Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation

How LRM is transforming teaching and learning

Behind every successful adult is at least one person who pushed him or her to greatness. If you ask some of the world’s highest achievers what motivated them to keep going, they usually mention a specific person who inspired them along the way – a parent, a teacher, a mentor, a coach.

Think about the people in your own life who made a positive impact when you were young. If you are an educator, it was probably a teacher of your own who inspired you to take that next step and answer the call to teach. There were likely other less-direct influences on your career choice, and others who influenced other parts of the positive parts of your adult life.

Now imagine what it would look like if all of those mentors – those teachers, those coaches – had been able to combine their efforts for a singular purpose: guiding you on the road to successful adulthood. It’s a pretty amazing thought, right? But most of those people were probably from different circles of your life with you (a kid) being the only connection between them. Technology is changing that though, by better aligning the important relationships in a student’s life.

More specifically, Learning Relationship Management is delving deeper into how mentors like teachers and coaches help guide all students to success — both academically, and in other areas of life. The Learning Relationship Management Alliance is a leader in this student-friendly technology that can also be applied to other groups that benefit from mentor support, like senior citizens in assisted living.

The LRM Alliance created this infographic to summarize exactly what the vision is for this relationship technology, including a need to cultivate authentic relationships, personalize learning, streamline content, and connect networks in a student’s life. Take a look:

 

So how is the LRM Alliance progressing these ideas in a coherent way that any district can implement? By combining the strengths of several leading companies to raise awareness about the many benefits to this learning setup. This group of edtech innovators is changing the way students succeed through electronic means that extend beyond academic pursuits. The five companies that make up the LRM Alliance are:

Through community-enabled mentorship, the strengths of a variety of people associated with each student is tapped. This includes, and is not limited to, parents, teachers, sports coaches, and more. Even older siblings can be included in the community to help encourage, monitor and ultimately guide the student to positive learning outcomes.

When it comes to personalized and blended learning, LRM allows K-20 brick and mortar schools and online schools to move from small pilot programs to large, full-scale implementation. Teachers and administrators have more information on how students are progressing and can tailor lessons to better fit their needs and learning styles. Personalized learning paths are in turn supported through learning relationship management and strengthened by the mentors outside the classroom who are in the student’s network. Learning Relationship Management does not just setup personalized and blended learning lesson plans; it gives students the tools to execute those plans.

Learning Relationship Management is not just about prescriptive methods, though, or simply handing out assignments. The students themselves are an integral part of the process of goal-setting, intervention planning and the communication that takes place about them. Every student can benefit from LRM tools because it does not dictate what people must take part. If a student lives with grandparents, or has a drama teacher but no sports coaches, or even has a trusted teacher he wants to keep in the system even when class has ended, LRM technology makes all of that possible.

Learning Relationship Management has the potential to combine what schools are already doing right with a stronger support group outside the classroom. There can be numerous people (invited by the student and overseen by the lead adult administrator) who weigh in on the goals, benchmarks and activities of the student. There is a lot of power in the community-enabled coaching model and the more people who can contribute to the success of a student — in a streamlined, productive way — the better that student will fare in school, and in life.

You can learn more about the Learning Relationship Management Alliance and its member companies at the organization’s site.

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

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

Necessary Shifts: A Change in K-12 Teacher Education

In the not-so-distant past, public schools used to represent the most major building block in the education and socialization of students outside of the home. Young minds were molded by the teachers, administrators and friends they met in the confines of the school setting. Teachers had the ability to teach in much more isolated circumstances, even ten years ago, than they are able to do today.

With respect to the students of the past, modern classrooms are full of sophisticated youngsters that show up with a detailed view of the world formed from more than home life experiences. Instant access to knowledge from the age a child can press a touchscreen on a Smartphone and widespread socialization from as young as six weeks old in the form of childcare atmospheres mean that kids arrive at Kindergarten with less naivety than previous generations. Teachers are not handed a clean slate but rather one that is already cluttered with random knowledge that must be fostered or remediated.

Teacher Education Innovation

It stands to reason that if students are changing, teachers need to change too. More specifically, the education that teachers receive needs to be modified to meet the modern needs of K – 12 classrooms. There are policy and practice changes taking place all over the world – many driven by teachers – that address the cultural shifts in the classroom. Some that show a lot of promise include:

  • Subject-specific recruiting by colleges and universities. The book Teaching 2030, written by 13 experts in K-12 classroom pedagogy, calls for education schools to stop letting in any and every education major in the broad sense of the subject area. Instead, the experts suggest that colleges become more selective to meet the demand of actual student need. Young people that are interested in teaching high-demand subject areas like mathematics, bilingual education, physical science and special education should be viewed as more valuable to institutions of higher learning. This needs-based philosophy addresses actual voids in the industry and better equips schools to meet students’ needs.
  • Virtual learning options. Though colleges often get all of the attention when it comes to online learning programs, K-12 education is also shifting more toward distance learning options. During the 2010-2011 school year, 1.8 million students in grades K-12 were enrolled in some type of distance learning program. That is up from just 50,000 in the 2000-2001 school year, according to the International Association for K-12 Online Learning. This is a trend that teachers-to-be simply cannot ignore. Virtual learning is not reserved for only those that can afford it; 40 U.S. states have state-run online programs and 30 of those states provide statewide, full-time K-12 schools. The University of Central Florida is one of the only schools to offer a virtual-school emphasis for education majors that lets students apprentice with Florida Virtual School instructors.
  • Continued classroom learning for administrators. Since the people at the top are generally the decision-makers, they should be required to return to the field every now and then. On the other hand, the teachers that are actually in the student trenches should be empowered to help change educational policy based on the reality of the modern classroom. The Center for Quality Teaching supports a “teacherpreneur” program that would “blur the lines… between those who teach… and those who lead.” Actionable strides toward closing the public education gap between teachers and administrators are necessary for real, effective change to take place in K-12 classrooms.

Public education in America needs teachers that are better trained to meet the needs of specific student populations, those that understand the necessary role of distance learning, and those that are willing to speak up to facilitate classroom change. Without these teachers, effective reform to meet global demand is not possible.

How have the roles of teachers changed over the years in your opinion? What is the single greatest obstacle that teachers face that stands in the way of maximum K-12 student achievement?

 

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

 

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

The positive connection between games and online learning

By Mitch Weisburgh, cofounder of Games4Ed

Game-based learning has the potential to drastically improve the way children are taught.

Games have peculiar qualities that let them engage hard-to-reach students in a way lessons cannot. Researchers have begun to explore the intrinsic qualities of games that make them promising learning tools, and anecdotal evidence is available everywhere.

I personally know a student who struggled in history until Assassin’s Creed sparked his interest in the French revolution; he is now an honors history student. I know many students who spend hours playing Minecraft and many hours more learning new skills and techniques on YouTube, which they then apply to Minecraft. Clearly, a good game is a powerful motivator for learning. It engages the mind and the passions simultaneously, with obvious results. But why, and how, does this work, and how can we harness it in schools?

Who uses games? 99% of boys, 94% of girls, and 62% of teachers play video games.

Games foster ideal conditions for learning

There is a sweet spot for learning that lies between what a person can do without help, and what they can only accomplish with help. Lev Vygotsky coined the term zone of proximal development to describe this spot. In the zone of proximal development, the lesson is neither so easy that the student is bored, nor so difficult that he gives up.

Teachers use their training and skill to create lessons that fall into their students’ zone of proximal development, but Plass, Homer, and Kinzer show in Playful Learning: An Integrated Design Framework that successful games tend to aim toward this same zone. The tantalizing opportunity provided by games is a lesson that measures player skill, and then delivers an appropriate response automatically.

Gamers beware, however. According to Tobias et al, when the game mechanics become complex, the zone of proximal development is overshot and learning can be inhibited. Game designers “need to be mindful of the cognitive load imposed on players” to learn to play.

Games encourage growth

Games relate to another key aspect of learning. Carol Dweck pioneered the idea is that individuals who see themselves as evolving through hard work and dedication will grow their abilities, while those who see their talents as fixed traits will not. She called this the growth mindset paradigm, laid out in her book Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Games reinforce the growth mindset through their treatment of failure.

Games that support a growth mindset allow for “graceful failure” by embedding low-stakes failure into the game mechanics. These games encourage balanced risk-taking and exploration. A player who fails at a well-made game immediately tries again, and when the player eventually succeeds, the idea of growth through practice is reinforced. Kris Mueller, an eighth grade teacher writing for Edutopia, wrote: “A well-designed game leads players through carefully-leveled tasks that prepare them to succeed in bigger challenges.”

Games improve spatial skills

There are literally hundreds of research and pseudo-research papers on games. A meta-analysis of more than 100 studies, Effects of video-game play on information processing: a meta-analytic investigation, found that studies generally agreed: games improve visual processing, visual-spatial manipulation of images, and auditory processing. The analysis, undertaken by Powers, Brooks, Aldreich, Palladino, and Alfieri, attributed much of the improvement to video games demanding that players interpret, mentally transform, manipulate, and relate dynamic changing images.

Games have significant value for education because the skills cultivated by games are widely applicable outside of games. Tobias, Fletcher, and Chen showed this in a review of 95 studies, Digital Games as Educational Technology: Promise and Challenges in the Use of Games to Teach (to be published later in 2015). They found “evidence of near and far transfer in applying learning from games to external tasks.”

Specifically, action games, often called First Person Shooter (FPS) games, improve attention, mental rotation, task switching, speed of processing, sensitivity to inputs from the environment, resistance to distraction, and flexibility in allocating cognitive as well as perceptual resources. Not only did people learn these skills from video games, there was a significant ability to transfer that learning to other activities.

Games are linked to STEM achievement and greater creativity

Spatial skills “can be trained with video games (primarily action games) in a relatively brief period” and that these skills “last over an extended period of time.” More excitingly, the improvement in visual-spatial skills is related to other, more scholarly, improvements. The Benefits of Playing Video Games (Granic, Lobel, and Egels in American Psychologist, January, 2014) noted that those learning these skills from video games show increased efficiency of neural processing. Improvements in spatial skills predict achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

There are also links between playing video games and enhanced creativity, although we do not yet know the exact nature of the connection. Perhaps games enhance players’ creativity, or creative people tend to play video games, or some combination is at work.

