Pedagogue Blog

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, Matthew Lynch

Should We Rewrite American History Books?

“History has a point of view; it cannot be all things to all people.” – Samuel Taylor

When it comes to textbooks, every school district in the nation has its own system for ordering. What a district chooses impacts what the students in those boundaries learn. When it comes to subjects like math, science and even English there are some absolute truths that must be followed. When it comes to history or social sciences though, there is some wiggle room. These subjects have their own facts, of course, but the perspective can make all the difference. Of all topics, these have the ability to be biased or slanted towards a particular group.

Since the early 1990s there has been a push to make the American history lessons taught in K-12 classrooms more multicultural in their approach. From the truth behind Christopher Columbus’ alleged ruthless ways to the acknowledgment that Thomas Jefferson bore children with his slaves, the Puritanical, patriotic approach to America’s founders has been questioned – at least by some. Is it right to put these men on a pedestal? Is it wrong to point out their flaws? Which is more important – the truth or shared nationalistic beliefs?

The latest iteration of these arguments comes out of Texas. A coalition of Hispanic-American educators and over 50 organizations have petitioned the State Board ofEducation to have Mexican-American history placed on a list of over 200 electives available in Texas high schools. The list in place now includes electives like Web gaming and floral design. The petition is meeting opposition, however, because of the danger of its “leftist” ideals. Board members also cite the expense (one former member cited “millions” when it comes to price tag) and say that there is no reason to officially add the course since school districts already have the authority to teach it if they want.

Given that logic, there was probably never a need to add floral design, or Web gaming, to the official list either. Yet somewhere along the way that “cost” was justified.

Yet the history of the state told from the perspective of the ancestors of its majority student group is not worth putting on the official list.
The refusal in Texas speaks volumes to the opposing histories that exist in this country. American history has come to mean anything from a migratory European perspective. But the term “American” itself cannot be contained to just one simple definition, or one region of the world. The people here are multicultural and multiethnic, and each home country’s history IS a part of the American one. Yet some educators would rather compartmentalize the rich, vibrant and diverse histories into teachable units with a common theme. I don’t believe that gives students a full perspective on their histories and those of their fellow citizens. The narrowness in our own history classrooms leads to greater close-mindedness when it comes to other areas of the world, too.

There are history and social studies teachers who do a good job presenting more than one side to each story, and those teachers should be applauded for their efforts. But for K-12 students to have a fuller, well-informed view on their own histories and futures, courses like Mexican-American history need to be taught, along with Asian-American, African-American and any other type of “American” ones. We need to give our students the credit to come to their own conclusions about their country, and not leave out inconvenient details. By essentially censoring what they learn, we do our students a great disservice and our country, too.

What do you think? Is it possible to expand the depth of history classes and still have students with shared values?

 

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

Education officials to re-examine standardized testing

Education officials will re-examine standardized testing in the U.S. due to growing complaints from the public. 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 recently 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, has 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 two years, four states have delayed or repealed graduation testing requirements. Four other states, including Texas, where the idea of using these tests began, have 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 Policy & Reform, Secondary Education

Solving the special education teacher deficit

Across the nation schools are trying to locate and hire qualified special education teachers. The open positions are abundant and many teachers are not equipped to handle the challenges this difficult job presents. Schools often settle for inexperienced or under qualified candidates who may not last even a year or two.

The Lee Pesky Learning Center, in conjunction with Boise State University, believes that adequate teacher preparation can make all the difference. This nonprofit organization is working to overcome the teacher shortage by preparing individuals for the unique demands and challenges of working with special needs students.

The Pesky Center in Boise provides one-on-one instruction for special needs students after school hours, studying with an “education specialist.” Students of all ages come to work on anything from multiplication to reading comprehension with a mentor. Attention is placed on instructional components, how the student is responding and if goals are being achieved.

Founded in 1997, The Pesky Center was established to help students with learning disabilities. At the moment, the most pressing issue is locating and developing quality special education instructors. The center is helping to address this teacher shortage with a new training program. Students working toward a master’s in teaching at Boise State can apply to spend one year at the center as an instructor, while taking classes. The training and classes of this Special Education Collaborative program are covered by a scholarship from the founders of the center, Alan and Wendy Pesky.

Over the coming years, the hope is to grow the program and train even more teachers on the intricacies of working with special needs students. Professional development opportunities and training programs such as this will only help to tackle the special education teacher shortage by equipping educators with the skills necessary to be successful in their profession long-term.

