Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, Teachers

4 Ways to Help Your Students Embrace Diversity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5 Expert Tips on Working with Homeless Students

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hasn’t there been some progress though?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edtech aims to save time, combine resources

It’s no secret that teachers spend a lot of non-instructional time on paperwork. It seems as data tracking with students has improved, the amount of it that teachers are asked to do has risen. Grading assignments and filling out report cards are just a drop in the bucket of keeping up with the data needed for individual students, schools, districts and states. The data is well-intended of course and meant to ensure that students are on track, both academically and otherwise.

It just takes time. A lot of it. Technology has made it easier to track student achievements and development but in most cases, has not streamlined that data in the best way possible. Even digital systems often overlap with each other and require the same data to be entered more than once.

Just this week, MIDAS Education released its EEM (Education Enterprise Management) solution intended to bring all student data together in one spot. EEM is an edtech-wide movement that favors integration of information systems, rather than having a need for separate ones. Customized instruction is the aim of the MIDAS system that gives real-time access to teachers, parents, students and administrators through a user-friendly Web interface. MIDAS is not just a curation tool that gives users a single sign on —  it actually replaces all of these systems with a single platform powered by one massive database.

MIDAS encompasses the functionality of up to 13 different software packages in one EEM solution, with a single log-in and an intuitive user interface.

I really like the idea of housing everything in one spot and making it accessible to everyone who needs the information. This not only saves time for the educator and administrators, but ultimately benefits the students. More streamlined policies on data strengthen the help kids can receive throughout their P-20 careers.

For more information, please visit MIDASEducation.com.

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

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

4 Keys to Getting Reluctant Readers from ‘No’ to ‘Wow’

Interactive, multimedia environments can turn reading into something that students actually enjoy.

By Ted Levine

Reading is the most fundamental skill an early learner can develop to start on a path towards success, both as a student and as a young citizen. But I hear from educators all the time about how hard it is to engage reluctant readers, especially at the elementary level when development is most crucial. So the question then becomes: What tactics can we use as educators to encourage those reluctant readers to turn the corner, and ultimately to get them excited about reading and learning?

Just like any other skill, reading is something everyone needs to work at. It requires time, effort, and repetition in order to be properly developed. While educators have the important task of working with young learners to develop their reading skills, student also need support and encouragement at home. No tactics or “shortcuts” will help reluctant readers make progress unless there is time carved out in class and at home to focus on their reading. Having said that, there are some key tactics that educators can use to help drive reluctant readers down the path towards reading proficiency—and even enjoyment.

1) Invite young learners to engage in multimedia learning environments. A multimedia learning environment may consist of reading texts, photographs, videos, audio, and even some interactive elements, all mashed up into one single experience. Technology is often overlooked when it comes to reading, but multimedia learning environments can provide an incredible springboard for students who are reluctant to pick up a book.

Young learners are often drawn into the excitement and movement of multimedia elements, particularly video and interactive content. By contrast, huge chunks of text and reading environments that lack any visually engaging components are daunting for reluctant readers.

We recently held a webinar with Dr. Kimberly Greene, an associate professor of education at Brandman University. Dr. Greene had strong opinions about the importance of shorter passages, approachable fonts, and digital reading environments that deliver an inviting experience. Another of her strong opinions is the second tactic I will share:

2) Don’t send reluctant readers into environments that are too “childish.” This point struck a particularly strong chord with the webinar’s attendees, who were mostly upper elementary and middle school educators.

For example, let’s take a 6th-grade student who currently reads at a 3rd-grade level. The print or digital reading environments available at that reading level often have a childish design. Reading something obviously designed for young kids can be a source of embarrassment for the student to read in front of his or her peers, and oftentimes is counterproductive to achieving the desired outcomes for this type of student. Instead, every student in this example 6th-grade class should be able to experience an interactive reading environment like Kids Discover Online, where every student in class has the same rich reading experience, but at slightly different levels.

