Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

The Four Dimensions of a Positive School Culture

As today’s school leaders seek to acquire the skills and knowledge that are necessary for effectiveness in current educational institutions, they should realize that there are no simple answers or shortcuts to achieving leadership excellence. The most important task is to find the right combination of qualities and characteristics that will consistently provide the leader with the skills and knowledge required to succeed on a regular basis. To that end, there are four dimensions that are essential to creating a positive school culture – optimism, respect, trust and intentionality.

  1. Optimism

Optimism is the belief that people have untapped potential for growth and development. The optimistic leader is an individual who is capable of reframing problematic situations as opportunities and considering the impossible to be merely difficult. School staff are pushed towards success by a leader who is both encouraging and enthusiastic, qualities that are vital for effective leadership. When an administrator is enthusiastic and positive, spirit becomes contagious and spreads. Attitude is contagious! When leadership remains positive at all times and is constantly communicating visions for the school that are uplifting and visionary, they are building a positive school environment.

Optimism does not, however, mean that negative behaviors aren’t dealt with. Administrators should never be afraid to confront negative issues, but rather should face them head on and attempt to turn negative attitudes and behaviors into positive ones. This is the core of optimistic school leadership. One good rule to implement is “Praise in public, constructive criticism in private.” This allows leaders to continue to pursue optimistic leadership while confronting and engaging problems in a constructive and productive way. It is undeniable optimism contributes tremendously to increase members’ desire to work while assuring excellence and success.

  1. Respect

Respect is the recognition that every person is an individual of worth. The value of respect in the area of leadership is basic to organizational effectiveness. It denotes the simple belief that people have worth and value and should therefore be treated as such. When respect is a central pillar to school culture, it represents school leadership recognizing the fact that all individuals are valuable and therefore must be respected. This creates not only an inviting and inclusive school culture, but also fosters diversity and offers every individual within the school setting the opportunity to flourish. so as to create an inviting and inclusive workplace where diversity is seen as the norm and every individual has an opportunity to flourish. Respect is commonly identified as a critical element of overall leadership effectiveness. When a school principal shows respect for his or her staff, a positive atmosphere is created that brings about excellence and satisfaction within the school. Respect is absolutely pivotal to the successful acquisition of effective leadership.

  1. Trust

Trust is the possession of confidence in the abilities, integrity, and responsibilities of ourselves and others. Trust is a crucial component of effective leadership. Trust nurtures all of the other dimensions of effective leadership. Trust is an important value, and it contributes directly to the success of an organization. On the other hand, lack of trust is a barrier to cohesive teamwork and efforts. Trust is at the heart of any functioning cohesive team. In its absence, teamwork is all but impossible. Therefore, building trust is quite a critical element that any successful leader should have.

  1. Intention

Intention is a decision to purposely act in a certain way so as to achieve and carry out a set goal. It is having knowledge of what we intend to bring about as well as how we intend it to happen, thus giving clarity and direction to our work. Intentionality is the ability of individuals to intertwine their inner consciousness and perceptions with their actions. It is simply having an end in sight. The ability to be purposeful and focused is a very significant aspect of building a positive school culture. Leaders of effective schools are more distinctly purposeful in their vision and mission than are the leaders of less effective schools. Thus the leaders of effective schools are more likely to believe strongly in the aspect of intentionality than the less effective school leaders. Everything that an administrator does must be with clear intent. If you don’t know where you’re going you’re never going to get there. As a leader it is critical that everything is done with purpose. As with the other characteristics, intentionality is a key element that school leaders should adhere to in their desire to bring about effectiveness, long-lasting change, and excellence in their schools through a positive school culture.

These four dimensions of a positive school aim to include all interested stakeholders in the journey towards student success. The messages of optimism, respect, trust and intentionality are sometimes transmitted by interpersonal action, but are mostly disseminated through the institution’s policies, programs, practices, and physical environments.

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

6 Ingenious Ways Activists Are Transforming K-12 Education

Activism when it comes to public K-12 education is flourishing. Laws regarding K-12 education are no longer simply handed down and enforced without pushback – student, parents, teachers and outside activists have a larger voice than ever when it comes to the decisions impacting the future of their public schools.

After some thought, I came up with the six most impactful things (in no particular order) that education activists have done in the past few years when it comes to K-12 education:

1. Student-driven change. When it comes to the paths of their educations, K-12 public school students are standing up for their rights more than ever before and empowering positive changes in their learning experiences. In April, over 100 Chicago Public Schools students made news when they skipped their standardized testing to protest the tests instead. Speaking to the press, one CPS student said that the protest was designed to draw attention to the fact that “standardized testing should not decide the future of our schools and students.”

Student-led zombie flash mobs took place in front of the Philadelphia School District headquarters to oppose the closing of public schools in the city. Hordes of students in other cities like Denver, Providence and Philadelphia followed suit and spoke out against the advance of high-stakes testing and school closing. They rallied together and marched relentlessly to prove their strong dislike against standardized testing – and the belief the effects are not a true measure of success in the real world. While there may have been some parental encouragement behind the scenes, these students appeared to act alone in their pursuit of a better public school learning experience.