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

(Yet) 5 More Educational Technology Concepts Every Teacher Should Know

In previous articles, I wrote about some emerging educational technologies and technology concepts that every teacher must keep track of to be more effective in the classroom, from virtual laboratories to prototyping. In this final installment of this series, you will discover even more concepts that will revolutionize K-12 education as we know it. A couple of these must-know technologies would have been unbelievable a few years ago. Take a look at the following five:

  1. Student-led planning. When special education students reach high school, they are being called upon more and more to have input into their individual learning plans. This is to prepare these students for more independence in adulthood. It also gives teachers more insight into the methods these students favor when it comes to learning. Instead of dictating what and how special education students should learn, student-led input helps chart the course toward academic and life skills.
  2. Holography. Holography was just science fiction a few years ago, but it’s now becoming a reality in some fields, such as medicine. This imaging technique, which allows one to see a 3-D view of an image, has yet to become a part of everyday classroom activities. Holography introduced in classroom activities would change entirely how some subjects are taught. Biology, physics, astronomy, and chemistry could be taught on an entirely different level (S. H. Kim & Bagaka, 2005).
  3. Time-management tools. These tools are variations on calendar software. They can be used to schedule your appointments, or you may want to take advantage of more complex features. Some tools can be viewed online, affording access for more than one student at a time. A teacher can arrange appointments or make a note of due dates for assignments so that all students in a class can keep track of such details. Most of these tools allow the option to put some information in private mode, too, so the administrator can choose which calendars people can see and which cannot. Most of these tools include a feature allowing teachers to arrange meetings and groups.
  4. Virtual reality. Experiential education has been used as an instructional method for years. Field trips have always served to introduce students to real-world issues, to supplement learning by helping students get a fresh perspective on what they have learned in books. Technology using virtual reality, however, has introduced new levels of experiential education. Virtual 3-D worlds allow students and teachers to visit places otherwise impossible to visit without it. They can go to space, deserts, or foreign countries without physically traveling there.
  5. Natural user interfaces. In its simplest definition, a natural user interface (NUI) uses the body’s movements to achieve certain outcomes. In the consumer market, examples of NUIs include the Nintendo® WiiTM, Xbox KinectTM, and the iPhone virtual assistant, Siri. The potential in the field of K–12 education is still being realized but will certainly lead to developments in the next half-decade. Students who are blind, deaf, or have physical disabilities or autism can better learn through use of this still evolving technology.

Advances in technology have influenced every aspect of modern life and are having an enormous impact on education. Technology can promote student engagement, immerse students in real-world issues, enhance discussions and workshops, and facilitate formative assessment. Plus, as students today are often digital natives, very familiar with technology.

However, the new technological advances do not come without their problems. There’s a significant digital divide between students with access to technology and students, mostly from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, who don’t have the same level, range, and consistency of access.

Furthermore, students may spend too much time using their devices and the Internet includes information that may be harmful as well as helpful. Without clear parameters, teachers may become overly focused on technology to the detriment of information transfer.

Nonetheless, these advances will prove to assist in the education of students in the near future. Observing the development of these technologies closely will reveal the ways in which they will change learning.

 

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

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

Diverse Conversations: Being Transparent

Many higher education professionals often complain that the higher ups at their institutions are not transparent in their dealings. This can have a negative impact on faculty morale and thus a devastating effect on the functioning of an institution. To talk about how institutions can actually ensure transparency and counteract the problem of lacking transparency, I recently sat down with Laurie M. Joyner, president of Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio.

Transparency is, of course, a vital component of just about any professional enterprise, but it is particularly important in higher education for maintaining positive relationships within the organization structure – between higher education and those that I am referring to here as “the higher ups”, which include administrators and so forth. Why do you think transparency is so important in this context?

Transparency in communication and action builds trust, which is essential to effective shared governance. The strategic challenges facing higher education today, including remaining mission-driven within the context of a sustainable financial model, touch upon deeply held beliefs about institutional direction. Our academic values and tradition recognize that such critical decisions are best informed by the perspectives of faculty, staff, students, alumni and board members. A lack of transparency with any constituent group compromises our ability to form effective partnerships necessary for creating a shared vision required to move our institutional agenda forward.

Q: In your experience, what are some of the most common problems when transparency is not maintained? What does that look like in terms of organizational function and relationships between higher education professionals and the administrators, the leaders?

A: The most common problem is that a perception of mistrust is likely to develop making it more difficult to align priorities and efforts designed to strengthen the institution. When priorities are not aligned between faculty, administrators, and the governing board, organizational functioning may be negatively impacted. This often appears as tensions surrounding the rights and responsibilities of various groups for certain types of decisions. The challenge, of course, is that more attention and energy can become focused on who has prime responsibility for what decisions versus figuring out how to collaborate in a collegial manner to address the most pressing issues facing the institution. In some cases, relationships become strained, decision making can stall, and ultimately, organizational effectiveness is compromised.

It’s also important to note that while transparency is a healthy aspect of organizational culture, it is not necessarily sufficient for effective governance. Effective governance requires ongoing education regarding the strategic issues impacting the organization (e.g., shifting demographics, improving educational outcomes, exploiting competitive strengths, etc.) Insisting on transparency regarding key institutional metrics can build support for difficult decisions, facilitate continuous improvement, and meet the growing demand for quantitative outcome data.

Q: Drawing from these first two questions, what would you say are the most important areas for maintaining transparency; where is it particularly important in higher education institutions?

A: A commitment to transparency should be pervasive for the benefit of all internal and external stakeholders. This transparency can be exceedingly helpful in facilitating data-driven decisions, supporting continuous improvement, and fostering a culture of accountability regarding institutional performance at all levels. From a faculty perspective, transparency is of special importance in the following areas: institutional planning and budgeting; curricular requirements; academic integrity; academic freedom; and the selection, evaluation and promotion of faculty colleagues.

In my experience, there are two areas that present special challenges to administrative leaders who value transparency. These areas relate to personnel and legal issues where one is not at liberty to discuss the circumstances surrounding particular decisions. It is frustrating to face community resistance that is not based on complete information and not be in a position to respond.

Q: What are the key benefits for maintaining transparency in higher education, from an administrative and leadership standpoint?

A: The main benefit is that it builds a culture of open communication and trust, both of which are necessary to create a sense of partnership for effectively accomplishing the important work of the institution. Given the challenges facing higher education today, it is critical to do everything possible to align our collective efforts around shared priorities as we work toward achieving our common purpose.

An additional benefit of transparency is that it also supports the development of increasingly refined performance metrics that are useful in supporting a culture of continuous improvement across the organization while also responding to calls for greater accountability for student and institutional outcomes.

Q: How, then, do you go about establishing and ultimately maintaining transparency in higher education institutions?

A: I think this is best accomplished by respecting the systems of shared governance involving the Board, the President and senior administrators, and the faculty. In many cases, this is easier said than done because different constituent groups have varying levels of understanding as it relates to effective governance practices (e.g., who has more or less responsibility and authority for making certain types of decisions). Given this, I believe ongoing professional development is required at every level of the organization to ensure that all key constituent groups are being supported as they adopt best practices to enhance shared governance.

A deep commitment to transparency also supports continuous improvement across the organization and contributes to a culture of assessment and accountability. Once these elements are structured into organizational policies and practices, they strengthen and reinforce one another, ultimately improving shared governance and educational quality.

Q: At Wittenberg University, transparency is something that you emphasize at these various levels. Beyond these basic methods and strategies for establishing and maintaining transparency, what strategies have you found to be most effective for maintaining transparency?

A: We have worked hard to try to educate our campus on some of the core challenges facing Wittenberg. This is a critical point. There must be general agreement on the challenges if there is any chance of aligning the efforts of the campus community and Board. We have also worked very hard to communicate early and often using a range of strategies. For example, I host community dialogue sessions to discuss areas of concern and to respond to any community questions. I also distribute Board agendas to the faculty, report the actions taken at each Board meeting to all faculty and staff, and distribute an electronic newsletter to faculty, staff, and retirees every two weeks. I also provide similar monthly updates to Board and Emeriti Board members. In addition, we are working to develop more refined outcome metrics to assess progress toward key institutional goals. The intent is to eventually have all these metrics readily available to anyone interested in tracking institutional performance over time.

Q: In your experience, when there are transparency issues and they are proving problematic, how have you proceeded to address the issues and restore transparency?

A: In my experience, proceeding in an honest, open and authentic way is always the preferred approach with all constituencies. Further, ensuring that all elements of the governance system are working as effectively as possible and then routinely consulting with appropriate groups is essential. If there are not effective structures or systems in place, then creating meaningful structures to bring various groups together to focus on important issues can help foster understanding, enhance transparency, increase collaboration, and improve results.

Q: Inevitably there are some instances in which administrators inherit transparency issues and that’s what I’d like to focus on in this question. What advice would you give to a higher education administrator who is facing problems with transparency? What advice would you give in terms of establishing transparency and, if you like, dealing with the fallout of the initial transparency issue?

A: Communicating about the issues in a forthright manner and establishing structures to help address difficult questions are important. I also think recognizing that shared governance is challenging and requires ongoing attention is critical. At Wittenberg, we have initiated an effort to strengthen Board governance with support from the Association of Governing Boards (AGB). From my perspective, there are few issues more strategic than ensuring that our governing Board understands its rights and responsibilities as it relates to our institution.

My hope is to initiate a similar process internally to enhance the working relationships between our faculty committees, senior administrators, and Board. Through these parallel efforts to strengthen governance, I believe Wittenberg will be better served because our systems will become more closely aligned as we work toward shared priorities within the context of clearer expectations regarding our respective responsibilities. Ultimately, I believe this work will result in greater satisfaction for our faculty leaders, administrators, and Board members and will also foster improved institutional outcomes.

Thank you for your time, President Joyner. This concludes our interview.

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

Invitational Leadership Juxtaposed with Other Leadership Models

Let’s look at invitational leadership, as it relates to various models of leadership. Invitational leadership has this is common with participative/distributed leadership: a belief in promoting active participation of all interested stakeholders, as well as the fundamentals of moral/ethical leadership. However, a closer look reveals that invitational leadership is more inclusive and complete, since it addresses the “total environment” in which leaders function. While invitational leadership believes in allowing active participation of all organizational members, it also seeks to achieve a balance of authority and influence throughout the organization.

The transformational and servant leadership styles have been among the best received and most highly praised over the last few decades. In both models, there are similar principles that call upon leaders to lead in an manner that sets an example for followers. As with invitational leadership, these models attempt to help leaders to support their followers in empowering ways.

Invitational leaders accept the basic tenet of servant leadership that those who lead must be ready and willing to serve, but they go beyond this idea in their attempt to describe the values and roles they must serve in their organizations.

Invitational leadership, in truth, holds many of the same beliefs that describe both transformational and servant leadership. One similarity is that of forming and sharing a vision. Invitational leaders seek to invite their associates to share in a vision of greatness, and offer them a vivid but powerful picture of human effort. The three leadership types also share the elements of trust and respect.

Another shared component between invitational leadership and the two models is that of morals and ethics. Invitational leadership is at the heart a moral activity, intentionally showing respect and trust in the leaders themselves and in others, both personally and professionally. In a similar manner, it seeks to empower followers by asking others in the organization to meet their goals in pursuit of their own success. In other words, encouraging others in their quest for self-fulfillment is a characteristic embedded in the invitational leadership model. The authors conclude that invitational leadership is a mutual commitment between colleagues, instead of a series of orders issued from the top down.

While we see many shared components between the invitational leadership model and participative, transformational, and servant leadership models, there are also a few inbuilt and crucial differences. The first of these are the twin elements of optimism and intentionality. Optimism and intentionality are viewed as important characteristics for effective leaders.

The focused effort on values and principles that apply to policies, programs, places, processes, and people are also important for effectiveness in leadership. We then find that these important and unique qualities make the invitational leadership model an excellent choice, especially in these times of critical student need and increased accountability for school leaders. In light of the problems facing today’s school systems, the invitational leadership model could lead to many positive outcomes. Encouraging everyone in the school setting to participate in goal achievement allows for new ideas and fresh perspectives, which are sorely needed in an educational system that is largely old-fashioned and out of date.

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

Hard Evidence: at what age are children ready for school?

David Whitebread, University of Cambridge

When are children “ready” for school? There is much debate about when the transition between play-based pre-school and the start of “formal” schooling should begin. The trend in the UK primary school curriculum over recent decades has been towards an earlier start to formal instruction, and an erosion of learning through play.

But the evidence from international comparisons and psychological research of young children’s development all points to the advantages of a later start to formal instruction, particularly in relation to literacy.

Among the earliest in Europe

Children in England are admitted into reception classes in primary schools at age four; in many cases, if their birthdays are in the summer months, when they have only just turned four. This is in stark contrast to the vast majority of other European countries, many of which currently enjoy higher levels of educational achievement. In Europe, the most common school starting age is six, and even seven in some cases such as Finland.

European Commission. EURYDICE and EUROSTAT 2013. * Although education is not compulsory until six in Ireland, approx. 40% of four-year-olds and almost all five-year-olds are in publicly-funded primary schools.

From the moment children in England enter the reception class, the pressure is on for them to learn to read, write and do formal written maths. In many schools, children are identified as “behind” with reading before they would even have started school in many other countries. Now the government is introducing tests for four-year-olds soon after starting school.

There is no research evidence to support claims from government that “earlier is better”. By contrast, a considerable body of evidence clearly indicates the crucial importance of play in young children’s development, the value of an extended period of playful learning before the start of formal schooling, and the damaging consequences of starting the formal learning of literacy and numeracy too young.

Importance of play

A range of anthropological studies of children’s play in hunter-gatherer societies and other evolutionary psychology studies of play in the young of mammals have identified play as an adaptation which evolved in early human social groups, enabling humans to become powerful learners and problem-solvers.

Some neuroscientists’ research has supported this view of play as a central mechanism in learning. One book by Sergio and Vivien Pellis reviewed many other studies to show that playful activity leads to synaptic growth, particularly in the frontal cortex – the part of the brain responsible for all the uniquely human, higher mental functions.

A range of experimental psychology studies, including my own work, have consistently demonstrated the superior learning and motivation arising from playful as opposed to instructional approaches to learning in children.

There are two crucial processes which underpin this relationship. First, playful activity has been shown to support children’s early development of representational skills, which is fundamental to language use. One 2006 study by US academics James Christie and Kathleen Roskos, reviewed evidence that a playful approach to language learning offers the most powerful support for the early development of phonological and literacy skills.

Second, through all kinds of physical, social and constructional play, such as building with blocks or making models with household junk, children develop their skills of intellectual and emotional “self-regulation”. This helps them develop awareness of their own mental processes – skills that have been clearly demonstrated to be the key predictors of educational achievement and a range of other positive life outcomes.

Longer-term impacts

Within educational research, a number of longitudinal studies have provided evidence of long-term outcomes of play-based learning. A 2002 US study by Rebecca Marcon, for example, demonstrated that by the end of their sixth year in school, children whose pre-school model had been academically-directed achieved significantly lower marks in comparison to children who had attended child-initiated, play-based pre-school programmes.

A number of other studies have specifically addressed the issue of the length of pre-school play-based experience and the age at which children begin to be formally taught the skills of literacy and numeracy. In a 2004 longitudinal study of 3,000 children funded by the department of education itself, Oxford’s Kathy Sylva and colleagues showed that an extended period of high-quality, play-based pre-school education made a significant difference to academic learning and well-being through the primary school years. They found a particular advantage for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Studies in New Zealand comparing children who began formal literacy instruction at age five or age seven have shown that by the age of 11 there was no difference in reading ability level between the two groups. But the children who started at five developed less positive attitudes to reading, and showed poorer text comprehension than those children who had started later.

This evidence, directly addressing the consequences of the introduction of early formal schooling, combined with the evidence on the positive impact of extended playful experiences, raises important questions about the current direction of travel of early childhood education policy in England.

There is an equally substantial body of evidence concerning the worrying increase in stress and mental health problems among children in England and other countries where early childhood education is being increasingly formalised. It suggests there are strong links between these problems and a loss of playful experiences and increased achievement pressures. In the interests of children’s educational achievements and their emotional well-being, the UK government should take this evidence seriously.

Hard Evidence is a series of articles in which academics use research evidence to tackle the trickiest questions.

The Conversation

David Whitebread, Senior Lecturer in Psychology & Education, University of Cambridge

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

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

Distributed Leadership as Task Distribution

In 2004, Spillane et al.’s theoretical description of distributed leadership was based on the performance of certain tasks, and the interactions between shifting combinations of leaders and followers, in the course of performing certain tasks.. Leadership is distributed across the three essential elements: leader, follower, and task.

Task distribution was the focus of a series of studies of distributed leadership in 2007, by Spillane et al. They analyzed patterns of distributed leadership by using the electronic logs of 52 school principals. Data was gathered by prompting the principals with electronic beeps, sounding at intervals throughout the day. They recorded whether they were engaged in leadership tasks, and if they were the ones leading/co-leading those tasks, or if others were doing it for them. The principals also indicated their intentions by choosing from a list, including increasing knowledge, monitoring teaching/curricula, developing common goals, motivating/developing others, or redesigning the teaching and learning.

In their 2003 study of distributed leadership, Camburn et al. also studied leadership as a task performance approach in a sample of schools. They studied distributed leadership by asking everyone in formal leadership roles to report the priority and/or the amount of time they spent on a variety of leadership activities. However, they did not explore the intended or actual influence of these leaders.

Leadership is clearly seen in the performance of certain functions or tasks. So, how do we establish what counts as a leadership task? Camburn et al. use organizational theories as their reference point, by following “A long line of research and theory that conceptualizes leadership in terms of organizational functions and then examines who within an organization performs these functions.” The problem with this approach is that the leadership tasks needed for this purpose may differ from those required to achieve specific goals in an organization. Most organizational theories cannot distinguish between the direct and indirect impact of leadership tasks on outcomes.

Existing evidence linking certain types of leadership to student outcomes is a better resource for determining educational impact. Research has shown instructional leadership tasks deliver more results for students. Robinson’s 2008 meta-analysis of 27 published studies of the impact of instructional leadership on student outcomes confirms this, by showing that the actual impact of instructional leadership was two to three times greater than that of transformational leadership.

The five different sets of leadership practices were measured to show different relative impacts. Relative effects were lower in the tasks of establishing goals, strategic resourcing, and establishing an orderly, supportive environment. The effects were average for planning, coordinating, and evaluating teaching and the curriculum, but were huge in relation to promoting and participating in teacher learning and development.

Clearly, using evidence is better than using general organizational theory. We can relate student impact to distributed leadership. For example, teacher engagement during a learning opportunity is far more important that whether or not teachers volunteered for it. Researchers should go beyond measuring distribution of leadership activities. The leaders’ ability to shape professional development should also be assessed, assuring they have qualities associated with better outcomes for students.
After selecting built-in leadership tasks for distributed leadership, evidence must be collected on the patterns of responsibility for the tasks. Thoughtful analysis is needed regarding who is involved, and the degree of knowledge they posses about the tasks. The level of influence leaders have over task performance should also be noted.

The third step investigates the links of these tasks to student outcomes. The most complex and expensive part of the study, it involves modeling and measuring the impact of variables, such as student background, which could dilute the data. Valuable data comes from studying the leadership of teachers, and teacher learning practices, especially where there is prior evidence of improved student outcomes. Careful analysis of these studies, and their association with student impacts, shows us the distribution of leadership practices that is most likely to make a difference to students.

When we look at the influence process itself, we can see the shifts in school and teacher culture needed to support the wider distribution of leadership tasks. This sharing of authority is vital for sustained educational improvement. Literature on teacher influence is plentiful. If distributed leadership is to fulfill its objectives, then it should focus on how those in senior leadership positions can develop a more balanced leadership approach.

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.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

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

How can HBCUs raise more alumni dollars?

Anyone following Historically Black Colleges and Universities knows that it has been a tumultuous few years. Saint Paul’s College closing its doors to new students and placing current students at other schools. Morris Brown College filing for federal bankruptcy protection. Most recently, the nation’s oldest HBCU, 119-year-old South Carolina State University, declared financial exigency.

Between schools being shuttered or declaring bankruptcy, it’s a distressing time for HBCUs and anyone attending or working at them. Online colleges, robust diversity programs at predominantly white institutions and more affordable community college offerings are all competing for the students who once could really only find a quality education at a HBCU.

Finding ways to keep these institutions relevant is more important than ever and that includes one part of financial responsibility that I believe is being overlooked: alumni giving.

HBCU graduates are some of the proudest in the country, often with a stronger sense of social responsibility than their PWI-graduate peers. Yet HBCUs aren’t doing a strong enough job tying that pride back into alumni giving programs. Case in point: Harvard raised a record-breaking $752 million in alumni and other gifts in the fiscal year 2013. At HBCU “black Ivy League” Spelman College saw just $157.8 million ($20 million from alumni) during its Every Woman Every Campaign in 2013 that was a special, targeted campaign beyond normal annual endeavors.

Perhaps comparing Harvard’s financial gifts to any other school isn’t completely fair, but it does give an idea of what HBCUs are up against in the non-elite college market. If Spelman, considered the “best” HBCU, can only bring in one-fifth of the giving of Harvard in a year when Spelman aggressively went after donations, what does that say for every other HBCU?

An even better question is this: What can HBCU alumni giving campaigns improve upon to bring in more dollars to benefit their current crop of students?

Make college affordable.

Even the best college education will come with resentment attached once a student has to start paying back those burdensome loans. HBCUs have a better shot at alumni giving back once a college education is paid off, so why not make that debt burden lighter? HBCUs have some of the best statistics when it comes to financial aid in the form of Pell grants and scholarships and these institutions should continue to push for the funding to make obtaining a degree affordable – particularly for minority and first-generation college students. More money in these graduates’ pockets will translate into more alumni giving in the early years following graduation.

Personalize giving.

I don’t know about you, but getting a standard alumni giving form in the mail with a return envelope does not usually inspire me to pull out my checkbook. The same is true of emails without much personality. Instead of just asking for the money, HBCUs need to put faces and causes along with the requests. What are some of the upcoming projects that this money could go towards? Who will receive scholarships from this giving? Even non-glamorous giving campaigns that go towards basic infrastructure have a better shot of meeting goals if alumni are informed of what money is being solicited to do. HBCU alumni who can associate their own positive memories with money-making campaigns are more likely to want to be a part of making those things happen.

Get alumni involved before they leave campus.

Don’t wait until students are off campus to solicit them for help facilitating the college experience of the classes who follow them. Cash in on the good feelings that accompany graduation time from both the students earning degrees and their families. Even those who don’t have much may be willing to give a little to keeping the college dream alive for other students who are still trying to accomplish their academic goals. Set up a table outside commencement with giving forms and other alumni information. Have literature that explains to students how alumni giving dollars have facilitated what they’ve enjoyed while on campus. Send out an email blast to soon-to-be graduates that invites them to visit the alumni website, like its Facebook page, and join its official club. Don’t wait to chase alumni down after they’ve left; rope them in before they leave and keep them active in the coming years.

Just as HBCUs have a responsibility to get their students workforce-ready, alumni have a responsibility to give back to their institutions. HBCUs need to do a better job of conveying that though and encouraging former students to step up to the plate.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

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

School metal detectors reduce weapon carrying but not fear

Paul Hirschfield, Rutgers University

The recent horrifying spectacle of a disturbed student fatally stabbing his teacher in front of his classmates in Leeds has spurred a national dialogue about how schools should address violence.

Perhaps the most controversial measure under consideration is expanding the use of knife arches – known in the US as walk-through metal detectors. Given metal detectors’ longevity in some US schools (since 1992 in Chicago’s high schools), the number of studies that have assessed their effectiveness is abysmally low.

In the UK, teacher union leaders and the deputy prime minister have rejected the idea of more knife arches. Their opposition to this expensive technology is understandable given that armed violence is extremely rare in UK schools. Responsible policy-making is driven by patterns and sound cost-benefit analysis rather than the uproar over single tragic incidents.

But such a proposal may resonate in the minority of schools where the risk of violent threats and victimisation are more than remote. Some students in these schools reportedly arm themselves for protection and their next minor altercation could (but rarely does) escalate into serious violence.

In these jurisdictions, police and school officials may employ knife arches in order to signal that safety is a top priority, while raising awareness about the dangers that knives pose. But do knife arches promote the aims that matter most to students, parents, and teachers? Do they make schools safer? Do they alter the school climate in a manner that promotes students learning?

The answer to these questions surely depends, in part, on how the knife arches are employed. Arches, when deployed in the UK, are used sporadically – around one day, gone the next. Confronted with this temporary barrier, most knife-toting students will either ditch the weapon or ditch school (assuming smuggling the knife through a window or side entrance is not a realistic possibility). These potential assailants can be quite confident (and their potential victims reasonably concerned) that no knife arch will impede their next attempt.

Lessons from US schools

Whereas the limited capacity of sporadic knife arches to act as a deterrent seems obvious, you can reasonably predict that more frequent use would substantially enhance this capacity.

In the USA, as in the UK, opposition to metal detectors is intense and largely successful across the socio-economic spectrum. But there are some schools – predictably comprised largely of urban youth of colour – where the lockdown environments feared by campaigners in the UK are a daily reality.

During the 2009-10 school year, 4.8% of American high schools scanned their students daily for weapons (while 12% conducted random checks). In these schools, this ritual of submission is part of a broader effort, administered by full-time school security staff, to ban all forms of contraband such as cell phones and students who are suspended or in violation of strict dress codes. With the Obama administration’s blessing, school districts around the country are rethinking the “zero tolerance” approach.

In 2010, an exhaustive meta-analysis of studies on metal detectors, either deployed alone or combined with other fortification strategies, uncovered no studies that compared student outcomes before and after installation.

Among the five studies that compare student safety measures (all self-reported) in schools with and without metal detectors, only one reflects positively on metal detectors. This 1992 study involved students who attended three sampled New York City high schools that scanned their students at random with hand-held metal detectors approximately once a week. They were 43%-49% less likely than students of twelve other high schools to report carrying weapons inside or en-route to school (even though they were equally likely to carry them at other times).

Fear remains

But reducing weapons possession is of limited benefit unless it translates into reduced violence or fear. Collectively these five studies and a subsequent one from Rutgers University suggest that metal detectors fail to reduce threats, fighting, fear, and perceptions of violence and disorder. Injuries and deaths resulting from smuggled weapons are so uncommon that any benefits are likely to elude statistical detection.

The apparent failure of metal detectors to reduce fear is especially disappointing, because fear reduction is the most promising pathway through which metal detectors may improve academic performance.

Fearful students enjoy school less and often reduce school involvement. In some schools, attendance reportedly worsens on the days when metal detectors are employed. I am not alone in my lack of surprise.

Student perceptions of fairness, trust, and caring all promote safe schools. Metal detectors drive a wedge of distrust between students and their schools while conveying little concern for students’ rights.

Frequent and effective scanning requires a large investment of time and money, and it inevitably widens the net of surveillance. The thousands of hours that students collectively spend waiting in line to be scanned are hours that could have been spent engaging academically.

The money spent on arches and their operation is money that could have been spent on programmes that address the needs, struggles, fears, and hopes that students carry through the school doors, gates, and arches each day.

The Conversation

Paul Hirschfield, Associate Professor of Sociology and Affiliated Professor in the Program in Criminal Justice, Rutgers University

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

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

Diverse Conversations: Leading a Small Liberal Arts University

For those who aspire to become a college/university president, one of the biggest decisions that you will make is whether a large or small college/university presidency is the right choice. For this installment of “Diverse Conversations,” I decided to interview Dr. Debra Townsley, president of Williams Peace University, to find out what it’s like to lead a small liberal arts university. Inaugurated as the 10th president of William Peace University in August 2010, Dr. Townsley oversees a student body of nearly 800 full and part-time students enrolled in WPU’s undergraduate day, evening, online and Saturday programs, and an alumni body of more than 9,000.

Q: What attracted you to a small liberal arts university?

A: Small, private institutions are connected learning communities. Faculty directly teach all students. Co-curricular programming is intentional and an integral part of the learning. Students make life-long friends and are part of a connected alumni network. I appreciate these connections and believe they lead to strong learning opportunities for everyone in the community.

Q: What do you like most about leading a liberal arts university?

A: We do make a difference in the lives of our students. I have the good fortune of hearing this when I meet alumni, who have had a chance to experience what their education has afforded them and meant to them.

Q: Has your impression of William Peace University changed since the first time you were on campus?

A: I have learned more about Peace since my first visit, but my view of WPU has not changed since my first visit. On my first visit, Peace seemed like a community with dedicated faculty and staff who cared about students’ success and a community with students and alumni who had a love for the school. These first impressions have been and continue to be true.

Q: You’ve been president of William Peace University for three years. During that time, you have been able to witness, study, and assess the trends in higher education. What trends do you see emerging in higher education?

A: Higher education is changing because of multiple external forces, such as the economy, demographics, student learning needs, technology and regulations, just to name a few. Current trends indicate that students (and families) want to know there are job opportunities upon graduation, have limited resources for higher education, and learn through new methods like hands-on learning, experiential learning, use of technology, cases, discussion and/or multiple evaluative tools, to name a few.

One trend getting much attention is the massive open online course (MOOC). There is a debate over MOOCs – their usefulness in student learning, their replacement of the classroom, their long-term costs, etc. However, this was a similar conversation several decades ago when distance or online learning options were developing. I remember a faculty member telling me 15 years ago that it was a waste to invest in online education because it would not last. Now, we know that online is here to stay and that online learning can be very successful. MOOCs are likely to further develop and take learning in new directions that we may or may not be able to imagine today.

There will likely always be a place for classroom learning, but other ways of teaching and learning have emerged and will continue to emerge. This is what makes the industry challenging, but rewarding, as we seek the best way for students to reach their potentials.

Q: What are some of the challenges facing you and William Peace University in this upcoming year?

A: Small privates are similar in our challenges. We provide a quality education with limited resources, and we are always seeking new ways to do this. We complete the matriculation of a class, while starting the process all over again. We are finalizing our admission for Fall 2013 with the largest-ever incoming class and total enrollment, but have also started receiving students for tours, inquiries and applications for the Fall of 2014. It is a continuous cycle. I do believe higher education and the expectation for higher education is continual improvement, thus continual change; and change is hard for some people. This is an increasing challenge to resolve in higher education – the conflict between status quo and change.

Q: What are you most looking forward to at William Peace University in this upcoming year?

A: I am most looking forward to the students being back on campus. The students at WPU are engaged and fun to be with. At the same time, I always look forward to graduation. It is my favorite day of the year – not because the students are leaving, but because it is gratifying to see students arrive on campus and graduate four years later with confidence and hope for their futures. Graduation is a proud day for students and families, but it is also a proud day for us as educators to believe that we made a difference in each student’s life in some small way.

Q: Do you have any parting messages for our readers, many of whom are our current and future college/university presidents?

A: I believe the presidency of a college or university is the best job. We are in a challenging, changing industry. We work with students of all ages, which keeps us young in thought. We can feel a sense of accomplishment in our daily and strategic initiatives but, more importantly, in knowing that we have truly made a difference in some way – small or large – in an individual’s life. How many jobs give you this chance?

Well, that concludes my interview with Dr. Townsley. I would like to thank her for consenting to this interview.

 

 

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

4 Reasons Why Classrooms Need Diversity Education

School climate and school culture directly impact student success. As a result, it is particularly important for the school culture (and the classroom culture) to reflect, acknowledge, and celebrate diversity. Taking these feel-good ideals and making them a reality can be tough for educators, especially with so many other initiatives on their ever-tighter schedules.

But I think that this is so important that as an educator, you must take the time to do it. How to celebrate diversity in the classroom is another article, but for now, I want you to begin your journey with knowing exactly why it’s important.

1. Because the idea of “diversity” is not even that straightforward. Not only must schools recognize diversity evident among broad racial and ethnic groups (e.g., Asian or Hispanic), but the diversity within these groups must be recognized as well. For example Chinese and Japanese students may share common cultural characteristics as a result of being Asian, but will also have distinctly Chinese and Japanese cultural characteristics that differ from each other. The same is true of Caucasian students who come from vastly different family backgrounds, even from the same neighborhoods. In the interest of treating students equally, giving them equal chances for success, and equal access to the curriculum, teachers and administrators must recognize the uniqueness and individuality of their students.

2. Teachers have a particular responsibility to recognize and structure their lessons to reflect student differences. This encourages students to recognize themselves and others as individuals. It also encourages the appreciation of a diverse school population, and brings a sense of connection between disparate cultural heritages within a single school’s culture. It is certainly in the best interest of students and teachers to focus on the richness of our diversity. Recognizing and acknowledging our differences is part of treating students fairly and equally.

3. So that you can facilitate the process of learning overall. One reason for seeking out and acknowledging cultural differences among students is the idea that learning involves transfer of information from prior knowledge and experiences. To assist in this transfer process, it is important to acknowledge the students’ background, and to validate and incorporate their previous knowledge into the process of acquiring new information. All students begin school with a framework of skills and information based on their home cultures. This may include a rudimentary understanding of the alphabet, numbers, computer functions, some basic knowledge of a second language, or the ability to spell and write their names. It also includes a set of habits, etiquette and social expectations derived from the home.

4. So that you can help students assimilate what they learn with what they already know. If a student cannot relate new information to his own experiences, or connect the new material to a familiar concept, he may perceive the new information as frustrating, difficult or dismiss it completely, believing it to be in conflict with his already tenuous understanding of the world. Teachers have the responsibility to seek out cultural building blocks students already possess, in order to help build a framework for understanding. Some educational pedagogy refers to this process as “scaffolding.” Recognition of a student’s cultural differences provides a positive basis for effective learning, and a “safe” classroom environment. Every group of students will respond differently to curriculum and teachers must constantly adjust to be sure their methods are diverse, both in theory and in practice.

What are some easy ways you’ve found to promote diversity in your classroom? Leave a comment below.

Also, if you’re interested in learning more about how you can celebrate diversity in class, here are some tips I have for you.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Latest Posts