3) Start small. For a reluctant reader, sitting down to read for a full hour might feel overwhelming. Aim to have them start with just 15 minutes of reading. You can even begin with five or 10 minutes. No marathon runner kicks off their training season with a 26-mile run. The point is to break down the walls of intimidation and frustration, and to gradually build up your learner’s skills.

4) Create “wow” moments. Getting kids to read is one thing; getting them excited about reading is another. I believe that giving students a reading experience filled with iconic photographs, beautiful illustrations, short-form video, and interactive elements that support the text will create the “wow” moments that every educator so desperately seeks to deliver to his or her students. Having these inspiring moments when they “get it” will lead students to approach reading with feelings of excitement instead of apprehension. Rather than seeing reading as a chore, they will look forward to it and engage on a deeper level with the content.

If we can instill that love of reading in our students, we are giving them a huge head start on the road to academic success.

Ted Levine is the president and CEO of Kids Discover, follow him on twitter, @KIDS_Discover

 

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

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

Classroom Technology: Does it Really Make a Difference?

Public school teachers have a lot on their plate when it comes to measuring achievement. Student success is determined through assessments, graded materials and even technological savvy. The general consensus seems to be that in order to give K-12 students a fighting chance in the real world, teachers and administrators must stay on top of any and all technology trends. Is it worth the effort though?

The National Center for Education Statistics reported in 2009 that 97 percent of K-12 teachers had computers in their classrooms every day. In addition, 54 percent were able to bring a computer into the classroom. The overall ratio of students to classroom computers was 5.3 to 1.

Well that was then and this is now. Since 2009, teachers have made the shift to include mobile devices like tablets and Smartphones as part of the classroom culture. Computers are still there, but are quickly playing second fiddle to smaller, faster and just-plain-cooler pieces of technology. While the inclusion of cutting-edge technology certainly grabs the attention of students, does it actually make a difference in academic success?

Does technology really provide more opportunities?

The problem with answering these questions is that not enough time has passed since the influx of Internet-based learning has stormed K-12 classrooms. At a technology summit in early 2012, Troy Williams of Macmillan New Ventures told a packed conference room that companies like his do not “have the outcomes yet to say what leads to a true learning moment.” He added that it would still be another three to five years before those numbers can truly be analyzed. Matthew Pittinsky, a co-founder of the popular Blackboard software, agreed with Williams, saying that “these are really early days” when it comes to truly integrated technology intended to improve student success in K-12 and higher education settings.

In its widest definition, though, technology has always been associated with the creation of a level playing field for students. Bernard John Poole of the University of Pittsburgh wrote ten pillars of technology integration in K-12 schools and his final point reads: Recognize that technology is for all, and involves all, in the process of lifelong learning. Poole talks about the way that teachers must receive ongoing training, and parents must be equally involved, in order to promote student achievement through technological advances. While his points sound good on paper, it leads one to wonder if he truly believes that technology is necessity of learning, or if it is only a means to capturing an ever-waning student body attention span.

At the public school level, all students have equal access to classroom computers and mobile devices. Even if these youngsters have no electronic access at home, upon entering a classroom they are able to interact with technology and keep up with their peers. That is all well and good – but does it matter? If all public K-12 classrooms got rid of computers and banned Internet-based learning, would it negatively impact academic success through college years? Would it affect graduation rates? Would American kids fall behind the rest of the world?

I think that truly depends on how you look at it. Does the technology itself provide heightened learning experiences? I’d argue that it does not. Instead, the implementation of the technology is a necessary move to keep students interested in the subject matter. I am not saying that I am against rapid adjustment to cutting-edge technology in learning and practice; I think there is no way to avoid embracing it and still turn out high numbers of world-ready graduates. I just think that there is a danger in relying on the technology to convey learning materials in a vacuum. Look at how much technology has changed since the 2009 report I referenced above. Does this mean that the students growing up in public school atmospheres in 2013 will be better prepared for life than those of 2009? What about the students of 2017, and so on?