2. Parents as reformers. In California, the parent-led “trigger movement” made waves as parents demanded more from failing public schools. Dessert Springs Elementary School in Adelanto is an example of a school that was transformed from a consistently failing school (students had reading scores in the bottom 10 percent of the state) to a public charter that better served its student body – all because parents took a stand and demanded the change.

The Lone Star State had some big news this year when a coalition led by parents was successful in petitioning the state to reduce by two-thirds the number of tests required to graduate high school. In 2011, the state required at least 15 high-stakes tests on students prior to earning their diploma. Two years of hard work later, the Texas legislature passed an education bill reducing the number of tests to five.

3. Activists stepping up. During 2013, civil rights advocates found an audience with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. In January, these public-school supporters gathered in DC to discuss their grievances to the Department of Education. The Journey for Justice came as Chicago was on the cusp of closing around 50 schools, and New York and Philadelphia had voted to close more than 20 each.

These activists had every right to speak up – research shows that the closing of public schools in urban areas has the biggest negative effect on Latino and Black students. Mass school closures often shake up communicates and disrupt children’s learning, among other effects on displaced students. Perhaps the biggest public school activism success story for 2013 was the teacher union-led Scrap the Map in Seattle. After months of protesting Washington’s mandatory MAP standardized testing at Garfield High School, a decision was made to make the test optional for students throughout the state. In 2013, public school activists came out en masse and took to their local, state and federal legislators to protest detrimental closings and other public school legislation.

4. Pushing for increased funding. In 2013, activists were vocal about the need for stronger programs in science, technology, engineering and math. Thankfully, President Obama listened. His 2014 budget includes $3.1 billion in investments in federal STEM programs – an increase of nearly 7 percent over the budget of just two years ago. Of that total, $80 million is intended to recruit 100,000 well-qualified educators and another $35 million is earmarked for the launch of a pilot STEM Master Teacher Corps. The rest of the money will go to supporting undergraduate STEM education programs and investment in breakthrough research on the way STEM subjects are best taught to modern learners. At the urging of advisors and activists, the president realized that demand for STEM-related jobs is there and the money allocated to STEM learning initiatives will better prepare today’s students for the worldwide workforce.

5. Supporting Race to the Top. Over the last 2 years, education activists have continued to support the president’s incentive-based Race to the Top program. Race to the Top was launched in 2012, and it rewards states that are willing to reform their education models to best adapt to modern student learning needs. The Race to the Top initiative has raised standards for learning to reflect a push toward college and career readiness. Each year, the program gives even more in federal funding to states that prepare plans for reforming their student offerings and 2013 was a big year for it.

To date, the program has allocated more than $4 billion among 19 states that have shared well-developed plans to improve learning standards, teacher effectiveness and struggling schools. The states that have been granted the funds represent 42 percent of all low-income students in the nation – making the initiative an effective way to close the achievement gap and equalize funding in areas where schools may struggle based on their geographical location.

6. Lobbying for college affordability. College affordability activists urged the president to make earning a college education more affordable for all Americans and convinced him that this will impact future K-12 classrooms. In August 2013, the President announced plans to assign a ratings system to colleges by the 2015 school year that takes items like tuition, graduation rate, debt and earnings ratios of graduates and percentage of low-income students who attend into consideration. The grand plan? To base the amount of federal financial aid colleges receive on the rankings system by 2018.

The overall principle is not to call out colleges but rather to make them more accountable to students, and to ensure that every American with college degree aspirations has the actual means to make it happen. Long term, this will impact the quality of teachers in the classrooms, particularly in urban settings where research has shown that the most effective teachers are generally those who come from the same background. More lower-income college students earning degrees will have a positive impact on the entire education system and the college scorecard initiative is a step in that direction.

What would you add to my list? Don’t forget to leave a comment.

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

School Security: Just Smoke and Mirrors?

In theory, parents and educators would do anything to keep students safe, whether those students are pre-Kindergartners or wrapping up a college career. Nothing is too outlandish or over-the-top when it comes to protecting our kids and young adults. Metal detectors, security cameras, more police presence in school hallways, gated campuses – they all work toward the end goal of sheltering students and their educators and protecting the most vulnerable of our citizens.

Emotions aside though – how much does school security really increase actual safety? And do school security efforts actually hinder the learning experience? It sounds good to taut the virtues of tighter policies on school campuses but is it all just empty rhetoric?

Recently the University of Kentucky came under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union for plans to install 2,000 security cameras on campus. Representatives at UK say the move is a response to the increasing randomness of school violence at all levels of the learning process and a way to better ensure student safety. The ACLU says it is a blatant violation of privacy.

I say it is money wasted because all the security cameras in the world would not have prevented the largest school tragedies of recent history, from Sandy Hook Elementary to the Virginia Tech massacre. Security cameras and other monitoring devices give us a false feeling of security and an actionable course when there are no answers to pointless questions.

While extreme, UK’s camera monitoring plans are in sync with what is happening in K-12 schools across the nation. In the 2009 – 2010 school year, 84 percent of high schools had security cameras for safety monitoring. Over half of all middle and elementary schools had them too, with 73 and 51 percent respectively. Despite this, the National Center for Education Statistics reports that the percentage of high schools with controlled access to school buildings during normal hours is lower than that of middle and elementary students. Though not expressly stated in these findings, it would seem that in the case of high schools, cameras are more of a way to catch rule-breakers after the fact than a way to prevent violence and other criminal activities.

Students are not the only ones who are the subjects of safeguards like surveillance cameras. Teachers, administrators and other staff are also vital when it comes to putting school safety into place – and in the case of teachers, they are on the front lines of what is going on with students. Limited access to K-12 campuses is meant to protect outsiders from harming the many people who are supposed to be there. But what about student-versus-student violence, or student-versus-teacher physical altercations? In 2011, 12 percent of high schoolers reported being in a physical fight at school that year. Nearly 6 percent reported carrying a weapon, like a gun or knife, onto school property in the month preceding the survey. By the time a security camera picks up on the fact that a student has a knife or gun, is there really any timely way to prevent the inevitable.

Given the fact that state spending per student is lower than at the start of the recession, how much should schools shell out in the way of security costs? Perhaps the best investment we can make to safeguard our students and educators is in personal vigilance. Perhaps less reliance on so-called safety measures would lead to higher alertness.

What role should school security play on K-12 campuses, and should it be a financial priority?

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership

3 Reasons Educators Are Opting for the Distributed Leadership Style

Nowadays, it is becoming more popular in schools for leadership duties to be spread out among educators, rather than concentrated in the hands of a few. This concept is known as distributed leadership, and it’s worth knowing why this leadership style has become the style of choice for some schools and districts.

For one, the “charismatic hero” leadership style associated with transformational leadership can be hit or miss. Furthermore, distributed leadership allows school leaders to handle tasks of much greater complexity. After all, it is not the heroic leader who makes an organization function well, but rather the “mundane,” everyday activities that matter.

Aside from that, there are a few more reasons that a school might adopt a distributed leadership style. Consider that:

1. Distributed leadership is well within the broader policy spectrum for public services.
In a government’s emerging model for public services, we see three major types of leadership that the government favors. These are hierarchy, market, and network. Now, if we overlay the school setup on the government model, then we see where the schools’ “capability and capacity” fits in relation to the network regime of governance, where distributed leadership is positioned.

Distributed leadership can therefore be said to be similar to the broader policy process, since government will construct a goal that would require both school actors and non-school actors to distribute their efforts between organizations and/or within organizations to achieve this end. It also provides a cultural reference to the official structural similarities of two traditionally separate organizations.

2. Distributed leadership promotes collaboration between organizations. Distributed leadership fits well with the merging or networking of work-based activities according to current trends on inter-agency working in schools; with the joint production of personalized needs and solutions; and finally with the changing workforce . All these efforts seek to merge the professional cultures of different groups.

With the above in mind, the emergence of distributed leadership is not only a reaction to the recent policy shifts; it also reflects changes in contemporary culture. Organizations can no longer control their workers through the so-called rational or bureaucratic structures of the past. Those out-of-date methods inhibit the kind of independent work that relies on solidarity, respect, or mutual trust, since all they end up doing is bringing about authority conflicts.

3. Distributed leadership is a result of changing attitudes toward organizational culture.

The present focus on distributed leadership is not so much related to the cultural turn toward taking emotions into account, like transformational leadership, but is more of an example of management theory resonating with a contemporary shift toward the weakening of traditional logic. Organized social structure, as a result, has given way to a “network culture.”

These new changes also indicate a change in the knowledge economy. We have begun to see a form of “socialism” in education, proven by the use of terms such as “universal education” to symbolize the trend toward viewing education as something other than a market commodity in this age. Governments around the world are now keen to set up a policy that ensures that literacy is achieved by all, with no regard to social status. The role of the school leader is therefore shifting from economic management to social management.

Distributed leadership is emerging as an alternative to the hierarchy we have seen in organizations in the past. What do you think are some reasons for the growing popularity of this leadership style? Leave your comments in the section below.

References

Distributed leadership is a theory of leadership that was developed by Peter Gronn, and has been written about by many other scholars since then. To read more of his work on distributed leadership and other topics, click here to visit his Amazon.com page.

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

5 Things You Should Know about the College Gender Gap

If you have been following education hot button issues for any length of time, you’ve likely read about the nationwide push to better encourage girls in areas like science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The thought is that by showing young women that these topics are just as appropriate for them as their male peers, more women will find lasting careers in these traditionally male-dominated fields.

I’m all for more women in the STEM workplace but with all this focus in one area, are educators neglecting an even larger gender gap issue?

Nationally, over 57 percent of college attendees are female when public and private school stats are combined. Female students have been consistently edging ahead of their male classmates since the late 1970s when the percentages flip-flopped. Aside from all-female schools, there are others that have marked disproportionate numbers. Pacific Oaks College in Pasadena has nearly 96 percent females in attendance, and the University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center in Memphis has over 93 percent. At Indiana University Northwest, located just outside Gary, 67 percent of the student population is female.

I’m glad women are becoming more and more educated, but the gender gap is problematic. Here are some things you should know about the college gender gap.

  1. The college gender gap is not an accident.

There are a few reasons why more young women than men are choosing a college education. The first is that there are more trades that do not require a college degree that appeal to men. The second is that economically speaking, women earn a better living with a college degree than without one in comparison to men. Though there is still a wage gap (in 2012, women earned just 80.9 percent of the salaries of their male counterparts), women see the value their earning potential can gain from achieving a college diploma.

I hear people asking this question all the time: What are K-12 educators doing wrong when it comes to preparing young women for STEM careers? It’s a valid one.

But based on the statistics I’ve listed here, shouldn’t we also be asking this question: What are K-12 educators doing when it comes to preparing young men for a college education?

  1. This can lead to financial trade-offs for men down the line.

It all comes down to the weight we assign to the worth of a college education. If a diploma is simply a way to earn more money over a lifetime, then perhaps men are doing the intelligent thing by launching into the workforce early and without student loan debt. That logic is flawed, however, when taking into account the fact that blue-collar jobs are declining in favor of white-collar ones. A young man making a lifelong career decision today simply cannot predict what educational demands will be placed on his field in another 10, 20 or 30 years.

  1. The educational disparity that results is bad for marriage.

Money aside, there are other pitfalls in a disproportionate number of men going to college. Statistics show that marriages where the couples have differing education levels more often end in divorce than couples with the same educational achievements. And even before divorce is an option, women who set college educational goals may not want to settle for men with less motivation – at least when it comes to academics. If this trend continues, social dynamics may be impacted.

  1. The path to the college gender gap begins before college.

According to Dr. Leonard Sax, too many boys are struggling in schools today. Sax proposes that five factors are responsible for the decline in school performance among boys: video games, prescription drugs, endocrine disruptors, devaluation of masculinity in popular culture, and teaching methods.  Sax and many others believe that video games disengage boys from real-world pursuits. Mind-numbing keyboards and flashing images have a seductive effect on the brain.  Medication for ADHD may be damaging motivational centers in boy’s brains, and the harmful effects of estrogens from food and plastic containers are upsetting the balance of boys’ endocrine systems.  The athletic, scholarly male TV heroes of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s have been replaced with Bart Simpson. These and other shifts in modern culture are responsible for devaluing traditional masculine strengths.  Additionally, Sax claims that the ways in which children are being educated today simply turn boys off from schooling.

Men who are completing a four year degree take longer than women to do so, and tend to socialize more in college, study less than women, and have poorer grades. The difference in male-female college/university enrollment reflects performance differences that are evident well before college attendance.

  1. Minority men fare even worse with this trend.

The problem escalates when race is taken into account.  Recently, the Black Star Project published findings that just 10 percent of eighth-grade Black boys in the U.S. are considered “proficient” in reading. In urban areas like Chicago and Detroit, that number was even lower. By contrast, the 2013 National Assessment of Education Progress found that 46 percent of white students are adequate readers by eighth grade, and 17 percent of Black students as a whole are too. The achievement gap between the two races is startling, but the difference between the NAEP report on Black students as a whole and the Black Star findings of just Black boys is troubling too. It is not simply Black children in general who appear to be failing in the basics – like literacy; it is the boys.

We must ask ourselves why boys and young men seem to be falling behind academically.  More importantly, what steps need to be taken in order to reverse this trend?

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

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

6 Reasons Why You Should Become a Transformational Leader

A transformational school leader ensures students focus on their studies by being considerate of individuality, being charismatic in influencing them, and inspiring them. Instead of using set problem-solving techniques, he or she involves students and teachers to come up with solutions to problems as they arise. Transformational leaders in a school setting quickly identify areas in need of improvement, seeking out-of-the-box solutions. The leader identifies cynicism and intentions to quit among teachers, through consultation and individualized consideration. Realigning their values and goals to resonate with those of the school, the leader reassures teachers that they are needed and valued.

Becoming a transformational leader is not that easy, though. Transformational leadership is all about perception. It only works if it is able to influence the core—the follower’s feelings. Charismatic and inspiring, transformational leaders are well versed the power of language and imagery. “Transformational characteristics” are included in training courses, but the personal effort of the leader determines whether transformational leadership is achievable.

Here are some reasons for you to consider adopting a transformational leadership style:

  1. Transformational leadership is so crucial that organizations often suffer without it. The positive connection between transformational leadership and job characteristics is so strong, we should almost expect an opposite result in organizations that do not employ it. When switching to a transformational style of leadership, a principal or dean must understand how he or she is to influence task perception. The shaping of daily tasks in a transformational manner helps foster positive perceptions among followers.
  2. Transformational leadership makes work meaningful. Meta-analytic research has produced evidence of a positive relationship between transformational leadership and work-related results. These findings demonstrate that transformational leaders make work meaningful by providing autonomy. Followers of transformational leaders feel strongly that their work is esteemed and self-congruent.
  3. Transformational leadership makes workers feel more empowered. Transformational leadership encourages a feeling of empowerment in all followers. There is an inverse relationship between cynicism and transformational leadership, because persons under a highly transformational leader are usually intellectually stimulated and constantly challenged to be open-minded. Various studies have demonstrated relationships between follower empowerment and job satisfaction, decreased anger and frustration, and a sense of organizational attachment.
  4. Transformational leadership allows workers to feel connected to their organization. Transformational leaders motivate by increasing self-efficacy in followers, by facilitating social identification within a group, and by linking organizational values to follower values. This allows followers to feel more determined in their work and augments their perceived empowerment.
  5. Transformational leadership makes workers want to stay around. While cynicism and intentions to quit are widely considered symptoms of employee negativity, initial research in organizational behaviors has considered them to be generalized traits. Recent studies found cynicism to be a specific construct; a reflection of the followers’ perception of the leader. Cynicism is a product of ineffective leadership and lack of participation and consultation in decision making. Intention to quit (ITQ) is another form of employee’s negative reaction to poor leadership. Factors that have been linked to ITQ include poor pay, and lack of job satisfaction and goal commitment. Employees are unlikely to have ITQ toward an organization where their need for efficacy is met in their respective job responsibilities. Highly resilient followers are more likely to adapt after setbacks at work, rather than leave the organization.
  1. Transformational leadership is universal. A study by Boehnke, Bontis, Distefano, and Distefano investigated the existence of universally consistent behaviors. They sampled 145 senior executives in two divisions of a global petroleum company and its subsidiaries around the world.  One of the major findings of the study was that the basic dimensions of leadership that produce extraordinary performance are universal, with little variation in the six different parts of the world sampled. However, some leadership differences were attributed to the different corporate cultures in the two company divisions.

In the final result, transformational leadership is identified as consistent with a clear majority of sampled behaviors, as provided in the executives’ descriptions of their version of exceptional organizational performance. Terms such as visioning, intellectual stimulation, team building, coaching, and inspiring behavior appeared in 68% or more of the responses. All those attributes refer to a transformational style of leadership.

It is intriguing to note that the only non-transformational characteristic in more than half of the reports was “recognizing and rewarding,” at 62%, which is an element of the transactional style of leadership. It is apparent that transformational leadership is widely accepted as an exceptional leadership technique. It is applicable in all kinds of organizations, including the school setting. Whether you are a practicing leader or someone who aspires to become one, you would be well advised to add transformational leadership to your repertoire.

References

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Diversity, Equity, Matthew Lynch, Teachers

Ask An Expert: A Change in K-12 Teaching Education

Question: For 22 years I have been a elementary school principal in Minnesota. With each passing year I notice that our students are changing, as they gain more and more access to information prior to starting school. However, the teachers that we employ seem to be evolving at a slower pace. What can be done to better train our teachers? Lilith P.

Answer: 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.

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.

 

 

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

We cannot teach race without addressing what it means to be ‘white’

**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.**

Jennifer Harvey, Drake University

We have steeped ourselves in higher education today in a framework for understanding difference that insists we should “value diversity.” Even then, in terms of realizing a robust multiracial environment in colleges across the nation, we have a very long way to go.

We know higher education’s commitment to diversity is not mere window-dressing.

For instance, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), an independent corporation founded in 1895 that grants accreditation to post-secondary educational institutions in 19 states, requires a commitment to diversity.

But the skyrocketing costs of college, which make access difficult for the more economically marginalized, and an incarceration crisis that sees young black men and women imprisoned at astronomical rates, are only two of many factors that create racialized outcomes when it comes to higher education.

Colleges and universities bear institutional responsibility for taking such racialized outcomes seriously (as the HLC accreditation processes insist). One small but important piece of such responsibility means considering how discussions of race take place in classrooms.

Some of the questions that arise in this discussion are: how can academics help students engage meaningfully in the public discussion now riveted on race and racial violence? What is missing in our current understanding of diversity? And is our current paradigm of diversity adequate for including challenging issues that get raised in regard to white racial identity?

These are important questions to ask, especially since events in Ferguson, Missouri last August that have been followed by numerous killings of African American men, women and children — first by the police and now by a 21-year-old white male in Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina.

As a professor of religion and ethics who writes extensively about the role of faith communities in challenging racial injustice, I’ve been grappling with these issues as they show up in my classroom for many years. How do we effectively teach the next generation of young people such that they are better prepared to make a desperately needed impact on the US racial climate?

White racial identity

When 70% of blacks cite problems with policing relative to race and only 17% of whites do the same, we, as academics, know that able teaching on racial difference is essential for students.

But the very way in which diversity is framed creates a serious logjam when it comes to race in the college classroom. The premise of diversity is not merely that we are all different (and that students need to learn about that), but that our differences are goods to be celebrated and embraced.

We tout the innate value of diversity for college life: citing the importance of learning in diverse environments to equip our students to navigate a pluralistic world.

But there’s a major gap that goes unaddressed in this framing.

The particular difference “white” racial identity and experience represents in the context of US history and current climate makes it hard to “celebrate” the “goodness” of whiteness.

How far is white racial identity considered in discussions?
greg lilly, CC BY-NC

Students know this. I regularly help my students explore the failure of the diversity paradigm by asking them whether a group of black students carrying signs that read “Black is beautiful” is the equivalent of a group of white students carrying signs that read “White is beautiful.” They quickly shake their heads and tell me “no.”

“Why not?” I ask. “Shouldn’t valuing diversity include all diversity? If we can’t equally celebrate both of these scenes, then what are missing?”

They typically can’t explain why these two scenes are not the same. But, they know they are different. And understanding the reasons the scenes are different becomes a critical starting point for us to think about the historical, ethical and moral challenges of “whiteness” in the United States.

Inadequate framing of race

I believe our “diversity” paradigm is failing because it does not give us the tools to unpack and explore this conundrum.

The need to ably teach matters of race difference and historical as well as contemporary racial realities in the US could hardly be more urgent. But our ability to engage, discuss and home in on “whiteness” is stymied by a paradigm that cannot help students understand the difference between the two scenes just described.

Such inadequate framing of race certainly does not help us engage white students in the room, for whom the conundrums evident in the difference between these two scenes are embedded in their actual racial identities as “white people.” (Ask students of color in the room to talk about their racial identity and most can do it. Ask white students to do it and you get an uncomfortable silence.)

So, the diversity paradigm needs something more that can help faculty and students alike directly engage the complexities “white” poses for thinking about race.

How to engage white students

Academics are recognizing this and finding different ways to address these challenges. At a recent gathering of the National Conference of Race and Ethnicity in American Higher Education (NCORE), several workshops focused on the distinct challenges of engaging white students on race.

Psychologists who study racial identity development have helped educators think about the ways racial identity is formed in response to racial environment.

Such studies explain a great deal about the reactions of white students to racial conversations. For example, if you are taught to genuinely believe in “equality” but experience “white privilege,” the high level of cognitive dissonance that it generates has to be first addressed. Only then can any effective teaching take place about race and racial injustice.

Through race theories and historical work, academics are enabling students to understand how race and racial identities are constructed. These tools help students see the many challenges of a white racial identity as well as that of black or Latino. This can be a potentially transformative education for students today.

Lean in to move forward

There’s an irony here, of course.

It’s people of color who are most negatively impacted by the racialized outcomes of higher education and the structural violence of our national landscape. Yet, the gap educators are starting to address puts greater focus on the study of “white.”

So, let me be clear. The point is not that academics believe white students should get even more resources and attention. The point here is that we are coming to recognize that our racial destinies are completely bound up together.

We need to lean in, and explicitly take up the challenges of whiteness if we are to produce teaching and learning that can adequately impact the lives of all, in this racially plural, white hierarchy that is the United States.

____________The Conversation

Jennifer Harvey is Professor of Religion at Drake University.

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

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

4 Types of Media That Schools Should Use to Tell Their Stories

Whether local, national, or social, each type of outlet serves a distinct purpose.

Guest post by Christopher Piehler

In the first part of this two-part series, I wrote that “Schools Should Shout Their Success Stories from the Rooftops.” This time around, I will take a look at the benefits of telling those stories in a variety of media outlets.

Local media is the best place to start. Whether your local news coverage comes from a massive daily newspaper and three TV stations or just a website run out of someone’s spare room, outlets that focus on your community are vital to telling your story to the people whose votes can change how you do your job. Yes, it’s nice for people in your immediate area to know about the great teaching and learning that happens every day at your school. But on a more practical note, the local media can be a crucial ally to a district that is presenting a bond measure to the public. If you aren’t working with them to tell your story, you are leaving it up to them to hopefully “get it right”.

I recently spoke to a superintendent in a district that serves 32,000 residents, more than 50 percent of whom don’t have kids in the school system. When he introduced a bond measure in 2015, he started his outreach to those non-parent voters by building an ongoing relationship with the local media—which in his case consisted of one local news site. As a result of this and other efforts (which I’ll get to later), he succeeded in passing a $67.5 million bond. And now, when he wants to share his district’s challenges and successes with those non-parents, he knows he has a place where his voice will be heard.

National media can be a harder nut to crack, but it’s worth the effort. If there’s a glaring need in your district, the more people you ask for help, the better chance you have that someone will help. For example, a teacher I know was trying to crowdfund four classroom audio systems for her school. She was far short of her goal—and then The Rachael Ray Show found out about her quest and devotion to her students. The next thing she knew she was on TV, answering the door to a mailman who delivered the donated audio systems.

Of course, national media coverage is about more than just pointing out a need and getting free stuff. Having a positive story about your school or district told by a high-profile TV show, magazine, or newspaper puts a powerful seal of approval on the work that you’re doing for your students and community. It’s also a great morale-builder for teachers and staff. As a bonus, the fact that a local school was featured in the national media will often become its own local news story, with a heartwarming headline like “Celebrity chef Rachael Ray gives teacher an on-air technology gift.”

One tip about approaching national media outlets: The bigger the organization, the more likely it is to have an education specialist. Find that person and follow his or her work for a few months before pitching your story.

B2B or trade publications are not as glamorous as The Rachael Ray Show or as widely read as Time magazine, but having your story showcased in Scholastic Administrator or eSchool News has both short- and long-term benefits.

In the short-term, sharing your story with your fellow educators around the country opens the door to fruitful collaborations. In the long term, developing a reputation for innovation serves as a job recruitment tool for educators who may be moving to your area.

Social media and community portals: In part 1 of this series, I wrote about the power of Twitter, so I won’t go over that again, but I will say that social media is an indispensable part of every school’s storytelling operation. On Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, you have complete control over the text, images, and timing of everything you post. These are fantastic places to solidify your brand with your community, parents, and staff. And because most people have personal social media accounts, they’re familiar with how the platforms work, so pretty much everyone can help their district maintain a positive social media presence.

If social media is the cake, community portals are the icing. Back to that superintendent in the district of 32,000: At the same time he was telling the story of his bond to the local media, he added a button to his district’s website that let anyone in the community ask a question, which would then be promptly answered by the appropriate person.

The superintendent said that this one-on-one communication played a big part in clarifying the benefits of the bond and ultimately getting it passed. Districts around the country are using various portals to connect with their communities, and they’re learning an important lesson: Sometimes the most important part of telling your story is listening first.

_________

Christopher Piehler is the Lead Storyteller at PR with Panache! The former editor-in-chief of THE Journal, he has worked for a variety of consumer and B2B publications. He has been an ed tech commentator on both TV and radio, has served as a CODiE award judge, and has been a speaker at the FETC and CoSN conferences.

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

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

High School Dropouts: More than Loss of Money

It seems that every time the issue of high school dropouts is discussed it all centers around money. U.S. Census Statistics tell us that 38 percent of high school dropouts fall below the poverty line, compared with 18 percent of total households in every demographic. Dropouts are also 40 percent more likely to rent their residences and spend $450 less per month on housing costs than the overall population. Only around 60 percent of dropouts own vehicles and they spend over $300 less on entertainment annually than average Americans. It’s clear that a high school diploma is in fact the ticket to higher earnings, at least on a collective level

I wonder, however, if our cultural obsession with the financial implications of dropping out of high school sends the wrong message to teenagers. Earning a proper living is certainly valuable but what about all the other great reasons to finish the K-12 academic course, and potentially college-level learning following it? Money is not everything and is certainly only one piece of the value of a high school diploma. Some other areas of focus when it comes to the pitfalls of dropping out of high school should include:

Value of a career versus a job. Over 68 percent of high school graduates begin college coursework the following fall. Students who earn high school diplomas are that much more inspired to continue their academic journey and seek out a lifelong career match, not just clock hours at a “job” until retirement. The fulfillment people receive from a job they enjoy should not be underestimated. Studies have found that happier people are healthier and are even able to better fight off common illnesses like colds and the flu. Considering more time is spent working than in any other pursuit, job satisfaction plays a major role in overall happiness. The value of careers go beyond individual satisfaction, however. As a nation, everyone benefits from well-educated workers who earn a living in areas where they possess natural talent too.

Social strength. The childhood years go by so quickly and high school represents the last stage before adulthood. The social opportunities that high school provides are not duplicated anywhere else, with the exception of a college setting and high school dropouts miss out on both. What’s more, high school dropouts tend to get into more trouble than their in-school peers. The National Dropout Prevention Center reports that 82 percent of U.S. prisoners are high school dropouts. The life lessons found in the later years of high school are more valuable than they get credit for and the peer-level socialization is a vital part of late-childhood development.

Learning for its own sake. In our material society, it is difficult to explain the intangible value of things like intellectualism, particularly to young people. Until greater value is placed on obtaining knowledge for no other reason than to broaden individual and societal wisdom, students will continue to drop out of high school. After all, how can the economic importance of a high school diploma really be explained to children who have never had to earn their own living? Even those in dire socio-economic conditions do not have a grounded concept of what money means in quality of life and long-term happiness.

The negative financial ramifications of dropping out of high school cannot be denied but the way they are over-emphasized seems like a worn-out tactic to me. To really reach today’s students and encourage them to finish at least a high school education, they should be valued as learners and not simply earners.

 

 

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

3 Entities That Rebelled Against Standardized Testing in the US

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

This article will look at three groups of people who have urged us to reconsider standardized testing in our country. Here they are:

  1. Maya Angelou and other authors. Along with 120 other children’s book authors, beloved poet and activist Maya Angelou (now deceased) called President Obama on the carpet for his “testing overuse and abuse.” The authors said that the pressure on children to learn narrow testing materials, and then perform well, robs them of a love for learning. Among the authors on the list are Ruth Spiro, Whitney Stewart and Alma Flor Ada.

The letter, addressed to President Obama himself, scolded the Administration’s role in heightening standardized test ramifications and therefore putting more pressure on students and teachers to perform. Some highlights of the letter include:

“Our public school students spend far too much time preparing for reading tests and too little time curling up with books that fire their imaginations.” 

“Students spend time on test practice instead of perusing books. Too many schools devote their library budgets to test-prep materials, depriving students of access to real literature. Without this access, children also lack exposure to our country’s rich cultural range.”

“We offer our full support for a national campaign to change the way we assess learning so that schools nurture creativity, exploration, and a love of literature from the first day of school through high school graduation.”

While many teachers, parents and education experts (like Diane Ravitch) have spoken out about their concerns with teaching-to-the-test, and most recently the Common Core Standards, this was the first time such a list of “who’s who” has come out against reading and testing culture. Angelou had always been a strong and vocal supporter of Obama.

  1. School districts in Florida. Some school districts passed motions against standardized testing and certain parent groups have tried to opt their children out of various exams.

As a result, last year, The Florida Department of Education announced plans to review the state’s standardized testing. The announcement came after a year of criticism of testing policies and opposition toward the new standards.

Florida Education Commissioner Pam Stewart stated that in addition to the plans to review the testing, she was establishing a Keep Florida Learning Committee. The Committee would examine areas where the state could deregulate the school system, boost parental involvement, review instructional material and track the introduction of Florida Standards throughout the upcoming year.

“At the Department of Education, we are committed to ensuring our education system has appropriate policies and procedures in place to help Florida’s students excel,” Stewart said.

“I am proud to lead these efforts, which I am confident will help us better understand students’ needs so we can better prepare them for colleges and careers,” added Stewart.

Stewart said that there was no plan to stop the end-of-course exams or the Florida Standards Assessment, which was due to begin last spring.

  1. Education officials across the US. Due to growing complaints from the public, education officials offered to re-examine standardized testing in the U.S. last year. The general consensus is that students pre-kindergarten to 12th grade are taking too many exams.

Michael Casserly, executive director of the Council of Great City Schools said, “Testing is an important part of education, and of life. But it’s time that we step back and see if the tail is wagging the dog.” The Council of Great City Schools represents 67 urban school systems.

The Council of Chief State School Officers, which represents education commissioners in every state, also joined in on the effort.

Teachers have always administered tests; but exams became a federal mandate in 2002 under the No Child Left Behind Act. It requires states to test students annually in math and reading, starting in grades 3 through 8 and ending with high school.

In the past few years, four states delayed or repealed graduation testing requirements. Four other states, including Texas, where the idea of using these tests began, reduced the number of exams required or decreased their consequences.

In addition to federally required tests, states have added on more assessments, many that mandate exams such as an exit test to graduate high school.

On average, students in large urban school districts take 113 standardized tests between pre-K and 12th grade.

The number of standardized tests that U.S. students take is too high. While I feel that the idea to use tests to hold schools accountable is a good one, the frequency and redundancy of standardized testing has gone too far. It is essential to measure student achievement, but I hope that further analysis of standardized testing will lead to ways to relieve some of the burden that these tests bring to our students.

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

Technology and Graduation Rate: A Direct Correlation

There is a lot of talk out there about ways to raise the graduation rate. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan proudly wore #80 in the NBA All-Star celebrity game to tout the highest graduation rate the country has seen since 1974. Educators are collectively working harder to help students make it to the high school finish line and get prepared for college and the workforce. There is a lot of credit to be handed out for the successful graduation rates around the country (of course, there are still plenty of areas for improvement) but I think one shining area deserves a lot of the praise: technology.

The website DropoutPrevention.org singles out technology as a leader in high school graduation upsurge. The site states:
“Educational technology is needed for a variety of reasons. It provides an alternative method of learning for those who struggle to learn using traditional methods.

Technology can be used to address multiple intelligences and also to provide authentic learning experiences for students.”
In other words, technology has made it possible for students who fall off the traditional path to jump back on and finish what they spent most of their childhood working towards. This may be in the form of taking remote classes from home, remedial classes in on-campus computer labs or even by enrolling in full-time online schools, public or private. The technology available for these options benefits students who face difficulties with a normal school schedule including teenage parents, students with short-term or long-term illnesses, teens with substance abuse struggles, or those who had poor academic performance due to learning disabilities or bullying.

Equality through Technology

Technology is also a great equalizer in K-12 classrooms. Students have the same access as their peers to whatever technology is available in their district and specific classroom. While there is certainly some technology discrepancies between one district and another, often based on the socioeconomic status of the families within that district, within each one students have fair access to technology. In a way, things like computers and mobile devices in classrooms usher in the technology of the outside world and give students who may not otherwise have access a chance to use it for learning purposes.

Having in-classroom technology more directly impacts the graduation rate by providing customized learning experiences. A student who needs extra help on a particular topic need not hold up the entire class, or feel embarrassed asking for that help, when there are computer modules and tablet apps available for individual learning experiences. Teachers who spot a trouble area with a particular student can gear that teen towards more exercises to master the topic. Of course technology is not the magic wand to fix all problems, but it does allow for more flexibility of the learning process which in turn makes it easier for a wider group of students to stay in classrooms until the end of the K-12 journey.

College Prep

K-12 educators used to have the goal of helping their students reach high school graduation, but now the pressure is on to create students who go on to achieve college goals too. No matter how advanced the technology options in a particular school district, they are dwarfed by the reliance on and widespread use of technology on college campuses. High school students who become acquainted with technology for things like course selection, class management and actual learning modules are better prepared when they arrive on college campuses. There is very little hand-holding when it comes to higher education (perhaps too little based on college dropout rates) and students need to be self-sufficient in life skills and technology ones when they cross the bridge to college life.

How big of a role do you think technology has played in high school graduation rates?

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts