of finding a quality education and a stable living situation. Teachers diligently tried to teach this student to read, and to help him look past his struggles at home for a few hours each day, but he continued to struggle and had failing grades. With the implementation of the new phonics curriculum, he started getting 105% on spelling tests within a few weeks.
After grasping the concept of phonics, he was able to connect what he was learning to the classroom, which is something this particular student had never done before. He finished the school year above average, full of confidence in his ability to read.
At Fruithurst, the hunt for a new curriculum to help students with dyslexia and other struggling readers evolved into a complete curriculum overhaul. Using a blended approach to teach core reading skills allows students to move at their own pace and allows teachers to provide appropriate intervention to struggling readers. I am now confident that all of our students are receiving a great phonics foundation and have the best possible chance to be great readers in the future.
Dr. Christy Hiett is the Principal of Fruithurst Elementary School in Fruithurst, Alabama.