What do you think? Does technology improve learning?

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

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

Becoming Superman: How Americans Can Save the Nation’s Educational System

As referenced in the recent documentary, Waiting for Superman, the American educational system is not living up to it’s potential. Comparisons with other developed countries show that the strongest nation in the world is falling behind academically.  Even with the tremendous changes taking place since No Child Left Behind was enacted, serious problems still exist. For example, the cost per pupil in the U.S. has soared to five times the level in the 1950s, after adjusting for inflation. With this kind of money being pumped into the system, why are our school systems in the state that they are? This is a common problem with any bureaucratic monopoly.

Statistics, and common sense born of observation, tell us that the biggest crisis in our schools is finding ways to educate students in low-income areas. However, as Waiting for Superman illustrates, our educational problems are not limited to poverty-stricken areas alone. As Lesley Chilcott, producer of the Waiting for Superman documentary put it, “The dirty little secret… is that middle- and upper-class communities are suffering as well. When we talk about U.S. students ranking twenty-fifth in math, we’re not just talking about underserved communities, we’re talking overall.”  Yet, despite decades of knowing that these problems exist, little improvements are being made. Of course, everyone wants to improve our system; they just do not seem to know how to do it.

The American public must feel that educational reform is a top priority issue in these times of severe economic troubles. Today, people are concerned about their jobs and putting food on the table. Upgrading education, although theoretically important, can hold a low priority to the more pressing problems of keeping a roof over their heads. The paradox here is that this is precisely the time to make that investment into education. When times are tough, workers need to improve their skills to compete effectively in the marketplace. Education can provide those skills. Furthermore, those enhanced skills and improved technological talents are going to be desperately needed in the future as America continues to struggle in the 21st century labor force. Production is not getting easier and simpler. In fact, it is just the opposite. The skills needed in the world marketplace require a better education and improved, and more advanced abilities. Planning to turn out workers for the factories of today is a crucial element, but those same workers also need to be able to adapt to technologies that are just now being developed. Workers taught in an educational system that is subpar will not only hurt them and their families; it will cripple America’s competitiveness.

Educational reform will occur once we decide that enough is enough and make the commitment change happen no matter what it takes. When America realizes all children deserve a stellar education regardless of where they are from, whom their parents are, or what their socioeconomic status is, we will be able to reform our educational system. Americans have to stop treating minority students in underperforming urban environments like collateral damage. The disheartening reality is that America has billions of dollars to fight a two-front war, but cannot or will not properly educate its children. If a hostile country attacked America, it would take less than 24 hours for American troops to be mobilized into battle. However, we seem unable to mobilize a sea of educated teachers and administrators to wage war against academic mediocrity, which is a bigger threat to our national security than Iran or North Korea.

Waiting for Superman has been criticized as being against teachers unions, placing blame too squarely on the shoulders of educators, and misrepresenting educational statistics. However, the film also shined a bright spotlight on the harsh reality of our educational system, showing the exodus of middle and upper class children from our public schools, the sadness of the lottery system for what are perceived as the best schools, and the general hopelessness that some have about our educational system. One segment of Waiting for Superman illustrates American self-confidence through an image of kids doing daredevil bike stunts, and then crashing. This shows that while our students seem to have confidence, they do not have the skills to actually succeed. As a nation we rank behind more than 20 other developed countries when it comes to teaching math and science. Our own deep probing into our educational system has repeatedly revealed serious problems; yet, perhaps we did need such a documentary to bring it back to the forefront of people’s thoughts. Certainly, Waiting for Superman has served as a stark reminder of just how bad our educational system has become, and just how ineffective most of our efforts at improving it have been.

The American educational system has reached a turning point, a time when things seem at their most dire, and yet some simply sit idly by “Waiting for Superman.” What America needs is to view this film as a call to action, where each of us is called upon to be Superman, or at least to have a hand in saving our educational system, perhaps without the flashy heroics and cape. Rather than waiting, every educator, educational leader, government official, parent, and citizen needs to educate themselves about the problems that exist in our educational system. Each of us needs to understand the deficiencies in our educational system, and stop placing blame. Rather, we must come together with an understanding that “Superman” is not coming to save our children, and it is up to us to work together to find innovative ways to rise to the challenge of fixing our educational system. The future must be planned for now! It certainly will not be an overnight process; however, by taking steps one at a time, an enormous amount of ground can be covered in the coming years.

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

Energizing the collaborative classroom

How tech tools can help teachers peak into the thinking and learning of even their shyest students.

By Dr. Sheryl Abshire

I am in my 41st year in education, and I’ve spent the last 19 years as a CTO, so I have seen the evolution of educational technology. When I started teaching in 1973, the exciting new technology was a cassette recorder. Since then, I’ve seen ed-tech trends come and go. Right now, a noteworthy trend around the country—that I think is a long time coming—is the increased emphasis on using technology to individualize and personalize learning.

It’s a lot of work to do that. One of the things that has been particularly helpful in our school district has been pairing students up and having them work in teams to collaborate, cooperate, innovate, and create. Managing a collaborative classroom is hard work for a teacher who has 25 to 30 students. She’s trying to monitor these groups, she’s trying to pull students out and individualize, she’s trying to get her finger on the pulse of learning so she can direct, redirect, and help students feel confident.

We were fortunate to pilot the very first Flexcat systems. We had input into the development and design of the system, which includes a microphone that a teacher wears on a lanyard and pods that let her listen to and talk to small groups around the room. What we have seen is that this system gives teachers the ability to manage an active and engaged classroom in a way that was heretofore impossible.

Teachers can monitor groups in real time, interject feedback in real time, and focus groups that need to get back on the rails. Students are keenly aware that the teacher is monitoring them, so we’ve seen an increase in focused learning in these groups. Students are much less distracted and more productive, and the work in these collaborative groups is much richer. And it’s reduced the time it takes to get and stay on task. We have found that to be a real game-changer for education in our classrooms.

Shy students shut down in a large group. They don’t have the confidence to talk in front of 30 students, but they’re much more confident in front of four or five. Using this tool, a teacher can draw out that shy student from across the room.

Teachers aren’t comfortable with a new tool or strategy unless they’ve used it. For more then 30 years, there’s been this constant nagging conversation about how technology is something that you have to add on to what you’re doing. That’s a myth. Technology doesn’t add on; it’s a tool. When I was a teacher and they gave me a blackboard, it was a tool. If an activity requires collaboration, and we have a tool that makes that collaboration more effective, you can bet that we’re going to expose our teacher to that tool.

Our technology center introduces teachers to tried and true tools. We use the Flexcat in PD as teachers develop projects, brainstorm, and reflect. This lets them see the tool in action and see how it will work in their own classroom. We do a lot of collaborative work in our PD, and teachers use the system and say, “What is that? I need that.” We then train the teachers to use the system and it becomes embedded in practice. Teachers understand how it works and how it strengthens instruction.

We now have Flexcats in some but not all of our classrooms. Our schools and teachers are working towards a full deployment because they see the benefits. Teachers are writing grants and being very creative when it comes to funding. When they get the tool, they are fired up and ready to go. The work that we do in the technology department is to make sure that when they do get started, every tool is connected to student learning…every single thing.

Collaboration and cooperative learning are not new strategies in the classroom. When I began teaching 41 years ago, we were using these techniques. There has been an ebb and flow in pedagogical approaches, but it comes down to this: Individualized learning is the strongest learning, and in cooperative groups, you get to that quicker. In a group of three, you can see personalized learning happen. And with the Flexcat, I’ve seen and heard children coach each other, teach each other, learn from each other. It’s fascinating to me to have a tool that allows teachers to peek into the thinking and learning of children, because if we can do that, we are on the road to true personalized learning.

___

Dr. Sheryl Abshire is the Chief Technology Officer for the Calcasieu Parish Public Schools in Louisiana. She has worked as a school principal, K-5 teacher, library/media specialist, classroom teacher, assistant professor at Lamar University, and as an adjunct professor at McNeese State University & Louisiana Tech University. She is a past chair of CoSN, the present Chair of the CoSN Policy Committee, and the past President of the Louisiana Association of Computer Using Educators. She also served on the FCC Universal Services Administrative Corporation Board representing our nation’s K-12 schools and libraries.

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

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

Senator Elizabeth Warren criticizes education department over student loans

Senator Elizabeth Warren has written a blistering letter to the Department of Education’s acting Education Secretary John King regarding how the department handles student loan fraud.

In the letter, Warren accuses the department of not having a proper handle on student loan contractors, and specifically cites its relationship with Navient, formerly known as Sallie Mae.

In 2014, the Department of Education and Navient reached a settlement of $100 million due to Navient’s role in violating a federal law that pinches interest rates at 6% for servicemembers.

Warren’s issue isn’t necessarily with the settlement, it’s that the department has failed to oversee its relationship with Navient.

As the company holds millions of student loans, the department’s relationship with Navient hasn’t been impacted even as the company was found to have broken the law.

Moving forward, Warren not only wants the department to reassess its position with Navient, but wants to know why the company hasn’t been penalized further.

To put some fears to rest, the department launched an internal investigation into Navient’s loan practices and found that a small percentage of those who borrowed were not receiving the federally mandated rate.

Warren notes the Department of Education’s Inspector General revealed that the department’s internal investigation into Navient was flawed and erroneous.

Towards the end of the letter, Warren writes that the findings of an independent review of the department’s handling of student aid are that companies that are responsible for supervising student loan debt receive protection from the Department of Education when they break the law.

As students and former students grapple with how to pay back student loans and are harassed by the likes of companies like Navient, the information presented in Warren’s letter is damaging and sad.

If the Department of Education is indeed offering protection to companies that break the law, and are failing to properly shelter students from these organizations, it proves why so many students have little faith in college affordability and the government’s role in helping them.

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

6 Fun Careers To Keep Students Excited about School

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest post by Anita Ginsburg

Some kids love school, where others struggle a bit more to find excitement and motivation. With a vast and varied career world, one of the best ways to keep kids interested and excited about school is to talk to them about some of the fun careers waiting for them when they finish.

Animator

For the artistic minded creative student the idea of drawing and creating for a living will likely get them excited. If you have a student that seems to spend more time doodling in the margins of their papers than taking notes, take the time to talk with them about enhancing their skills and becoming an animator. They could be working for their favorite tv show, software company, or publisher.

Event Planner

To the social kid that likes to plan parties, talk with them about considering a career in event planning. Whether they enter the wedding business, high end parties, kids events, or something else, they could make a career of planning parties for the rest of their lives.

Meteorologist

Many kids are fascinated with how the world around them works. Talk to your students about the weather and the many fun science based careers. One of the easiest to get kids excited about is meteorology because it is quick and easy to take them outside for a day and explore how the weather around us works.

Mechanical Engineer

To the kid that likes to tinker with objects and loves to figure out how things work, a career in mechanical engineering may be exactly what they are looking for. Encourage students that may have a knack for engineering based careers to embrace their desire to figure out how things work and practice with things such as models, puzzles and logic games. They should be excited about the many career options available with an engineering management master’s degree. 

Toy Designer

Most kids love to play with toys, so the idea of coming up with ideas and designing them as they grow is a dream come true. Encourage students to think about the toys they like to play with and the kinds they wish they had. They may just design the next big thing.

Zoologist

For all the animal lovers, a career in zoology may be just perfect. Zoologists work directly with the animals, as well as in conservation and educational settings. Visit the zoo with your students and let them meet with zoologists to find out more about this exciting career.

Even the most studious of kids will have times that they struggle to stay focused and thrilled about their studies. It can be very challenging to keep kids excited and working hard throughout school, but giving them something to motivate them through the tough times can be exactly what they need.

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

How should we measure the size of a university’s endowment?

Sarah Waldeck, Seton Hall University

Congress is rattling its saber at colleges and universities with endowments worth U$1 billion or more. Committees from the House and Senate have sent a joint letter to 56 private colleges and universities, asking for comprehensive information about endowment spending and management policies.

Thomas W. Reed, representative for New York’s 23rd Congressional District, is talking about legislation that would require colleges and universities with endowments of $1 billion or more to spend 25 percent of their endowment earnings on financial aid or forfeit their tax-exempt status.

But what is so significant about the $1 billion mark? Are all endowments with $1 billion so huge that Congress should treat them differently than endowments with less than $1 billion? And are all endowments less than $1 billion so small that Congress should ignore them?

From my perspective as a professor who has studied endowments, the only real significance of $1 billion is that it shocks the public because it sounds like so much money.

What really matters is how much buying power a school needs and how much buying power an endowment has. The bigger a school’s budget, the more endowment is necessary. To figure out which colleges and universities have large endowments, you have to consider a school’s expenses.

How do endowments work?

An endowment is like a savings account that exists to support college or university operations. The assets in an endowment usually come from donations. The funds in an endowment are invested; each year a school spends a portion of these returns and then puts the remainder back into the endowment.

In good financial times, an endowment allows a school to spend more on priorities like financial aid, research budgets or professor salaries. In bad financial times, an endowment acts like a rainy day fund to ensure that schools will not have to dramatically reduce spending in important areas.

Because an endowment’s primary purpose is to support institutional operations, the strength of a $1 billion endowment is relative to the size of an institution’s expenses.

How does an endowment work?
Philip Taylor, CC BY-SA

To illustrate, I want to take a closer look at three of the schools that received the congressional request for information because they have endowments of $1 billion or more. In the context of this discussion, there’s nothing particularly special about these three schools except that they demonstrate why expenses are relevant to endowment size.

Each year, the National Association of College and University Business Officers ranks endowments by their absolute value. In 2015, Harvard was at the top of the heap with an eye-popping $36.4 billion endowment. Vanderbilt University was in 23rd place, with $4.1 billion. Grinnell College was considerably farther back, coming in 50th with an endowment of almost $1.8 billion.

Now let’s add a fourth school to the mix: Colgate University. As before, in the context of this discussion there’s nothing special about Colgate except that it helps illustrate why endowments and expenses need to be considered simultaneously.

When measured only by absolute endowment value, Colgate is way behind Harvard, Vanderbilt and Grinnell. Colgate comes in 103rd place, with an $892 million endowment. And Colgate was spared the congressional letter because its endowment did not exceed the $1 billion threshold.

Expenses matter

Now consider these same schools, this time in light of both absolute endowment value and all expenses – the costs incurred to fulfill the school’s educational mission, to administer the institution and to fundraise. Unsurprisingly, these four schools have wildly different expenses. Harvard and Vanderbilt are large research universities, while Grinnell and Colgate are small liberal arts colleges.

In 2013 (the most recent year for which data is readily available), Harvard had expenses of $4.4 billion; Vanderbilt, $3.8 billion; Grinnell, $97.6 million; and Colgate, $172.2 million. There’s been a lot of discussion about whether colleges and universities are doing enough to control costs. But to measure the strength of an endowment, we can assume that current institutional expenses are representative of future institutional expenses.

An endowment helps fund scholarships and research budgets.
kylebaker, CC BY-NC-SA

Grinnell’s endowment is so enormous that it can pay for a whopping 18 years of expenses, until today’s infants are ready to matriculate. Harvard’s endowment is large enough to cover eight years. And Colgate – which does not exceed the $1 billion threshold – can pay for five years.

But Vanderbilt, with its $4.1 billion endowment, cannot cover even two years’ worth of expenses.

Some academics have argued that endowments are excessively large once the endowment can cover more than two years of expenses. Others have suggested that an endowment is much bigger than a school needs when it can pay for more than five years of expenses.

At some point, an endowment may become vastly larger than what a college or university needs to ensure its success. No school really needs an endowment that is large enough to cover a half-decade or more of expenses. But to determine whether an endowment is so large that it warrants different treatment than others, Congress must consider the endowment in relation to institutional costs. It cannot simply use $1 billion as some kind of magical threshold.

Modifying endowment tax policy

Favorable tax policy is one of the reasons that endowments can accumulate $1 billion or that a school can have an endowment large enough to cover 18 years of expenses. The government collects fewer tax dollars than it otherwise would because donations to endowments qualify for the charitable deduction, and endowments do not have to pay taxes on their investment returns.

In my view, schools like Harvard and Grinnell are going to fight tooth and nail to hang on to this preferential tax treatment. But when a college or university has an endowment that is large enough to cover its expenses for years and years into the future, I believe lawmakers should conclude that the forgone tax dollars would be better spent elsewhere. At some point, an endowment has such ample funds that it no longer needs government subsidy. This means goodbye to tax-free investment returns and to the charitable deduction.

Eliminating the charitable deduction may mean that donors would give less, but they would not stop giving altogether. As I’ve described elsewhere, research has shown that the charitable deduction is only one of the reasons that donors give to colleges and universities. Some donors feel a responsibility to “give back” to their alma matter. Others desire the social status and public recognition that giving can provide, or want to influence institutional policy. Some people give simply because it makes them feel good. For many donors, a combination of all these factors motivates them to give.

But even if eliminating the charitable deduction means that some donors would choose to direct their giving elsewhere, chances are that the recipient organization would need the donation more than a school with a very large endowment.

Although schools are unlikely to see it this way, less preferential tax treatment would actually be a sign of success: it means that donors have been so generous and the endowment has been so well-managed that the school now requires less public assistance than others do.

So, legislators should stop fixating on the $1 billion mark and instead evaluate endowments in their larger institutional context.

Before Congress singles out certain endowments for less preferential tax treatment, it needs to distinguish between endowments that sound obscenely large and those that actually are.

The Conversation

Sarah Waldeck, Professor of Law, Seton Hall University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

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

Do school vouchers improve results? It depends on what we ask

Joshua Cowen, Michigan State University

A set of reports on Louisiana’s statewide school voucher program recently revealed a number of important features of that program’s operation and overall performance.

The most startling of these reports indicated that students who used school vouchers performed much worse on standardized tests than those who remained in traditional public schools.

This result echoes evidence presented last month from a separate team of scholars, who found negative impacts after one year of voucher use in Louisiana. The latest study not only confirmed that finding, but showed the pattern persisting – albeit less severely – after two years of voucher use as well.

School vouchers provide publicly funded tuition – typically for low-income families – to attend private schools. And these reports provide the first evidence that participating in such a system may harm kids’ academic achievement, at least in math.

As a researcher who studies both vouchers and other forms of school choice such as charter schools (independently operated public schools) I believe the new Louisiana studies are important to longstanding debates over the extent to which such choice enhances academic outcomes.

It may be tempting to use this news as an argument against vouchers, especially because the evidence is drawn from the most sophisticated research tools available to scholars who study these programs. However, it should be stressed that test scores provide only one indicator of program success or failure.

Impact of vouchers

The motivation for school voucher programs dates back to the 1950s, when the economist Milton Friedman began to argue that parents should have opportunities to choose between different providers of education for their children.

School vouchers provide publicly funded tuition – typically for low-income families – to attend private schools.
401(K) 2012, CC BY-SA

The first school voucher program began in 1990 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Over the years since, especially in the last decade, voucher or voucher-like systems have spread to 24 states, all of which differ individually on some key details such as the number of children who will be eligible for participation and the maximum amount of tuition available to these students.

In Louisiana, policymakers introduced vouchers in 2008 in New Orleans as part of a series of reforms following Hurricane Katrina’s devastation of the city and the city’s school system. In 2012, vouchers became available statewide.

As with many public programs, policymakers turn to researchers to help determine how well school vouchers work. This is true not only in Louisiana, but elsewhere as well.

And part of what makes the Louisiana results so newsworthy – but also why voucher critics should pause before leaning too heavily on the latest reports – is that many of these studies conducted in other locations, such as Charlotte, Milwaukee, Washington, D.C. and New York City, for example, found the opposite pattern. In these studies, students who used vouchers to attend private school tended to have higher test scores as a result.

The answers are not that simple

The question is whether test scores are the only way to judge schools and school performance.

It is true that public schools have to test their students, so using a similar metric is a reasonable, relative comparison between public and private schools. But test scores, while important, do not necessarily provide an absolute appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of voucher programs in a large education system.

What is the best way to judge schools’ performance?
woodleywonderworks, CC BY

First, we know from earlier studies that student attainment levels – high school graduation or enrollment in post-secondary education – may be higher among voucher users even when test score differences between them and their public school counterparts are nonexistent.

Whether this means that private schools are especially good at preparing kids to graduate and attend college or that they simply prioritize such success more than other outcomes is still unclear. But we see similar patterns in charter schools too: a number of studies have shown that charter school students have a higher chance of high school graduation or college enrollment even when their test scores do not differ on average from their traditional public school counterparts.

In the Louisiana context, the researchers also found more nuanced results when they posed a number of other questions.

When researchers examined, for example, whether competition from private schools pressed nearby public schools to improve performance, they found that the test scores of students in these competing schools did indeed increase, albeit modestly.

When they asked whether the declines in voucher users’ tests scores were present in noncognitive student outcomes (such as grit, self-esteem, and political tolerance), they found both public and private school students had similar levels on those indicators.

Each of these questions provides a different way of assessing the overall impact of the voucher program both on students who use them and on students in the surrounding communities as well.

Weighing other factors

More generally, it’s important to remember that voucher programs operate differently in different places.

In Louisiana, for example, one prominent explanation for the negative test scores is that heavy regulation of private providers keeps the best schools in that sector away from offering seats to voucher users. But in Wisconsin, we know that some regulations, such as requiring private schools to publicly report the academic performance of their voucher users, actually increased test scores.

Other state laws determine who’s eligible to use a voucher in the first place. In some states, vouchers exist expressly for kids with special academic needs; in others, low-income families are eligible as well.

Again, this implies that we have to be very careful. It is not as simple as taking evidence from one state and expecting the same results, good or bad, in another.

Little is known about teachers in schools that accept vouchers.
EarthFix, CC BY-NC

Apart from differences between states, there are other things to consider about the way voucher programs operate.

We know surprisingly little about teachers in schools that accept vouchers. State oversight of private school teachers is far less – in some places practically nonexistent – than for public school teachers.

Researchers are beginning, for example, to devote considerable effort to understanding who teaches in public charter schools. Answering that question in different voucher programs will help explain differences in students’ outcomes between private and public schools, both within and between different states.

Finally, we need to consider not only which students accept and benefit from a voucher, but also the extent to those who do attend private school – or any nontraditional alternative – are actually able to do so over the long term.

The evidence we have from places like Milwaukee and Washington, D.C. suggests substantial turnover in voucher programs, with minority students and students with the lowest test scores leaving private schools.

All of this is to say that when it comes to educating kids, what we know about school vouchers depends on what we ask. And what we ask should be informed not only by traditional academic outcomes, such as test scores, but also by a new understanding of the many different ways that schools can contribute to student success.

The Conversation

Joshua Cowen, Associate Professor of Educational Policy, Michigan State University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts