Pre-recession spending levels are back in California. Well, at least California education funding has returned to pre-recession levels. Students are seeing the same funding to their schools that existed before the housing crash of 2008.
According to Sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com, “[s]oaring tax revenues have carried per-pupil education spending in California beyond where it stood before the Great Recession.”
But is California education funding really improving?
On the surface that seems to be awesome news as state legislatures had cut California education funding in the face of budget cutbacks and dwindling tax coffers.
But as information posted via Redding.com points out, the funding is still not enough. California education funding is still in the bottom 10 of states when it comes to adequately resourcing students and schools. Getting back to pre-recession levels is nothing to celebrate; it’s just a starting point for what needs to be funding reform for the education in the state.
It will also be interesting to watch how quickly funding could expire as economies continue to grow. The marker is that California’s tax revenue seems to be healthy again, but we’re basing that off of money accumulated nearly 10 years ago. If we adjusted the funding based on what is actually being earned, and taxed, today this news may not seem so rosy.
What’s honestly the most surprising is that it has taken this long for the levels to return to 2007 levels. We should have seen this news in 2011 or 2012. It’s still not enough though rising education funding is something worth praising.
Even with that bit of information, new money, or old money dependent upon how one views it, is good. More investment for education isn’t a bad thing. I just hope that California education funding continues to grow so its students see better appropriation in their state.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish this guest post on virtual reality and education as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Daphne Stanford
I recently came across an especially heated op-ed piece by Joshua Kim in Inside Higher Ed about the recent hoopla over virtual reality in education and was struck by its especially sour and weary tone. However, I can’t say I blame him. Like many educators before him—I remember because I, too, used to be a weary educator—here was another gadget or technological trend that was being said to change education unalterably, and for the better! But when it comes to virtual reality and education, I’m trying to be open minded.
Let us, rather, explore what virtual reality can do. One of the most common uses is virtual travel around the globe or to places not ordinarily feasible, in terms of a physical visit—via, for example, Google Expeditions. Recently, students at University of Maryland were immersed in a virtual classroom experience in order to test out a potential distance platform that simulates what it’s like to be in an actual college classroom, potentially allowing online students to have a more immersive, authentic-feeling experience. “You want the instructor to feel as if they’re right in front of you,” said Ramani Duraiswami, a computer-science professor and co-founder of the startup company VisiSonics. They showcased the technology recently at the university’s virtual-reality lab, called The Augmentarium. There’s a similar set up at Rutgers University with the use of Second Life to immerse students into a virtual reality with their classmates that is potentially more motivating than typical online interaction using instant messaging platforms.
In addition to business and marketing-based user-created experiences, there are also applications in simulating heart surgery. The medical field, in particular, is one of the frontiers that is being particularly well-explored. For example, at George Washington University, the nursing school uses a full-blown simulation lab for training future surgeons. Their lab utilizes mannequins that have a pulse; they also can speak, blink their eyes, and spurt blood! I suppose, strictly speaking the latter scenario more akin to theatre or an elaborate staging scenario, as opposed to virtual reality.
Apparently, “there has been an explosion in the use of simulation medicineto help physicians gain preparation for performing lifesaving procedures as well as approaching delicate or difficult situations related to patient care.” We can see this with programs that utilize virtual reality simulations, in the computerized sense: for example, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Virtual reality is being successfully used as an educational tool at institutions like Brown University to elucidate subjects such as anatomy and archeology in an interactive, 3D space. Similarly, a tool called Microsoft Hololens is being implemented into medical training classes at Case Western Reserve University in order to help teach anatomy.
Other smart uses of Virtual Reality and Education
One other exciting realm where Virtual Reality and education is being successfully utilized is physical rehabilitation. For example, a Spanish-based company, Neurodigital, is in the process of developing a device called Gloveone, which allows users to feel texture—for example, a recently returned combat veteran with brain damage is temporarily able to feel their dog’s fur coat. The glove uses ten different sensors and motors that vibrate when its user “touches” something in the virtual realm. Because of the potential for personal connection between the user and his or her personal, home-based environment, there’s an increased level of motivation to continue with therapy—more so than there would be without the virtual reality component.
There’s another way to look at all this virtual reality and education —returning, perhaps, to a perspective more similar to that of Mr. Kim in the Inside Higher Ed opinion piece I cited, at the beginning of the article. Jorge Suarez of Arizona State University writes about the potential dark side of virtual reality with the impending release of Oculus Rift VR goggles and the growing interpersonal detachment that the widespread use of virtual reality could further exacerbate: “Ironically,” Ramos writes, “because of social media, many people have become disconnected from the world around them, and have instead become so attached to their phones, that they have not been able to put them down and have decent face to face conversations.” He offers as an extreme example a 32-year-old man who died after a three-day gaming binge at an Internet café in Taiwan.
Although I don’t foresee a student dying anytime soon from the use of virtual reality and education in the classroom, it is wise to be aware of the pitfalls of over-reliance on technology and virtual realms. This caution can also be applied directly to education: we must remember that education is inherently relational; that, as Kim stresses in his op-ed, a higher quality education begins with deeper investment in our teachers, rather than throwing money at quick technological fixes and instructional gadgets. However, there is also a great deal of potential in much of this new technology. It is up to us to balance our use of quality instructional time and technology that we judiciously implement into our class time. I don’t know about you, but I know I’d much rather examine a human body in virtual form than in the form of a cadaver! But, then again, that’s why I didn’t go into medicine!
What uses can you think of for virtual reality in your classroom? Comment in the space below!
Bio: Daphne Stanford grew up near the ocean, and she loves taking pictures of the mountains and rivers in Idaho, where she now lives. She believes in the power of writing, education, and community radio to change the world. She hosts “The Poetry Show!” Sundays on Radio Boise. Find her on Twitter @daphne_stanford.
As the first tech company to announce its diversity statistics in May of 2014, Google admits to poor numbers again in 2015. A whopping 70 percent of Google’s workforce in 2014 was male, while just 3 percent of its U.S. staff was Hispanic and only 2 percent were Black. Google diversity, or lack thereof, is just a small sampling of the industry as a whole, though.
For 2015, overall gender Google diversity by in large remained the same. However, there was slight improvement with a 1 percent increase in the number of women in tech positions. There was also a slim increase in women in leadership positions within Google. However, the same can not be said for Hispanic and Black representation, as they remained at 3 and 2 percent respectively, and only 2 and 1 percent in technology-focused jobs.
How can Google diversity improve?
Though the figures are alarming, Google has committed to rectifying the situation and has invested nearly $150 million in diversity goals for 2015.
Google diversity funds are being used to recruit on non-Ivy League university campuses, which include state schools with diverse student bodies and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (or HBCUs). Current employees are being trained and participating in diversity enhancing projects. The investment is also being made in computer science education for girls and diverse underrepresented populations. Although 72 percent of Google’s leadership team is white, Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, is Indian-born and committed to diversifying the company.
It’s clear that Google diversity numbers are incredibly lackluster. There is a huge imbalance in gender and minority representation. At the same time, Google deserves recognition for bringing this information to light and prompting the entire tech industry to take a closer look at its diversity figures. With Google’s investment of hundreds of millions of dollars, the proper steps are being taken to ensure that more women and minorities get into computer science and engineering programs and eventually, tech jobs in the first place.
Learning to code is something that happened organically for me. I come from a family of teachers. My dad taught woodshop for 30 years in some of Milwaukee’s toughest schools, and my mom taught briefly, too. When I was a sophomore in college, I wrote my own curriculum and taught SAT and ACT prep. As a student who had always done my homework, I was dismayed when my students didn’t do theirs, and I was frustrated by their excuses. I needed a better way to hold them accountable. I was an English major and a computer science minor, so I built a system for online homework delivery and performance analytics.
I tried to share my system with my teacher friends, but they said that they were using too many different software solutions already and didn’t want to add another one. So instead of looking to integrate my software with other products, I decided to build an all-in-one system—and to build it myself.
I was still a student, and I was doing well in my English classes but not as well in organic chemistry. Based on my own performance and my experience teaching kids with a wide range of abilities and learning styles, I became a strong believer in individualized instruction. I designed my system, called MIDAS (Massively Integrated Data Analytics System), from the ground up with the goal of guiding students to mastery by letting them learn at their own pace. MIDAS takes into account individual and aggregate student performance, demographics, and socioeconomic data to recommend what students should study next—all while accommodating individual needs and allowing students to submit their work using various media.
Learning to code for myself
When I started building MIDAS, I had zero coding experience. I hired a team of offshore developers to help me. When we talked on Skype, I asked lots of questions and studied the code. Those questions and their answers were the start of me learning to code. As a senior (a year into building the system), I finally took three programming classes. Eventually, I realized that language, time, and cultural differences were hampering my work with the developers, so I took over building MIDAS myself. Ultimately, doing it myself was easier than trying to explain to programmers how teachers think.
I stored the code for MIDAS on my local server, made changes, deployed those changes to see if what I’d done worked, and did it again and again. I learned by trial and error. When I got stuck, I read online articles on Stack Overflow or just Googled the topic I was looking for. I found snippets of code online in repositories likeGitHuband CodePen; most of these snippets are under MIT or GNU license, which means that programmers can use them or change them however they want. (Some snippets do require a paid license, though.)
As I built the system, I showed it to teachers, and they would say, “Hey, it would be great if it could do XYZ,” and I would add that feature. This went on for eight years, so as of right now, MIDAS combines the utility of up to 13 siloed systems, including SIS, LMS, CMS, SPED forms, graduation planning, transportation, scheduling, teacher mentoring and professional development, data analytics, state reporting, and the ability to build and curate curriculum and assessments.
The truth is, the system will never be finished. I wrote a major feature the other night that lets you post a video (for example, of a teacher teaching to demonstrate instructional practice), add time-stamped comments, and link those to a standard. I thought it was beyond me, but I searched online and found that Google has an API to deal with timestamps, so I thought, “Cool, I could use this.”
I’d say I wrote 90% of the code for MIDAS myself. I hired four other developers in the last year. (The size of the development team has quintupled!) We’re continuing to build additional modules and interactions between the modules, adding new functions over existing data structures. We do product demos a couple times a week, and when a teacher says, “It would be cool if it could do this,” I add it to my list.
My goal is to help school superintendents and IT directors help students and teachers who are tired of struggling to support dozens of different software packages. I built MIDAS on a single Amazon Web Services database, so reporting and analytics can be automated and simplified; this makes complying with state reporting requirements easier and frees educators to do what they do best: teach.
It has taken me eight years to wrap my head around MIDAS, but I know what every field in our database of more than 600 tables does. Growing up, I absorbed a lot about how educators work and how schools work just by talking with my parents and teachers and being that kid who hung around the office while counselors built the master schedule.
Being a woman has helped, too. I think my approach to solving problems and writing code is more global, whereas many men I’ve worked with engineer more linearly. If I were advising girls who are learning to code, I would say, “Do it, and don’t let anybody tell you you can’t do it. And just keep at it.” Oh, and getting a degree in computer science would be a good thing to do.
Megan Harney is the founder and CEO of MIDAS Education. She holds a master’s degree in Technology, Innovation, and Education as well as a bachelor’s degree, cum laude, in English and computer science from Harvard University. Megan has previously managed developers at Microsoft, taught students and teachers, consulted with district administrators to solve business problems, and conducted neurodegenerative research.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish this guest post on stealth assessment as a way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Dr. Gregory Firn
History is replete with examples of innovation and invention that outpaced the necessary shifts in thinking and ingrained habits delaying the full impact of the “new.” It comes as no surprise that education has lagged behind innovation. However, many of the factors underpinning educational lag are beyond the control of the classroom teacher.
Fueled by the proliferation of technology, we are in the early stages of “reimagining” teaching and learning. We have learned the hard way that devices alone will not result in the much-promised transformation of teaching and learning. The presence of devices in education has revealed limitations, constraints, and liabilities in several ways. Chief among these has been the reluctance or outright resistance to necessary shifts in instructional methodology and practices. This is both natural and expected.
Instructional shifts are complicated by the expectation that classroom teachers have the requisite capacities, competencies, and confidences to navigate technology-rich as well as technology-challenged learning environments. Another challenge is the diversity and variance of technology skill, knowledge, and experience of learners.
Other constraints include budget and time, as well as the very real issue of access to reliable broadband connectivity—not to mention bandwidth and device compatibility, availability, and functionality. All of these limitations place teachers in a perplexing and conflicted position. They may indeed want to shift practice, but can’t.
Arguably, the restrictions and adverse impact of narrowly defined accountability models, including the obsession with assessments, will not necessarily go away with the much-heralded reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (otherwise known as the Every Student Succeeds Act). States must now begin the process of figuring out their assessments and assessment schedules. However, the daunting challenges of reimagining teaching and learning in this digital age remain.
I posit that, against this backdrop, teaching and learning cannot and will not be fully reimagined without the awareness, understanding, and application of assessment and instruction congruency. Instruction and assessment cannot be separated or thought to be two independent components of the teaching and learning process. The true promise and application of technology is in its ability to provide feedback in the form of information and insight during the learning process—not just at the end of a learning activity.
Evidence of certain competencies cannot be monitored and measured through traditional assessment practices. Thus, expanding assessment thinking and design are essential to navigating a reimagined version of teaching and learning.
Stealth assessment in the classroom
One method that is slowly gaining momentum is “stealth” assessment. The key to stealth assessment is its unobtrusive nature, which has roots in gaming. The idea is that a player’s choices and strategies are constantly and consistently informing the player of their progress and success. Applied to education, stealth assessment presents a powerful step in minimizing and eventually closing the teaching and learning immediacy loop.
The immediacy of feedback is critical. For far too long, we have focused on the trailing indicators of learning. Technology now affords us the ability to focus on the leading indicators of both teaching and learning. In fact, we can now at best disrupt or at worst interrupt the failure to learn, rather than continuing to remediate failed learning.
Disrupting the failure to learn does not necessarily mean disrupting the learning process. For example, as more teachers adopt project-based learning, their ability to peek inside the learning process by monitoring the collaboration, construction, contribution, and co-authoring of meaning by each learner is critical. Yet the challenge for the educator to be in all places at once has never been more daunting.
As a Superintendent, I have seen that technology can help address this challenge and make stealth assessment possible. For example, the Flexcat system from Lightspeed Learning is a powerful tool to implement “stealth” assessment. Flexcat gives teachers the ability to listen to any small group on demand, without students knowing. This allows teachers to monitor and assess authentic interactions and collaboration from anywhere in the room—a giant step towards personalized teaching and learning.
Present and future technologies should cause a fundamental shift in instruction due to the stealth assessment concept, not just a minor adjustment. As I mentioned above the teacher and learner are empowered to monitor, provide and receive immediate feedback as well as participate in the thoughts, insights, and observations of learning as it is occurring. Participatory learning and participatory assessing are fundamental to the “student as worker, teacher as guide” mindset in which learners as key architects of their own learning. They co-author, co-construct, and co-produce knowledge, meaning and application. Moreover, critical thinking; examination; and assessing ideas, concepts, and constructs are essential skills in the 21st century.
Technology is a powerful tool that presents the opportunity and access for each learner to design, construct, collaborate, demonstrate, and assess their learning. To ensure this impact, educators must remain vigilant in their own learning to develop the capacity, competence, and confidence to shift instructional practices leveraged by technology to give each learner the best possible chance at success.
Dr. Gregory Firn has served as a Superintendent, Deputy Superintendent, and in several other educational leadership roles in Texas, North Carolina, Connecticut, Washington State, Nevada, and overseas. Dr. Firn twice led systemwide digital transformation initiatives, including the design and implementation of robust human capital development programs. Dr. Firn earned his doctorate from Seattle Pacific University, where his research focused on learner-centered education.
Historically black colleges and universities, or HBCUs, have provided a top-notch education for African Americans since pre-Civil War days. These schools, founded prior to 1964 with the goal of serving black students, once provided windows to educational pursuits when other doors were slammed shut to African Americans.
But with diversity at all American colleges and universities on the rise, and the emergence of flexible online programs, do HBCUs fit in the contemporary higher education picture?
They certainly can, with the help of some strategic thinking and considering their role in today’s society. Here are three paths HBCUs can take that will help them do just that.
1. Continue to serve as a haven for top-performing African American men and women.
According to ThinkHBCU.org, 70 percent of the nation’s African American physicians and dentists earned their degrees at HBCUs. Over 50 percent of public school teachers of African American descent earned their degrees at HBCUs. African Americans with communication technology degrees from HBCUs make up 44 percent of the nation’s total and 43 percent of mathematics degrees awarded to African Americans come from HBCUs. The range of industries addressed in the offerings of HBCUs is vast, contributing to a larger and more integral African American presence in the workforce.
Women gain an especially strong advantage when they earn a degree from an HBCU. The United Negro College Fund has reported that females who graduate from Bennett and Spelman Colleges make up more than half of the African American women who eventually earn science doctorates. To put that in perspective, that number is higher than the amount produced by all seven Ivy League sister schools put together. In a workplace when minorities often still struggle to reach the highest ranks, African American women hold a strong advantage with a degree from a HBCU.
2. Carefully consider and craft your role as an individual HBCU in today’s society.
When HBCUs first began popping up in America, they were a necessity to higher educational paths for African American young people. Benefactors like John Rockefeller founded Spelman College in Atlanta (named after his wife, by the way) in order to give black students a shot in a nation still very much in the throes of Jim Crow-law domination. Most of the 105 HBCUs were founded in former slave areas that still presented steep challenges for African Americans that aspired to higher education but faced discrimination in dominantly white college settings.
The original intent of HBCUs worked. Some of the nation’s brightest and most influential minds came out of HBCUs. Langston Hughes was a Lincoln University graduate. Martin Luther King Jr. earned his degree from Morehouse College. Talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, education expert Marva Collins and Brown University President Ruth J. Simmons all earned degrees from HBCUs (from Tennessee State University, Clark Atlanta University and Dillard University, respectively). These powerful pillars of the African American community were able to achieve optimal success in life because of the education they received from HBCUs.
But what about now? Do ambitious African American students really need a HBCU to achieve success? Perhaps a more poignant question is this: does it help or hinder the African American community when its members attend a HBCU today?
The answer is grounded in the particular student’s intent. Young African Americans today do not NEED a HBCU to obtain a general education, but they may find particular programs at individual schools meet their career objectives. Some may even find academic inspiration in the original founding purpose of a HBCU and that feeling of carrying on tradition may fuel them to graduate, make an impact in the world and give back to their college or university.
3. Foster diversity and be welcoming to all students.
Maybe it’s no longer necessary to attend an HBCU in the sense that it was when these colleges were originally founded. But that does not mean that these institutions lack other attractive qualities.
In fact, many students with white European, Latino or Asian roots are choosing HBCUs because of the strength of the academic programs and generally lower tuition costs. During the 2011 – 2012 school year, West Virginia State, Kentucky State and Delaware State universities all reported that more than 25 percent of their populations were made up of white Americans.
A continued push for diversity on HBCU campuses is the only way these schools can transition from the necessity of the past to the potential of the future. This means implementing more online course options and flexible degree programs so that all students can picture themselves succeeding at a HBCU.
To sum it up, gratitude for the original intent of HBCUs combined with forward educational thinking for students of all heritages will carry HBCUs to the next level of achievement in higher learning circles.
What else do you think HBCUs can do to keep and promote a reputation of excellence? I’d appreciate reading your thoughts in the comment section.
**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.**
Maria Klawe, Harvey Mudd College
I’ve been passionate about increasing women’s participation in computer science for more than 25 years. While the number of undergraduate women pursuing some STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) fields like biology and chemistry has steadily increased over the past couple of decades, women’s participation in computer science (CS) has actually been declining.
Indeed, within the last 20 years the percentage of undergraduate women who received CS degrees plummeted by almost 40%. According to the National Science Foundation, in 1995, 29% of bachelor’s degrees in CS were awarded to women; by 2012, the most recent year for which NSF data is available, only 18% of CS undergraduates were women.
The Computing Research Association (CRA) reports even lower numbers. CRA’s annual Taulbee Survey of over 100 major computer science departments in North America found that by the mid-2000s, the percentage of women graduating with CS bachelor’s degrees averaged 14%.
For me this issue is both personal and global.
Working to remove barriers
I’m a mathematician and a computer scientist. Back when I was getting my PhD in math, there were very few women in my field. Despite receiving discouragement because of my gender, I worked hard.
And I excelled. I went on to take up leadership roles in many places – at IBM, University of British Columbia, Princeton and now at Harvey Mudd. I’ve been the first woman in nearly all these positions.
I know the struggles that can hinder women when they are working in a predominantly male field. I also know firsthand how computer science and technology make for a great career, offering a good income, work-life balance and opportunities to travel. They also offer a chance to make significant contributions to the world, by working on important societal problems.
I want young women to have these opportunities.
I’ve been working on this issue for decades. When I came to Harvey Mudd College in 2006, the CS department was averaging only about 10% women majors. The faculty had decided to make significant changes to attract more women.
They redesigned their introductory computer science courses to focus less on straight programming and more on creative problem-solving. They included topics to show the breadth of the field and the ways in which it could benefit society.
In order to reduce the intimidation factor for women and other students with no prior coding experience, they split the course into two sections, black and gold (Harvey Mudd’s colors), with black for those who had prior programming experience and gold for those with no prior experience.
This worked wonders to create a supportive atmosphere.
Making the field exciting for women
Instead of traditional homework, which can be isolating, the faculty assigned team-based projects so that students coded together. And most importantly, they made the courses fun. The intro CS courses went from being the least-liked course in our core curriculum to being the most popular.
After the courses were introduced in 2007, we saw an immediate and steady increase in the percentage of female students majoring in CS. Within four years, we went from averaging around 10% women majors to averaging 40%. We have continued to average 40% since 2011.
In addition, faculty created early summer research opportunities designed for students who had completed only one or two CS courses, and encouraged their first-year female students to participate. A number of studies have shown that research experiences for undergraduate students increase retention and confidence in STEM fields, factors that are particularly important for women and minorities.
Harvey Mudd’s female students who participated in early CS research projects indeed reported greatly increased interest in the discipline and a boost in confidence. They realized they could do the work of a computer scientist and that they enjoyed it as well.
Even today, there aren’t enough women entering the field of computer science.Harvey Mudd College, CC BY
We also send large contingents of women students each year to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing,the largest conference for women working in technology fields. At this event, students get to see role models and are excited about the many amazing technology career paths they can pursue.
Other institutions are starting to take up our approaches.
The National Science Foundation’s most recent (2012) report shows that computer science has the lowest proportion of women receiving bachelor degrees of all the STEM fields. The percentage dipped to a mere 11% from 2007-2009 and gradually returned to 14% by 2013-2014.
Computer science should be a required part of secondary education, but a lot of schools don’t have computer science teachers. Most young people who go to college today have not had much exposure to computer science.
We also have to combat the cultural belief that some people are simply born with math, science or computer talent and others are simply “not good at it.” There’slots of researchthat shows that persistence and hard work play a much larger role in success in any area of science and engineering than “native ability.” Another serious challenge is posed by the media portrayal of careers in technology, which builds certain stereotypes.
I want people to think about how we can change our images of who we consider to be competent in technology. At the moment, the image of the computer scientist is limited to a white or Asian male.
One thing we know for sure is that you get better solutions if you have more diverse teams working on them. We need the female perspective to get the best solutions to very pressing problems.
Need for diversity
We also need more African Americans, Latinos/Latinas, poets, football players and artists involved in creating technology. Right now there is unfilled demand for computer science grads and not just in the tech industry.
I want computer science and technology to be a world that embraces everyone who has passion, ability and interest, whether they look like the dominant group or not.
Today, computer science touches all industries. Its products are embedded in our daily lives. Addressing the significant problems of the world – from climate change to health care to poverty – will involve technology.
I think the world will be an incredibly exciting place and we will see amazing technological developments when we create a much more diverse tech community.
If you’re a teacher helping ELL students succeed in regular education classrooms, there are a few things you must consider.
First, you need to educate yourself about the language acquisition process. You should also contextualize learning so that content is relevant to students’ experiences with their families. And most importantly, don’t allow the language barrier to interfere with a belief that ELL students can learn. You can’t underestimate the power of high expectations when it comes to success with language development (and learning in general). As a teacher, you should be willing to learn about ELL students, their families, and their communities, to structure meaningful learning experiences.
Use technology, including recordings, videos, and presentations, to emphasize language concepts. Students should be allowed to demonstrate their language acquisition through dramatization or video, with subtitles in their native language.
Some programs endorse the use of translation devices or electronic dictionaries in the classroom. However, there is some debate as to whether or not these forms of assistive technology actually defeat the purpose of English language learning.
Another less-considered idea is to include ELL students’ families and communities in the learning process. For example, you can host presentations or entertainment nights so students can show parents what they’ve learned. The community can be included as a means for support by inviting bilingual guests to share their language-learning experiences with students. ELL students will learn that language is a challenge for everyone and that learning a second language becomes a valuable, admirable skill. Cooperative and collaborative learning can also be effective. Many ELL students learn best in small-group discussions where there is less pressure to speak perfectly. Introducing the entire class to a third language might be beneficial, to help instill empathy for the new language learners.
Visual aids also support learning among ELL students. These include nonverbal behavior such as pointing, body language, signals, and gestures, as well as photos, videos, and dramatizations. ELL students should be encouraged to use graphic organizers and to keep picture journals of the words they have learned. Writing journals and learning logs also support learning among ELL students. Also helpful are alternative versions of texts or novels and teacher-provided notes for lectures or presentations.
I hope these tips are useful for taking part in ELL students’ success. Do you have any other tips that will help ELL students learn best in a school setting? Please leave your thoughts below.
What students desire from their school experience is not necessarily what their parents and members of the larger community want them to learn or experience. Only a small percentage of students come to school with an overwhelming desire to learn. Many attend school on a daily basis because that is simply what they are supposed to do. That doesn’t mean they don’t end up finding subjects they enjoy, but American students do not make the active choice to begin attending school.
So teachers come to the table already behind, in some ways. Not only is it the job of educators to teach, but they must also find ways to make the learning process enjoyable and desirable to students who didn’t make the choice to be in the classroom in the first place. With authentic lessons and inquiry learning, educators can clear this hurdle, though. Here are a few ways how:
1. Seek feedback. To assist in motivating students, schools could put out a survey asking them what they want to learn, what they have already learned, and what the teacher could do to make learning more exciting. With the stress of standardized tests, it might be difficult to take the time out of the day to distribute the survey, but every effort should be made to do so.
2. Create safety. Students are more prone to become engaged in assignments when the teacher has created a safe and inviting learning environment. Students want to work in an educational environment where a teacher’s expectations are explicitly outlined. In order to be successful, students must be given the opportunity to engage in activities just above their abilities.
3. Prioritize learning. It may seem like a smart idea to entertain students to motivate them, but solid learning is always the best path. The teacher also has an obligation to create a teaching environment that promotes learning. This means, for example, that teachers should not embarrass students for a wrong answer or a below-standard test score—nor should they allow other students to make fun of wrong answers and below-standard test scores. We need to make sure that the debate on the quality of American schools focuses on the academic practices directly affecting student learning.
4. Strive for equality. Schools are not only concerned with test scores, but are also concerned with equality. All students should be considered equal, regardless of their age, race, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, cultural beliefs, and ability levels. If all students feel they are being treated equally, then they will be more motivated to work. Students will feel intrinsically motivated to learn when they feel respected by teachers and the staff, and will work harder to achieve the goals that teachers and schools have outlined.
5. Consider outside support systems. Student-teacher and family-student relationships also influence intrinsic motivation. In order for students to perform well in school, they will need to have the proper support system both in school and at home. Most students are only interested in performing for the people that matter most to them. If these people do not hold education in high regard, then the student will not hold education in high regard either.
When students are in the elementary grades, they will usually perform for their parents and for their teachers with little to no resistance. Once students develop social networks, parents and teachers are quickly replaced by peers. Adolescents are prone to peer pressure and succumb easily to their peers’ suggestions and viewpoints. It is important for high school teachers to create strong student-teacher relationships, in order to more effectively motivate the students to remain engaged in behaviors that lead to positive academic achievement and outcomes.
6. Encourage collaboration. It is also important for teachers to create and support opportunities for students to collaborate with others. Schools and teachers that create the high levels of student engagement understand the possibilities learning group collaboration affords. Teachers can also provide opportunities students to collaborate with students in other countries. Collaboration among students in and outside the classroom will have to be closely facilitated by the teacher. If carried out appropriately, outcomes for this strategy can be very positive for all students concerned.
Why is it so important to have motivated students?
Student engagement is one of the potential indicators of the effectiveness of a school. Educators and administrators have to concentrate their efforts on activities that engage students in order to foster academic achievement. If they do not, they will have a room full of students who are either academically disengaged or who are merely giving the impression that they are academically engaged. Students are less likely to pay attention when they are on board with what is being taught.
If students complete a task they feel is boring, then they do so to comply with the teacher’s directions, and not because they are intrinsically motivated to do so. In too many instances, students operate from a point of extrinsic motivation, sadly to include the motivation to avoid being singled out or to incurring the teacher’s wrath. If school is not fun and exciting, students won’t develop the love of learning—leaving them less likely to move on to higher education.
What do you think are some ways to get students excited to learn? Share your insights and experiences in the comments below.
Leadership is an influence process that changes how others act or think. Therefore, one way of determining leadership is by investigation of its consequences. There are many ways of exercising influence that do not qualify as leadership. These include force, coercion, and manipulation, which are in no way related to leadership. The difference between all these influence processes is based one factor: the source of influence.
These sources of influence— positional authority, personal qualities, and rational persuasion—often separate leadership from any other form of power relationship. Distributed leadership is an influence process, since it embraces the social side of leadership. This is accomplished through an expansion of the specific influence processes that distinguish it from force, coercion, and manipulation. It uses influence processes that make use of the power of ideas, logical thinking, and evidence. This is particularly important in schools, since the professional culture of most schools typically makes it difficult to rely on the power of position alone.
There are some negative aspects of this concept. First, it lacks any educational content, and consequently, provides little or no guidance to the types of leadership practices that are likely to influence teachers, in ways that make a difference to students. Also, this leadership concept has been criticized for not identifying those particular leadership traits that are most likely to improve student outcomes. Instead, it focuses on distribution of leadership. Most of the available research shows that the knowledge needed to identify and define the types of leadership tasks that deliver these credible benefits are found in educational texts, and not in leadership literature.
Yet another limitation of this concept of distributed leadership is that it overlooks some of the ways leadership can be exercised indirectly. Not all interaction is through direct person to person communication. The three sources of leadership influence suggested—acceptance of orders from those in positions of power, response to essential personal characteristics, and acceptance of requests and ideas as reasonable—assume that all leadership influence is exercised through direct face-to-face interaction. This is simply not the case.
However, this conception ignores the most indirect ways in which educational leaders lend their talents to teaching and learning, such as the creation of the conditions that enable independent and unique patterns of thought and actions in others. This leadership practice is known as empowerment, and plays a huge role in the influence process.
A more powerful model is needed for measuring educational worth, if studies of distributed leadership are to give a greater understanding of how it can improve current teaching and learning processes. Recent research into distributed leadership has expanded the unit of analysis from that of leader-follower, to include the interactions among leader, follower, and other aspects of the situation, like the tools that guide and regulate teachers’ work. In summary, the concept of “distributed leadership as distributed influence” helps us distinguish between leader-follower interactions and how they produce change; this is a determining feature of what qualifies as leadership.
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.
In his State of the Union address, President Obama brought up the topic of universal Pre-Kindergarten learning and praised the programs already in place in states like Florida, South Carolina and New Jersey. He connected Pre-K initiatives to his Race to the Top program that has the lofty goal of making the U.S. the worldwide leader in college attendees and graduates.
His administration claims that the academic skill sets needed to reach that goal must have their foundation before Kindergarten and that the responsibility for that lies in public funding.
But is this true? Here are my thoughts from an educator’s view.
1. First, it’s no secret that the U.S. lags behind other developed nations, especially when it comes to science and math. To compete as a nation on a global scale, this generation of K-12 (or P-12) students simply need to know more than their parents did as children. This fact has led to some passionate discourse both for and against more stringent academic standards that start in early childhood and extend into the college years.
2. Universal Pre-K programs tend to benefit disadvantaged and at-risk students the most. Children from middle-to-high class socioeconomic backgrounds do not feel the positive effects of preschool as strongly as their low-income and minority peers. In families where at least one parent can be home with children in the early years, and able to do basic learning activities with them, the impact of Pre-K programs are virtually non-existent by the time the child is in mid-elementary school. Children that participate in play-oriented preschool programs but have attentive parents that expose them to minimal learning fare just as well, or better than, peers who attend regimented Pre-K programs.
3. Socialization and preparation are two other reasons for pre-Kindergarteners to attend school. Of course, academics are not the only benefit to Pre-K programs. Socialization and an idea of what to expect when the school years come along are also an integral part of the Pre-K process. Kindergarten used to be an adjustment year for children, but now kids who arrive in these classrooms are expected to know much more.
4. Be aware of how preschool can affect these same children when they reach kindergarten and beyond. As I have said before, being prepared for the next school year is also an important part of the Pre-K process. Kindergarten used to be an adjustment year for children, but now kids who arrive in these classrooms are expected to know much more. Common Core standards exist at the Kindergarten level, with the expectation that these students will know how to read simple sentences competently, do basic addition and subtraction problems and understand basic time concepts. States that already have tax-funded Pre-K programs test Kindergartners and report back to the preschool provider the results. In some cases, future funding rests on whether or not the Pre-K program adequately prepared enough students for the academic rigors of Kindergarten.
So then the question becomes one of impact. Will universal learning at a younger age make a big enough difference long-term to justify the added cost and resources? How much time do children really need to learn what they will need to know to compete globally?
Parents seem to be split on the issue, with one side affirming the need for stronger academic standards and the other side bemoaning the difficulty of material their young children bring home from school. Districts throughout the country have listened to parents’ complaints when it comes to implementation of all-day Kindergarten (versus the traditional half-days) and some parents have even decided to homeschool their children because they so strongly disagree with the academic rigor. Given this cultural climate, I wonder what is to be expected when more states roll out
Pre-K programs? Right now it is voluntary for families – but will that always be the case?
Is universal Pre-K a necessity – and if so, are American educators, parents and young students really ready for it?
Leave a comment—I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
Internet and cell phone cultures have brought a whole new meaning to American slang. Not only are kids these days speaking informally, but now those relaxed rules of grammar are sneaking into written words too.
This is probably not surprising at all, but do you know just how much this culture has affected our students’ writing skills? Fortunately, I have three research-backed results to show you.
1. Students can no longer tell the difference between formal and informal writing: The Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life project asked middle and high school educators about their thoughts on digital tools and the impact on student writing. The biggest problem with these digital avenues of composition, according to surveyed teachers, is the blurring of lines between formal and informal writing. Abbreviations are common, particularly on platforms like Twitter that have a 140-character limit. Most smartphones now have no limits on texting characters, but students that owned phones with the 160-character limits of just a few years ago have already formed short, abbreviated habits. In the digital realm, short and sweet is the key – even if a grammar, punctuation and writing formalities fall by the wayside. The same is not true of educational writing pursuits though, as K-12 writing instructors must prepare students for the demands of strong, professional writing in college and the workplace.
2. But at least they are more creative: Over two-thirds of the respondents said that writing platforms provided through Internet and cell phone use have improved student creativity. Students also have more outlets for collaboration which encourages improvement and “putting it out there” in terms of writing that may have been closeted to notebooks or diaries in pre-Internet generations.
3. Even after graduating college, young adults cannot write. A report released by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills found that over 26 percent of college graduates have deficient writing skills. These findings were not based on graduation assessment exams, but compiled by interviewing actual employers. These employers said that many college-educated employees could not even accomplish the basic writing tasks of the job proficiently. How are these students earning college degrees if their writing is not up to par though? With the average U.S. student accruing $35,200 in college debt, it would seem learning the basics of writing, at least above a “deficient” level, would be a given takeaway.
The deficiency is not the fault of the colleges and universities though, at least not totally. Students are showing up for college without the skills needed to write well and with schools assuming they already know the basics. The 2011 book Academically Adrift found that less than half college students felt their writing had improved at all in college. Less than half also said they were never required to write a paper longer than 20 pages. In a nutshell, the writing proficiency that half of these students exhibited as seniors in high school was the same four years later, despite the so-called rigors and high cost associated with a college education.
While colleges could certainly take a hint from these numbers, the work of remedial writing education is not the responsibility of colleges. It falls on the teachers that come long before the adult years. These teachers face an uphill battle though, especially in an age where formal writing is often confused with everyday communication. The tools for creativity in the writing process may be better than ever, but the constraints of digital communication are hurting students’ composition and their attention spans too.
How can students who have essentially made a lifestyle of short, segmented, slang-ridden writing conform to the formal communication still expected in the real world? It starts with teachers who set high standards and do not waver. In the long run, the fear of losing a student’s interest by insisting on high writing standards is a small one compared to the implications of college graduates viewed as writing-deficient by the people who sign their paychecks.
How can K-12 teachers win out against the negative impact of digital communication on formal writing? Please share your thoughts.