Games foster engagement

One of the most important factors related to learning is time on task. It is highly related to proficiency and can be used to predict math proficiency to the nearest tenth of a grade placement. Yet, students are found to be thinking about topics entirely unrelated to academics a full 40% of the time while in classrooms. In fact, on average, high school students are less engaged while in classrooms than anywhere else.

In the Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, Shernoff and Chikszentmihalyi make two points that relate directly to the need for increased engagement. They found that enjoyment and interest during high school classes are significant predictors of student success in college, and that this engagement is a rarity in US schools.

High engagement is observed when students focus on mastering a task according to self-set standards or a self-imposed desire for improvement. You’ll remember that those standards are linked to the growth mindset outlined by Dweck. Engagement (enjoyment and interest) is represented by heightened concentration and effort in skill-building activities along with spontaneous enjoyment from intrinsic interest and continued motivation.

This relationship between time spent and skill applies to video games as well. The more time spent playing educational games, the greater the gain in skills and knowledge. Unlike class time, however, video games are great at capturing and holding attention. The average gamer spends 13 hours a week playing games.

It is not clear whether the positive effects of game-based learning stem from greater time spent learning, or increased efficiency in learning, or both. It is clear, however, that more time is spent learning when educational games are used than when they are not. Tobias et al report that those who learn using games, “tend to spend more time on them than do comparison groups.”

What makes an optimal learning environment?

Shernoff and Chikszentmihalyi propose conditions for an optimal learning environment which match strikingly with the benefits of educational gaming. An optimal learning environment:

  1. presents challenging and relevant activities that allow students to feel confident and in control
  2. promotes both concentration and enjoyment
  3. is intrinsically satisfying in the short term while building a foundation of skills and interests
  4. involves both intellect and feeling
  5. requires effort and yet feels like play

Their research shows that video games may foster this environment. Students using a video game approach made considerably greater learning gains than those in a traditional classroom, and were linked to a higher level of engagement.

Shernoff provides an example: a full semester college course, Dynamic Systems and Control.

A college course was designed around a video game in which students race a virtual car around a track for homework and lab exercises. The students reported a higher level of interest, engagement, and flow, and the video game was able to maintain “the high level of rigor inherent to the challenging engineering course while adding the perception of feeling active, creative, and in control characteristic of flow activities. The students who interacted with the video game also demonstrated greater depth of knowledge and better performance in the course.”

SRI, in research on GlassLab STEM games for K12, found that, for the average students, learning achievement increases by 12 percent when game based learning augments traditional instruction, and if the “game” is a simulation, achievement increases by 25 percent.

The research so far points to the tremendous value of games in education, and marks signposts for differentiating “good” and “bad” games. Yet there is still little knowledge on the most effective ways to produce games “the reliably yield pre-specified instructional objectives.” Also, it’s hard to know in advance if students will master a specific standard through X hours playing any one game.

A combination of games and other instructional methods has been shown to be especially effective. “Integrating games into the curriculum improves transfer from games to school learning tasks.”

Games, combined with other instructional strategies, may be the solution to Bloom’s two-sigma problem.

References:

Effects of video-game play on information processing: A meta-analytic investigation Powers, Brooks, Aldreich, Palladino, Alfieri; Psychonomic Society, 22 March, 2013

Digital Games as Educational Technology: Promise and Challenges in the Use of Games to Teach Tobias, Fletcher, Chen; Educational Technology, due in September or October 2015

Playful Learning: An Integrated Design Framework Plass, Homer, Kinzer; Games for Learning Institute; December, 2014

Flow in Schools Revisited Shernoff, Chikszentmihalyi, Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, Second Edition, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group

Engagement and Positive Youth Development: Creating Optimal Learning Environments David J Shernoff, APA Educational Psychology Handbook, Chapter 8

Independent Research and Evaluation on GlassLab Games and Assessments, SRI, 2012, http://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2014/06/27/games-in-the-classroom-what-the-research-says/

The Benefits of Playing Video Games, Granic, Lobel, Engels; American Psychologist, January, 2014

_____

Mitch Weisburgh is the cofounder of Games4Ed.

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

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

The Four Biggest Factors In Teacher Turnover

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

1. Compensation

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

2. Working Conditions

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

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

3. Teacher Education

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

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

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

4. Mentoring

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Public versus Entrepreneurial Education: Who Will Win Out?

By Matthew Lynch

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

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

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

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

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

So, where should accountability lie?

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

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

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

Is there a happy medium?

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

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

photo credit: aaronvandorn via photopin cc

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

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

Author: Dr. Q. Mark Reford

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Who Owns Knowledge? A Look At Curriculum.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Should we grade teachers on student performance?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report: 11 states spend more on prisons than higher education

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HBCU Insights: Changing the Discourse on HBCUs

A column by Larry J. Walker

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

____________

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

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

Diverse Conversations: MOOCs for University Administration

By Matthew Lynch

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts