Education Leadership

E.T.Wilson published in Early Childhood, Education Leadership, Elementary Education, Higher Education, K-12,

What Preschool Can Teach Us About Choice and Opportunity

There is a pantheon of sitcom cliches that, no matter how many times they’ve been done before, always turn up in new ones. Among the repeat offenders: outrageously stressful wedding planning, pregnancy and baby delivery hi-jinks, new parents shopping for the “perfect” preschool, arguments over dolls vs footballs, and how these early childhood influences will determine the baby’s entire future from school choice to occupation and social status.

The sad reality is that the last two of these absurd situations have a kernel of truth. Does getting into the right preschool really determine whether a given child will go to the best university? Probably not; but when everything from friend groups to hobbies can factor into college admissions — and attending college can determine future career opportunities and professional networks — it is easy to see how major decisions can blur into the web of minor decisions surrounding a child’s future.

Early Childhood Competition

Everything concerning kids in America has gotten more competitive, starting early in their lives. Competition for better-paying (and future-proof) careers leads to more intense competition for any professional advantage at school. Getting into the best schools (by any of a number of definitions of “best”) heaps more pressure on kids while they are still in high school. From participating in sports to getting into AP classes, high school today eschews recreation in favor of workaholism and manicured student resumes.

Altogether, life for modern kids looks less like a series of choices and opportunities, and more like a long line of dominoes, set up and and sent cascading over within weeks of their birth, if not before. How can parents possibly hope to line them up just right for success and happiness?

But the problem isn’t just the hyper-competitive atmosphere surrounding the university system, and all the inputs considered in admitting or rejecting students; it is the preoccupation with the importance of college education in the first place.

When it comes to preparing children for the challenges and opportunities of adulthood, part of the messaging we need to fix — and soon — is the idea of ”college above all others”. Tuition prices have exploded in part because demand has exploded. Even historically mid-range schools face a demand beyond their capacity. For-profit schools have had lucrative success in taking advantage of this gold-rush mentality toward degrees, even as their students fail to graduate and default on their student loans in droves. More than a third of all defaults can be attributed to students from for-profit schools, even though they are just 26 percent of borrowers.

Trading School for Something That Works

The most common jobs in America today are retailers, cashiers, and fast-food workers. None of these requires any advanced education. Even filtering opportunity in terms of careers which require some minimum of post-secondary schooling and licensure, there are nearly as many truck drivers as there are nurses. If that comparison seems inappropriate, consider that trucking can be as essential to providing healthcare as nursing: nurses can hardly hope to treat a patient if they lack the necessary supplies and equipment on which they rely.

Trucking actually exemplifies the disconnect we, as a nation, have between the pressure we put on our youth to get educated, and the limitations we construct around how they “contribute” to our collective wealth and well-being. Without truck drivers, there is no clean water, no medicine, no food, and no consumer goods for a vast majority of Americans. But the career path into trucking — as with most skilled trades — takes people somewhere outside the world of universities and degrees.

The same impact trucking has, collectively, can be attributed to electricians, plumbers, and other skilled trades on which the modern world relies, yet bestows no particular social capital. Without electricians, all the gizmos and apps of Apple and Google, two of the world’s wealthiest corporations, would be useless. Without plumbing, our entire healthcare industry would be less preoccupied with inventing the next miracle pill or pushing the boundaries of surgical medicine than it would be with mitigating disease spread by poor sanitation. We are not so insulated from these alternatives as the popular imagination would assume; just ask the folks in Flint, Michigan whether plumbing is a worthwhile vocation.

The Value of Education

None of this disputes the intrinsic value of education, or the importance of giving students opportunity by expanding their access to learning. Rather, it points out how we’ve undermined our own drive to provide kids with the best chance in life by undervaluing the careers, and educational pathways, they might well follow to find their own form of success.

Trade school isn’t just a viable option, it can be downright lucrative, as well as rewarding, secure, and meaningful. But, as with all other things, planting that idea means having the conversation earlier, and undoing the damage of generations of parents and professionals marginalizing the trades that keep America running. Universities aren’t a solution to any of America’s challenges. They are merely one of a spectrum of options people face in deciding where they want to make their mark on the world, contribute to the maintenance and advancement of society, and find both purpose and acceptance among their peers.

The more parents encourage their kids to see the alternatives to college as equally worthy, the more the national conversation will pivot away from how we can give kids a leg up on the competition. At a time when our nation’s youth could feasibly have more options to learn, create, and work than at any time in history, it is absurd that they should be under such extreme pressure to conform to the parameters of a few selective universities.

The old sitcom trope of shopping for a prestigious preschool needs to die — not just for the sake of television comedy, but to reflect a society that celebrates the diversity it already possesses.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Policy & Reform, Trending Topics, Year-Round Schooling

How to Implement a Year Round Schooling System

Do you feel year-round schools would be a good choice for your district? The article that follows offers information on how to transition to a year-round school format, if you choose to go that route.

First, you need to decide what type of year-round school scheduling system you will use. Year-round schools are usually set up as single-track (ST) with unified attendance or multi-track (MT) with staggered attendance programs. Some schools use a combination of the two. The main difference between the two systems is that single-track allows the entire student and staff population to adhere to the same calendar, and multi-track separates students and teachers and places each in one of several staggered instructional blocks and vacation schedules.

To make this even more complicated, the single-track and multi-track systems can have different variations. In the 60-20 schedule, the school year is separated into three sixty-day sessions with three twenty-day vacations. A variation on this schedule is the 60-15, which provides for an additional three- to four-week collective vacation. This plan can be used with either the single-track or multi-track system. Collectively, these calendars are used by a little more than a third of year-round schools in America.

Lastly, let’s talk about two year-round calendars that are used by around 40 percent of year-round schools. In the 45-15 schedule, forty-five days of instruction are followed by fifteen days of vacation time. The related 45-10 schedule provides an additional four-week vacation for staff and students. Again, these plans can be implemented in either a single-track or multi-track system (Quinlan et al. 1987).

Choosing an implementation team

Before attempting to set up a year-round school in your district, it is important to get approval from at least 80 percent of your faculty, staff, and parents. This will require a number of meetings, presentation of literature on the subject, and time for discussion. If you do not get approval, you should strongly reconsider implementing a year-round system in your district. Assuming that you will receive the necessary approval, let’s move on to the next steps.

When transitioning to a year-round school setup, you must first assemble the implementation team. Groups no larger than seven usually work best. The team can be made up of a variety of district personnel and staff. Implementation teams normally consist of a school board member, the superintendent and assistant superintendents, principals, teachers, and other pertinent individuals.

Once the team is created, efforts must be made to assess the district’s capacity for implementing and sustaining year-round schools. The team must ask itself whether the district has all of the resources needed to implement and sustain a year-round system. In extreme cases, when the district feels it is unable to coordinate its own implementation efforts, the team may want to consider hiring an experienced educational consulting firm to oversee the process. There are many well-qualified firms that will be able to either work in conjunction with an implementation team or oversee the process themselves. Note, however, that this can turn into an enormous job with a significant price tag.

The consulting team or team leader must be committed to developing and implementing innovative strategies that have the potential to effectively produce educational change. Simply assembling a top-notch team is not enough, however. All of the major administrators, including the superintendent and school board, must fully support the decisions of the implementation team.

Remember that parents, community leaders, and policymakers must also be included in the process. Many parents are involved in their students’ educational plans and want to be informed of any changes. The implementation team will need to decide if parents and community leaders should be included as formal members of the team, or to simply elicit their advice and expertise as needed. When making decisions concerning which individuals will populate the team, remember to include members that have the expertise to be taken seriously within the district.

Involving parents and community members in the implementation process might provide the restructuring team with a way to engage other members of the community, such as grassroots organizations, local business leaders, and area politicians. Community members can also assist the school in choosing the correct year-round school system and schedule. It is vital for the team to understand the culture of the community, its needs and wants, and the life skills its young people require.

If the school would like to create fundraisers to assist in the efforts to transition to a year-round school system, it is important that the community members understand why the school wants extra money and why they should give the extra money. If the community members disagree with the changes being made, they will be less likely to participate or contribute to the cause.

Having an implementation team is an important component in a successfully transition to a year-round school system. The task of choosing the leader and deciding on the roles of the implementation team should not be taken lightly. In many instances, the leader of the implementation team will be the superintendent or someone he or she appoints. Alternatively, the leader and other members of the team can be voted in. The leader must be held accountable for ensuring the success of the entire team as it moves to implement and sustain year-round schooling. The leader’s roles might include, but are not restricted to, determining the areas of expertise the team members bring to the table and how he or she can utilize that expertise.

Implementing a year-round schooling system

 To ensure the minimum amount of time is spent on implementing the system, the leader will need to establish a standing meeting time and develop an agenda to utilize time to the fullest extent possible. The leader must decide if the team should have mandatory or optional meetings. If the meetings are optional, the leader must decide how information is disseminated to members who do not attend meetings. Prepared agendas are essential for smooth meetings and excellent communication within the team.

Once the year-round system is approved by all team members, the plan will need to be approved by the superintendent before it is presented to the school board. The same rules apply whether implementation is needed by one school or by all the schools in the district.

A concern, alluded to in the comments above, is the need to assess the district’s capacity for implementing and sustaining a year-round schooling system. To appropriately assess the abilities of the district or school, the leader will need to complete an inventory of the pros and cons. If the inventory concludes that the district or school does not have the capacity to implement or sustain the plan, it may be wise to suspend the idea until you have the necessary capacity.

Often, volunteer team members do not understand the dedication and length of time it will take to carry out the transition to a year-round schooling schedule. Before the team starts to implement the necessary changes, the leader will need to stress to all team members the enormity of the task, the number of hours the members will need to dedicate to the project, and what is at stake.

Once the team’s year-round schooling plan has been approved, it is time to implement the approved plan. First, the implementation team will discuss possible impediments to the approved plan and ensure the team has a contingency plan in place to deal with the issues as they arise. Next, they should implement their target goals and timelines. The leader will need to appoint a member of the implementation team to take on the responsibility of collecting, reporting, and evaluating any data collected. The leader will use the data collected to continuously revise and refine the team’s implementation efforts, as well as report their findings to the superintendent and/or the school board.

A useful tool for education specialists considering a move to year-round school years is the “Year-Round Education Program Guide” published by the California Department of Education. The guide takes you through the process of deciding on and implementing a year-round schooling calendar. The steps below are taken from the guide.

Implementation steps

  • Select schools and grade levels.
  • Establish a process for resolving issues.
  • Select and approve a calendar by working with employee groups.
  • Assess the need for facilities modifications, including shade modification and storage areas for off-track teachers.
  • Submit budget requests to district business office.
  • Decide if year-round education will be implemented on a voluntary or mandatory basis for students and employees.
  • Develop and approve a track preference and assignment policy for students, keeping in mind the need for same schedules for family members. Balance tracks by ethnicity, academic ability, socioeconomic level, and educational need.
  • Develop and approve a track assignment policy for teachers and staff.
  • Determine staff in-service schedule.
  • Institute a year-round education informational network for certificated and classified staff members and parents.
  • Send choices of tracks to parents by early spring.
  • Notify parents as soon as possible of track assignment.
  • Develop a policy and system for track-change appeals.
  • Develop a system for delivering services during the summer (e.g., classroom supplies and textbooks).
  • Modify/expand food services according to need.
  • Modify payroll periods.
  • Develop a system for plant maintenance and utilization of empty rooms.
  • Ensure that air conditioning and insulation are able to provide summer comfort.
  • Bargain with all appropriate classified and certificated units.
  • Develop a work schedule for office, custodial, and administrative staff members.
  • Develop a system to deliver electives and special services, such as special day classes, psychological services, resource specialists, and bilingual education.
  • Ensure appropriate cash reserves to meet summer payroll and supply expenses.
  • Modify transportation system as required, including routes, number of buses, and service schedules.
  • Establish a system for teacher room rotation or roving.
  • Develop a community-school communication system for notifying off-track families of important school dates and activities.
  • Provide activities for connecting off-track employees and parents.
  • Reschedule special events such as holiday programs.
  • Design attendance accounting system as required.
  • Modify report card schedule.
  • Coordinate with community services, such as the recreation department, youth organizations, church groups, and the police department.
  • Identify and coordinate with child care providers.
  • Identify intersession instructional programs and schedules.
  • Modify student testing program (California Department of Education 2015).

Track assignment considerations

General axioms

Establish the following priorities in deciding who gets first track preference, of a track:

  • Respect district employees and keep parents on the same track as their children.
  • Respect the terms of divorce settlements by respecting parents visitation schedules.
  • Consider unique family circumstances (e.g., predictable annual visits of families located in different parts of the country or the world).
  • Acknowledge unique educational opportunities (e.g., a cello prodigy who is offered a summer camp).
  • Use a fair, balanced track assignment policy once priorities have been honored. Each track should mirror the ethnic and socioeconomic composition of the entire school population.
  • Minimize ability and/or special education need track segregation. If a special population must be put on one track, isolation and segregation can be minimized by partial day integration of self-selection of track.
  • Develop an appeals process, including:
  • A site administrator.
  • An appeal committee (made up of an administrator, a teacher, and a board member).

Do not:

  • Load tracks by ability level.
  • Load tracks by special groups (e.g., band or football).
  • Move students from track to track each year (unless requested).
  • Wait too long to announce track assignments.

Operational strategies for special services

Special day classes

  • Typically confined to one track (or two if the population warrants).
  • Extended school year days are typically offered during intersessions (California Department of Education 2015)

Evaluation of a year-round schooling system

In order to validate their efforts, the implementation team will need to evaluate the effectiveness of its year-round schooling system. The process of evaluation can be completed in-house, or the district can hire outside consultants to perform the task. Hiring outside consultants is preferable, as it provides an impartial evaluation of the year-round schools. However, this can be costly, so many school districts may have no choice but to do it themselves. If the implementation team is willing to evaluate the success of the year-round school system, they must first develop a plan for evaluation.

The team’s evaluation plan should have been developed before the year-round schooling system was implemented. Performance goals that were created at the beginning of the implementation process should be used to guide the evaluation process. The team will need to decide who will collect, analyze, and interpret the data. In order to avoid biased results, it may be in the best interests of the school to hire an outside consultant who may provide a more objective assessment. The team will also use the results to determine whether the year-round schooling system was effective. The results may indicate that the plan was not a success. In this case, the best solution is to build upon the small successes and learn from the mistakes.

Implementation of a year-round school system is a long-term process. Reform occurs on a continuous cycle that must be sustained in order for improvements to be maintained and furthered. Keep in mind that not every reform effort bears fruit. Even the best schools have to continue to work in order to perfect their year-round schooling system.

References

Adler, Rachel, Rebecca Franckle and Kirsten Davison. 2014. “Accelerated Weight Gain among Children During Summer Versus School Year and Related Racial/Ethnic Disparities: A Systematic Review.” Preventing Chronic Disease 11:130355. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.130355.

“Benefits of Year-Round Schools Touted.” n.d. Education News. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.educationnews.org/articles/benefits-of-year-round-schools-touted.html.

Breslow, Jason. 2012. “By the Numbers: Dropping Out of High School.” PBS Frontline. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/by-the-numbers-dropping-out-of-high-school/.

Burgess, Matt. 2013. “Mapped: How Many Hours Do Children Spend at School around the World?” Help Me Investigate. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://helpmeinvestigate.com/education/2013/04/mapped-how-many-hours-do-children-spend-at-school-around-the-world/

California Department of Education. 2015. “Year-Round Education Program Guide.” Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/yr/guide.asp

Chaika, Gloria. 1999. “Is Year-Round Schooling the Answer?” Education World. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin137.shtml.

Dessoff, Alan. 2011. “Is Year-Round Schooling on Track? Summer Learning Loss and Overcrowding Drive Alternative Schedules.” District Administration. Accessed September 9, 2016. https://www.districtadministration.com/article/year-round-schooling-track

“Education Policy: Advantages.” n.d. K12 Academics. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.k12academics.com/education-policy/year-round-school/advantages#.V9VFZ_krLDd.

Fitzgerald, John. 2009. “Minnesota School Year Requirements Too Casual.” Minnesota 2020. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.mn2020.org/issues-that-matter/education/minnesota-school-year-requirements-too-casual

Holzman, Seymour. n.d. “Year-Round School: Districts Develop Successful Programs. Education USA. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED062682.

Lederman, Doug. 2009. “The Impact of Student Employment.” Inside Higher Ed. Accessed September 9, 2016. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/08/work.

Mendez, Edgar. 2014. “Congressional Report Highlights Year-Round Schools.” Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, July 8, 2014. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://archive.jsonline.com/blogs/news/266264841.html

Morin, Amanda. 2016. “The Pros and Cons of Year-Round Schooling.” Child Parenting. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://childparenting.about.com/od/schoollearning/a/year-round-school-pros-cons.htm.

O’Brien, Daniel M. 1999. “Family and School Effects on the Cognitive Growth of Minority and Disadvantaged Elementary Students.” University of Texas at Dallas. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.utdallas.edu/research/tsp-erc/pdf/wp_obrien_1999_family_school_affects.pdf .

“President Obama Wants to Keep Kids in School Longer: Extended Days, Weekend Hours, Shorter Summers.” NY Daily News, September 28, 2009. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/president-obama-kids-school-longer-extended-days-weekend-hours-shorter-summers-article-1.407418

Quinlan, Claire, George, Cathy and Emmett, Terry. 1987. Year-Round Education: Year-Round Opportunities. A Study of Year–Round Education in California. Los Angeles, CA: California State Department of Education.

Rogers, Kate. 2014. “How to Keep Your Electricity Bills Cool This Summer.” Fox Business. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2014/05/27/how-to-keep-your-electricity-bills-cool-this-summer.html

Von Hipple, Paul. 2007. “Save Iowa Summers.” Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.saveiowasummers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Paul-von-Hipple-Research1.pdf.

Washington, Jessica. 2013. “Year-Round School Could Be the Answer to the Minority Drop-Out Problem.” Politic365. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://politic365.com/2013/05/20/year-round-school-could-be-the-answer-to-the-minority-drop-out-problem/

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. “WatchingTV/Screen Time and Children.” n.d. Accessed September 9, 2016. http://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Children-And-Watching-TV-054.aspx.

 

 

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

Are wealthy donors influencing the public school agenda?

This article was written by Rebecca Jacobsen,  Jeffrey Henig, and Sarah Reckhow

School boards have often been portrayed as old-fashioned and dysfunctional, so much so that some school reform leaders have advocated for eliminating school boards altogether.

It is no surprise then that school board elections have mostly been known as being sleepy affairs. Most candidates in the past have been known to spend less than US$1,000 toward campaign expenses such as campaign literature and name recognition efforts. In 2010, for example, less than 3 percent of candidates reported spending more than $25,000.

However, this reality, as we have known it, is changing. Of late, out-of-state donors are writing very large checks to support candidates and political action committees (PACs) in local school board elections. Yes, there are PACs now involved in local school board elections.

Recent school board elections in places such as Denver, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Minneapolis and New Orleans have seen candidates routinely raising at least 50 times as much money as the 2010 national average.

Why is this happening? And how might the involvement of these large wealthy donors change our local schools?

We are scholars of politics and education. Our research shows that such large donations have the potential to change who is elected to govern and, as a result, how our schools are reformed.

Why do school boards matter?

First, let’s look at the unique arrangement of power in the U.S. education system to understanding why this new infusion of funding is significant.

The U.S. education system is highly decentralized, with control of schools spread across over 13,000 independent, local school districts. Most boards, comprising five to eight members, enjoy considerable power over many areas, including whom to hire, what to teach, when to hold school and how to allocate budgets.

State of Maryland school board meeting. Maryland GovPics, CC BY

It is true that of late, the decision-making power of school boards has been curtailed by recent national (e.g., No Child Left Behind and Every Student Succeeds Act) and state (e.g., state takeover laws) policies. For example, when NCLB came up with its own guidelines for “highly qualified teachers,” school boards had to ensure that their definition for teachers’ qualifications aligned with federal standards and not only with local priorities and standards. Ignoring these federal guidelines was accompanied by the potential loss of federal funding.

Even with these recent limitations, however, school boards nonetheless remain important. They can modify, regulate, innovate and resist state and federal policy demands.

This ability to resist or modify policy guidelines was evident recently after the Obama administration released its “Letter on Transgender Students,” which advised school districts to treat transgender students based on their expressed gender identity rather than their sex assignment at birth.

School boards across the country were called upon by local citizens to resist this policy. In some cases, local school boards voted to not comply with the Obama administrations guidelines.

Thus despite their relatively low profile, school boards have the power to dramatically shape local educational experiences by modifying, or even at times ignoring, state and federal rules and regulations.

How widespread is outside money?

This ability to alter or resist state and national policy may be the motivating force behind the recent investment by wealthy, national donors.

To examine this rise in donations to local school board candidates, we investigated over 18,000 campaign contributions in local education elections between 2008 and 2013 in five cities (Bridgeport, Denver, Indianapolis, Los Angeles and New Orleans). We selected these five sites for examination because they were geographically and politically diverse and yet all five had school board elections where national donors became involved.

We found that donations from outside donors were widespread and significant. In the 2012-2013 elections, for example, we found that large outside donors gave over $2.8 million to school board candidates and committees, comprising 44 percent of all funds contributed by individuals. This represents a significant increase from 2009-2010, when large outside donors comprised only 4 percent of donations in the cities we examined.

The figure below shows the growth of out-of-state donations by individuals in each city.

In-state vs. out-of-state individual donations by city and by year. Data Source: Authors’ Data, CC BY

Who’s making the contributions?

By examining publicly available campaign finance disclosure reports, which are filed by all candidates, including school board candidates, and list each donor and the amount donated, we were able to track a list of wealthy donors who contributed at least $1,000 in one election cycle (see here for an example of how to access these data). In total, we found 96 large national donors involved in education philanthropy and education reform. These donors included, for example:

Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, who donated in Los Angeles in 2011 ($150,000) and 2013 ($100,000) and in New Orleans in 2013 ($2,500). The high-tech billionaire is active in supporting the development of new charter schools and founded educational organizations such as NewSchools.org and Aspire Public Schools.

Reed Hastings. re:publica, CC BY

Alan and Jennifer Fournier, who donated in Indianapolis in 2012 ($4,000), Los Angeles in 2013 ($2,000) and New Orleans in 2012 ($2,200). Alan Fournier is founder of Pennant Capital Management, which manages $6 billion in assets. Alan Fournier cofounded (with David Tepper, a hedge funds manager), Better Education for Kids, which advocates for tenure reform and greater teacher accountability.

Katherine Bradley, the president of CityBridge Foundation, which “finds, incubates and invests in the most promising practices in public education,” who donated in Denver in 2009 ($500) and 2013 ($6,500), New Orleans in 2012 ($2,500) and Los Angeles in 2013 ($2,000).

Laurene Powell Jobs, wife to the late Steve Jobs and founder of Emerson Collective, who donated to Los Angeles in 2009 ($1,000) and 2013 ($103,000), New Orleans in 2012 ($2,500) and Denver in 2009 ($2,525). She is active in school reform and is a board member for several education nonprofits including Teach for America, the New Schools Venture Fund, and Stand for Children.

Could the top 0.01 percent change local schools?

Outside money may not be a bad thing if the values and interests of donors align with residents in the communities. It might even be a good thing if outside donations raise the visibility of school board elections, so often plagued by disengagement.

Perhaps bigger campaign war chests and close election battles will fuel engagement in school board elections, increase voter turnout and increase awareness of education issues. But these presumed benefits rest on the assumption that these elite donors share the same values and interests of the local community.

Research suggests that this assumption is unlikely to hold because policy preferences among the very wealthy differ from most Americans. Research by prominent academics working on economic inequality, Benjamin I. Page, Larry M. Bartels and Jason Seawright, captures these differences. These scholars found that,

“[o]n many important issues, the preferences of the wealthy appear to differ markedly from those of the general public.”

These different preferences are borne out in our data as well. We found that national donors favored “reform” candidates, or, put simply, those who supported policies such as school choice, performance-based accountability and adoption of the Common Core of State Standards.

School choice offers parents the ability to choose a their child’s public school rather than being assigned one based on one’s home location. Performance-based accountability plans generally require that school or teacher performance evaluations be based upon student standardized test scores. Schools or teachers may face sanctions if these targets are not met. The Common Core of State Standards (CCSS), adopted voluntarily by states, outline what students should know and be able to do at the end of each grade.

We found that candidates who received union support received almost no support from large, national donors. This targeted funding ultimately shaped, at least in some cases, the focus of the election debate.

Here is why it matters

The concentration of funds on candidates with particular policy agendas can squeeze out other policy issues. For example, a candidate we interviewed who was very interested in restoring adult education programs for immigrant parents noted,

“It [money] changes the discourse…their [the reform candidates] message is the only message. Not just the dominant message anymore. It’s the only message that people are hearing.”

While this candidates wanted to focus on the importance of providing adult education programs for immigrant parents, he felt his message about the importance of this issue was unable to compete with the messages being put forth by the reform candidates because he lacked funding to promote his policy agenda.

What changes in public schools when wealthy donors get involved? woodleywonderworks, CC BY

In our interviews, candidates who received outside funds noted that additional funding enabled them to reach voters more often and through multiple strategies. One candidate supported by large, national donors explained that in addition to mailings and yard signs, more traditional forms of reaching voters, the additional funds enabled him to hire a professional videographer who filmed and edited three vignettes that were shown on TV: one at his home with his family, one in a local library in the community and one in a classroom.

Even traditional forms of contact were given an upgrade. For example, a candidate noted that her materials were “more polished” with “nice photos,” something other candidates were unable to do because of a lack of funds.

Some candidates we interviewed felt voters benefited from this, whereas others worried that voters were “inundated” with information from just a few candidates. One candidate described how a friend received seven mailers from a candidate supported by outside funding in a single day. Candidates without this level of funding repeatedly noted that their message couldn’t compete.

Increasing polarization

As with state and national elections, we heard from several candidates that outside donations were also leading to increased conflict during campaigns and less willingness to compromise once elected.

One candidate described the polarization of the local board as being “very much like our federal government” where board members were either “a charter school candidate or a union backed candidate” and when on the board, “nobody can cross the line.”

As a result, some expressed concern that voters were becoming more cynical and less confident in their local public schools.

One candidate shared that she heard from voters on several occasions to “please stop calling” because “I’ve already gotten 10 calls this week about the election.” This candidate was concerned that disengagement in the form of low voter turnout was a direct result of citizens being turned off by the election.

What does this mean for public schools?

We certainly support greater attention to improving our public education system. But reform takes time. It takes compromise. It takes understanding of the day-to-day realities of local schools.

The old fashioned school boards, with all of their faults, were often slow and pragmatic, a force that could shield school leaders, teachers and students from broader political forces that whip the local agenda back and forth.

It remains to be seen whether school boards are strengthened by the nationalization of local school board elections or whether the injection of national funds will hinder the ability of schools to improve.

The Conversation

Rebecca Jacobsen, Associate Professor of Teacher Education, Michigan State University; Jeffrey Henig, Professor of Political Science and Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, and Sarah Reckhow, Assistant Professor of Political Science , Michigan State University

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

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

Lexia Learning Releases White Paper on Choosing Educational Technology That Helps, Rather than Hinders, Students’ Intrinsic Motivation

Proliferation of New Educational Technology Products Raises Question of Which Features Support and Spur an Inherent Love of Learning

BOSTON (March 16, 2017) – While student motivation in traditional classroom settings is well researched, materials on how digital tools are enhancing or undermining this essential factor for academic performance are harder to find. Lexia Learning, a Rosetta Stone Inc. (NYSE: RST) Company, has released a white paper titled, “The Importance of Intrinsic Student Motivation When Selecting Educational Technologies,” which not only focuses on well-researched methods of supporting students’ intrinsic motivation but also applies that research to educational technologies.

The white paper, written by Dr. Elizabeth R. Kazakoff, senior researcher at Lexia, highlights the three characteristics identified in Self-Determination Theory that are critical to spark intrinsic motivation in learners:

  • Autonomy
  • Competence
  • Relatedness to the contexts of a student’s community, personal goals, interests, or knowledge base

Dr. Kazakoff points out that instead of cultivating these three pillars of motivation, many people, including some educators and makers of educational technologies, opt for external motivators, such as rewards and punishments, to drive desired behaviors. “Although these solutions may be effective in the short-term, they often undermine students’ long-term intrinsic motivation for learning,” she writes. That is especially problematic since intrinsic motivation supports lifelong learning, a vital competency in the 21st century workplace.

To help educators ensure that intrinsic motivation is supported by the educational technology solutions they choose, the white paper shares questions—based on the three characteristics identified in Self Determination Theory of autonomy, competence and relatedness/meaning—that educators can ask themselves. For example, Dr. Kazakoff recommends that educators ask, “Is it clear to the student that their work online relates to their world offline?” because students’ perception of the value that a digital program’s goal will add to their lives can greatly influence the degree to which those students will be motivated.

“Educational technology products should be rich in elements that support intrinsic motivation, rather than ‘chocolate covered broccoli’ which simply sweetens the learning with a sugar coating of badges and stickers,” said Dr. Kazakoff. “Remembering the questions shared, as well as the tenets from Self Determination Theory of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, can help parents and educators navigate the digital landscape to find educational technology tools that are engaging and effective in generating authentic learning, not just providing edutainment.”

A complimentary copy of “The Importance of Intrinsic Student Motivation When Selecting Educational Technologies” can be downloaded at http://www.lexialearning.com/download-motivation-wp.

#  #  #

About Lexia Learning

Lexia Learning, a division of Rosetta Stone, empowers educators through adaptive assessment and personalized instruction. For more than 30 years, the company has been on the leading edge of research and product development as it relates to student reading skills. With a robust offering that includes solutions for differentiated instruction, personalized learning and assessment, Lexia Learning provides educators with the tools to intensify and accelerate literacy skills development for students of all abilities. For more information, visit www.lexialearning.com.

About Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone Inc. (NYSE: RST) is dedicated to changing people’s lives through the power of language and literacy education. The company’s innovative digital solutions drive positive learning outcomes for the inspired learner at home or in schools and workplaces around the world.

Founded in 1992, Rosetta Stone’s language division uses cloud-based solutions to help all types of learners read, write, and speak more than 30 languages. Lexia Learning, Rosetta Stone’s literacy education division, was founded more than 30 years ago and is a leader in the literacy education space. Today, Lexia helps students build fundamental reading skills through its rigorously researched, independently evaluated, and widely respected instruction and assessment programs.

For more information, visit www.rosettastone.com. “Rosetta Stone” is a registered trademark or trademark of Rosetta Stone Ltd. in the United States and other countries.

Media Contact:
Charlotte Andrist, Nickel Communications
[email protected] | 770-310-5244

 

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

Creating Real-World Connections and Fostering College and Career Readiness

By adopting a single platform that serves as a virtual staging area for all project-based learning, Columbus Signature Academy’s New Tech High School helps connect students to real-world learning while prepping them for success in college and the workforce.

By Joshua J. Giebel

When I ponder the traditional classroom setting, where instructors use textbooks, whiteboards, and lectures to teach math, I can only imagine how difficult it must be to make the critical real-world connections that students need to be able to fully engage with the subject matter. Simply telling students that geometry will someday become an important part of their lives isn’t enough. As learning facilitators, we have to illustrate those real-world connections, give pupils hands-on experience and examples, and then help them parlay their newfound knowledge into smart college and career choices.

At Columbus Signature Academy’s New Tech High School in Columbus, Indiana, we’ve been using project-based learning (PBL) since inception. When I was hired seven years ago, I was a recent college graduate whose teaching experience involved administering daily lectures and homework assignments in a traditional classroom setting. I’d heard of PBL through a college course and the concept interested me. I went through a rigorous, week-long training course on the nuts and bolts of PBL and then jumped in feet first.

When Will We Use This in Real Life?

The question math teachers hear most from students is, “When are we going to use this in real life?” Using PBL, I can provide the applications before that question pops into the student’s mind. As I was developing my own style of teaching math, this concept intrigued me. By creating projects and problems, I can show pupils how they’re going to “use it in real life” as they’re learning. This approach pushes them to develop a skill, come up with a solution, and/or create a workable method for solving the problem that I put in front of them. They can focus on building critical thinking and problem-solving skills in a way that the traditional classroom setting doesn’t support.

This year, my high-school geometry class tackled a project involving the furniture that they use in the classroom. In an effort to get more comfortable while seated, students tend to lean back too far in their chairs, which are built with small footpads. Because of the added weight and pressure pupils create when they lean back, these footpads break quite frequently.

To get to the bottom of this problem, we analyzed the design of the footpad and of the chair itself, which is made with an arc (where the footpad goes) that’s similar to a real, natural circle. Using the breakage problem as a focal point for the lesson, we talked about the arcs of circles, arcs on segments, sectors of circles, tangents, and all of the properties that go along with finding the center point of an object. Then, using an AutoCAD program and a 3D printer, students redesigned the chair footpads.

To take the project a step further, we had panelists from the chair manufacturer come into our class and assess the various alternatives that the students had designed. As it turns out, the company was aware of the problem and had already come up with a new design that was actually quite similar to some of our student projects. That was pretty exciting.

To manage the content associated with this and other problem-based assignments that my geometry and calculus classes work on, we use itslearning as our learning management system (LMS). For about two years now, students have used the centralized platform to conduct research, submit journal assignments, do their reflections, and create and store presentations, among other things. Using Prezi, Google Slides, or another type of presentation software, they work collaboratively and store all of their materials in the LMS.

For the chair project, for example, we shot a video of a chair breaking and then uploaded it into the LMS for students to watch and analyze. They were able to see what was happening during the breakage, where the stress was being created, and other key points. Then, using dynamic geometry software like GeoGebra and Geometer’s Sketchpad, they mapped out their arcs before putting them into the AutoCAD program.

Developing Tomorrow’s Workforce with PBL

What makes PBL so engaging is the fact that it’s student-centered—a key point that our LMS enables and supports. Put simply, students don’t have to come to me for every single thing. I can post information in the LMS and students know that they can always access it—whether they need it at the time we’re talking about it or three days later. This is a huge time-saver that allows pupils to manage themselves while also allowing me to be more productive during classroom time.

By encouraging students to identify real-world problems, develop solutions, and then present those solutions using 21st-century tools, PBL supports college and career readiness. This is important because today’s employers don’t want to hire people who are simply competent in academic areas; they want to hire people who can think critically and solve problems collaboratively.

Knowing this, our school intentionally and regularly builds in these skills to our instruction and assessment. In my view, college and career readiness is all about possessing 21st-century skills (e.g., the ability to communicate orally and in writing, collaboration, work ethic, mindset, etc.).

Project-based learning embeds these skills into each new undertaking so that, by the time students graduate from high school, they have had more experience working collaboratively, presenting to experts, and writing professional documents than most people have in their lifetimes. And by providing students with authentic, real-world problems, we engage students in the type of work they may encounter after high school. These experiences teach students about critical thinking and provide opportunities to persevere in solving problems.

Experimenting with PBL (or jumping right in) can seem daunting and difficult for any instructor. But it’s a worthwhile endeavor, and if you set realistic goals for how often you will do projects, come up with projects that you’re passionate about, and take a risk to change the way the class looks, it will pay off. The rewards are great and center on giving ownership back to students and then supporting those efforts/projects with an integrated LMS—a critical step in helping education move in the right direction as we go forward.

Joshua J. Giebel is a mathematics facilitator at Columbus Signature Academy’s New Tech High School in Columbus, Indiana.

 

 

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

Disengaged Students, Part 17: Anti-Intellectualism Starts at Home

In this 20-part series, I explore the root causes and effects of academic disengagement in K-12 learners and explore the factors driving American society ever closer to being a nation that lacks intellectualism, or the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake.

It’s often said that children learn more from what they see at home than from any other source in their lives. It’s human nature to look at older humans, particularly ones that live with you, as a guiding light in life. No parent is perfect and the struggle to be the best role models for the littlest eyes is a daily one. When it comes to education, though, it seems that today’s parents are happy taking more of a backseat – despite the potential of their influence.

Why Aren’t Parents Reading?

Perhaps a more direct attack on academic engagement comes from parents’ attitudes, particularly in the earliest years of their children’s lives, about reading and teaching basic skills at home. Teachers talk about it. Administrators talk about it. National campaigns that encourage parents to read with their young children “just 20 minutes per day” emphasize the need for parents to be on hand in early learning initiatives.

But when it comes to parent-to-parent interactions, the issue is nearly non-existent. Where are the heated mommy blog debates about what type of education is best in the early years at home? Even working moms and dads, who get a little more guidance from child care curriculum, should be talking about early learning as eagerly as they talk about the dangers of overpraising their children’s accomplishments or gluten-laden food. Forget heated debates; the conversation on early childhood education does not even exist.

Facts are Inconvenient

Parents’ less-than-passionate approach to education further fuels a larger national epidemic: the ability of American adults to accept questionable theory as fact. Children who are do not see their parents reading or researching the issues that impact their own lives are children who are vulnerable to unfounded paranoia or inaccuracies themselves. Children who are unable to differentiate between hard scientific knowledge that is tested, conspiracy theories espoused by celebrities, and suspect summaries from biased sources are unlikely to make the effort to hunt down real truths in academic settings.

Our popular culture mistakes assertions and correlations for arguments and proofs. If the rise in autism cases and the rise in the number of childhood vaccines coincide, that is enough evidence for a connection to be presumed. If a parent who raised a child on formula later sent that teen to Harvard, then there is clearly no validity in scientific claims that breast milk is indeed a better choice. If a President cannot produce an original birth certificate at a moment’s notice, then it stands to reason that he is an African terrorist infiltrating the U.S. government to further the world-supremacy plans of Islam. Get my point?

Each unfounded argument that is unquestioningly accepted by parents teaches even the youngest children that belief does not need a foundation. Blind acceptance is encouraged, and intellectual pursuits discouraged, when parents allow themselves to be led off the scientific path. The early molding of young minds impacts the ability of children to think critically in academic settings, for better or worse.

For K-12 students to really excel in classrooms, they must have the knowledge pursuit inspiration from home. It will make a difference in the desire level for answers, and will boost intellectualism in the long term.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Education Leadership, The Tech Edvocate

Why Coding Should Be a Compulsory Subject for Students

The main role of the educational system is to teach children how to become responsible, productive citizens of society. Schools offer a variety of subjects to equip kids with the skills and knowledge needed for adulthood – starting from kindergarten, where children learn the basics of writing, reading, and simple math and logical problems. These classes are designed as the ‘building blocks’ of knowledge. There are new blocks in education with every consecutive year.

When we talk about computer-related knowledge, one of the most important classes in schools is typing class. By learning to touch-type, children get used to the visual environment and improve their typewriting speed. Although the typewriter is outdated, keyboards and typing remain relevant today, particularly when entering data or programming devices.

One might say that kids intuitively acquire knowledge about information technology and its usage. They start touching keyboards and screens at a young age, and quickly learn how to navigate the Internet.But what about coding? Should our kids also learn how to code? Fundamentally understanding these new technologies—how they operate and how to customize them for better functionality—would improve kids’ experience with today’s digital devices.

Introductory programming classes in schools can help children understand the basics of programming structure, logic, and design. Of course, not all children will become software engineers; however, learning programming may help sharpen their practical and logical thinking skills. What’s more, some people found coding helped them get more out of their computers, tablets, smartphones, and other popular digital devices.

There are a lot of possibilities for a child that knows how to code, and the most important skill they acquire along the way is that they learn how to create their own solutions. Many would argue that it is hard for children to learn to code, but there are a number of applications and games designed specifically for that. Additionally, learning to code is the same as learning new language skill, especially for the children.

Since we are living in a digital age, technology plays a huge role in our daily lives. Smart devices are all around us—at home, school, the office, and so on. Although we use these devices every day, we typically only use them for basic functions, such as text messaging, phone calls, entertainment, music, etc.

When software and hardware designers make devices or apps, they usually add a lot of functions and features that most customers barely use. Mobile technology is developing rapidly, so the cell phones in our hands act as small personal computers with a broad range of tasks. Even TVs and other home appliances have become multi-functional devices.

Did you know that coding is a background for many of these devices? Unfortunately, most of us are unaware of the importance of coding. By teaching people how to create software codes that run devices, they will better understand how these devices actually work. Aside from that, coding classes can help students realize how applications are designed, as well as how the software triggers the device capabilities. That’s why coding should be a compulsory subject for students in the future.

Most experts emphasize the importance of introducing of coding into the school systems. According to Douglas Rushkoff from Codecademy, who is considered to be one of the world’s leading digital experts, schools have to incorporate code programming into their curriculum. By teaching students to code, we will create more future software and hardware engineers and meet the high demand for skilled tech workers.

Schools must recognize that both technology-related devices and coding are integral parts of our lifestyles. They should incorporate coding into their curriculum as a building block, to help kids not only understand how technology works and how to utilize its potential but to possibly get them interested in a future career in digital technology.

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

There’s more than practice to becoming a world-class expert

D. Zachary Hambrick, Michigan State University and Fredrik Ullén, Karolinska Institute

Some people are dramatically better at activities like sports, music and chess than other people. Take the basketball great Stephen Curry. This past season, breaking the record he set last year by over 40 percent, Curry made an astonishing 402 three-point shots – 126 more than his closest challenger.

What explains this sort of exceptional performance? Are experts “born,“ endowed with a genetic advantage? Are they entirely “made” through training? Or is there some of both?

What earlier studies show

This question is the subject of a long-running debate in psychology, and is the focus of the new book “Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise” by Florida State University psychologist Anders Ericsson and science writer Robert Pool.

In a 1993 study, Ericsson and his colleagues recruited violinists from an elite Berlin music academy and asked them to estimate the amount of time they had spent engaging in “deliberate practice” across their musical careers.

Deliberate practice, as Ericsson and his colleagues have defined it, includes training activities that are specifically designed to improve a person’s performance in an endeavor like playing an instrument. These activities require a high level of concentration and aren’t inherently enjoyable. Consequently, the amount of deliberate practice even experts can engage in is limited to a few hours a day.

Researchers found that skill level correlated with deliberate practice. Elliot Margolies, CC BY-NC-ND

Ericsson and his colleagues’ major discovery was that there was a positive correlation between the skill level of the violinists and the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated. As deliberate practice increased, skill level increased.

For example, by age 20, the most accomplished group of violinists had accumulated an average of about 10,000 hours of deliberate practice – or about 5,000 hours more than the average for the least accomplished group. In a second study, Ericsson and colleagues replicated the finding in pianists.

On the basis of the studies, these researchers concluded that deliberate practice, rather than talent, is the determining factor for expert performance. They wrote,

We reject any important role for innate ability.

In a recent interview, Ericsson further explained that

we can’t find any sort of limiting factors that people really can’t surpass with the right kind of training. With the exception of body size: You can’t train to be taller.

Is it all about training?

Based on this evidence, the writer Malcolm Gladwell came up with his “10,000-hour rule” – the maxim that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert in a field. In the scientific literature, however, Ericsson’s views have been highly controversial from the start.

In an early critique, Harvard psychologist and multiple intelligence theorist Howard Gardner commented that Ericsson’s view required a “blindness” to earlier research on skill acquisition. Developmental psychologist Ellen Winner added that “Ericsson’s research demonstrated the importance of hard work but did not rule out the role of innate ability.” Renowned giftedness researcher Françoys Gagné noted that Ericsson’s view “misses many significant variables.” Cognitive neuroscientist Gary Marcus observed,

Practice does indeed matter – a lot and in surprising ways. But it would be a logical error to infer from the importance of practice that talent is somehow irrelevant, as if the two were in mutual opposition.

How important is training?

For our part, working with colleagues around the world, we have focused on empirically testing Ericsson and colleagues’ theory to find out more about the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in various domains.

A 2014 study led by Case Western Reserve University psychologist Brooke Macnamara used a statistical tool called “meta-analysis” to aggregate the results of 88 earlier studies involving over 11,000 participants, including studies that Ericsson and colleagues had used to argue for the importance of deliberate practice.

Each study included a measure of some activity that could be interpreted as deliberate practice, as well as a measure of skill level in a domain such as music, chess or sports.

It isn’t all about practice.Ahd Photography, CC BY-NC

The study revealed that deliberate practice and skill level correlated positively with each other. In other words, the higher the skill level, the greater the amount of deliberate practice. However, the correlation wasn’t so strong as to warrant the claim that differences in skill level are largely due to deliberate practice.

In concrete terms, a key implication of this discovery is that people may require vastly different amounts of deliberate practice to reach the same level of skill.

A more recent study synthesized the results of 33 studies to understand the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in sports at a more detailed level.

One important finding was that deliberate practice lost its predictive power at the highest levels of skill. That is, on average, there was almost no difference in accumulated amount of deliberate practice between elite-level athletes, such as Olympians, and subelite athletes, such as contestants in national championships.

Training isn’t the only factor

As we discuss in a recent review article with behavioral geneticist Miriam Mosing, this evidence tells us that expertise – like virtually all phenomena that psychologists study – is determined by multiple factors.

Training history is certainly an important factor in explaining why some people are more successful than others. No one becomes a world-class performer without practice. People aren’t literally born with the sort of specialized knowledge that underpins skill in domains like music and chess. However, it now seems clear that training isn’t the only important factor in acquiring expertise. Other factors must matter, too.

What might these other factors be? There are likely many, including basic abilities and capacities that are known to be influenced by genes.

In a 2010 study with psychologist Elizabeth Meinz, 57 pianists ranging in skill from beginner to professional estimated the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated across their musical careers, and took tests of “working memory capacity.” Working memory capacity is the ability to focus one’s attention on information critical to performing a task by filtering out distractions.

Working memory capacity made a difference while sight-reading. woodleywonderworks, CC BY

The pianists then attempted to sight-read pieces of music (that is, to play the pieces without preparation) on a piano in the lab. The major finding was that working memory capacity was a factor in the pianists’ success in the sight-reading task, even among those with thousands of hours of deliberate practice.

Our research on twins further reveals that the propensity to practice music is influenced by genetic factors. This research compares identical twins, who share 100 percent of their genes, to fraternal twins, who on average share only 50 percent of their genes. A key finding of this work is that identical twins are typically more similar to each other in their practice histories, as well as their scores on tests of basic music aptitude, than fraternal twins are to each other. For example, it’s more likely to find a pair of identical twins who have both accumulated over 10,000 hours of practice than a pair of fraternal twins who have both accumulated this amount of practice.

This discovery indicates that, while extensive practice is necessary to become a highly skilled musician, genetic factors influence our willingness to put in that practice. More generally, this research suggests that we gravitate toward and persist at those activities that we have an aptitude for from the outset.

Research by other scientists is beginning to link expert performance to specific genes. In a groundbreaking series of molecular genetic studies, the University of Sydney geneticist Kathryn North and her colleagues found that the ACTN3 gene, which is expressed in fast-twitch muscle fibers, correlates with high-level success in sprinting events. Based on these findings, North and her colleagues have called ACTN3 a possible “gene for speed.”

How can people excel?

In view of this evidence, we have argued that the richness and complexity of expertise can never be fully understood by focusing on “nature” or “nurture.”

For us, the days of the “experts are born versus made” debate are over. The task before us is to understand the myriad ways that experts are born and made by developing and testing models of expertise that take into account all relevant factors, including not only training but also genetic influences.

From a practical perspective, we believe that this research will provide a scientific foundation for developing sound principles and procedures for helping people develop skills. As sports science research is already starting to demonstrate, it may one day be possible to give people accurate information about the activities in which they are likely to excel, and develop highly individualized training regimens to maximize people’s potential.

Far from discouraging people from following their dreams, this research promises to bring expert performance within the reach of a greater number of people than is currently the case.

The Conversation

D. Zachary Hambrick, Professor of Psychology, Michigan State University and Fredrik Ullén, Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute

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

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

How companies learn what children secretly want

Faith Boninger, University of Colorado and Alex Molnar, University of Colorado

If you have children, you are likely to worry about their safety – you show them safe places in your neighborhood and you teach them to watch out for lurking dangers.

But you may not be aware of some online dangers to which they are exposed through their schools.

There is a good chance that people and organizations you don’t know are collecting information about them while they are doing their schoolwork. And they may be using this information for purposes that you know nothing about.

In the U.S. and around the world, millions of digital data points are collected daily from children by private companies that provide educational technologies to teachers and schools. Once data are collected, there is little in law or policy that prevents companies from using the information for almost any purpose they wish.

Our research explores how corporate entities use their involvement with schools to gather and use data about students. We find that often these companies use the data they collect to market products, such as junk food, to children.

Here’s how student data are being collected

Almost all U.S. middle and high school students use mobile devices. A third of such devices are issued by their schools. Even when using their own devices for their schoolwork, students are being encouraged to use applications and software, such as those with which they can create multimedia presentations, do research, learn to type or communicate with each other and with their teachers.

When children work on their assignments, unknown to them, the software and sites they use are busy collecting data.

Ads target children as they do their homework. Girl image via www.shutterstock.com

For example, “Adaptive learning” technologies record students’ keystrokes, answers and response times. On-line surveys collect information about students’ personalities. Communication software stores the communications between students, parents and teachers; and presentation software stores students’ work and their communications about it.

In addition, teachers and schools may direct children to work on branded apps or websites that may collect, or allow third parties to collect, IP addresses and other information from students. This could include the ads children click on, what they download, what games they play, and so on.

How student data are used

When “screen time” is required for school, parents cannot limit or control it. Companies use this time to find out more about children’s preferences, so they they can target children with advertising and other content with a personalized appeal.

Children might see ads while they are working in educational apps. In other cases, data might be collected while students complete their assignments. Information might also be stored and used to better target them later.

For instance, a website might allow a third party to collect information, including the type of browser used, the time and date, and the subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over by a child. The third party could then use that information to target the child with advertisements later.

We have found that companies use the data to serve ads (for food, clothing, games, etc.) to the children via their computers. This repeated, personalized advertising is designed specifically to manipulate children to want and buy more things.

Indeed, over time this kind of advertising can threaten children’s physical and psychological well-being.

Consequences of targeted advertising

Food is the most heavily advertised class of products to children. The heavy digital promotion of “junk” food is associated with negative health outcomes such as obesity, heart disease and diabetes.

Additionally, advertising, regardless of the particular product it may sell, also “sells” to children the idea that products can make them happy.

Research shows that children who buy into this materialist worldview are more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression and other psychological distress.

Teenagers who adopt this worldview are more likely to smoke, drink and skip school. One set of studies showed that advertising makes children feel far from their ideals for themselves in terms of how good a life they lead and what their bodies look like.

The insecurity and dissatisfaction may lead to negative behaviors such as compulsive buying and disordered eating.

Aren’t there laws to protect children’s privacy?

Many bills bearing on student privacy have been introduced in the past several years in Congress and state legislatures. Several of them have been enacted into laws.

Additionally, nearly 300 software companies signed a self-regulatory Student Privacy Pledge to safeguard student privacy regarding the collection, maintenance and use of student personal information.

However, they aren’t sufficient. And here’s why:

Student privacy laws are not adequate.Mary Woodard, CC BY-NC-ND

First of all, most laws, including the Student Privacy Pledge, focus on Personally Identifiable Information (PII). PII includes information that can be used to determine a person’s identity, such as that person’s name, social security number or biometric information.

Companies can address privacy concerns by making digital data anonymous (i.e., not including PII in the data that are collected, stored or shared). However, data can easily be “de-anonymized.” And, children don’t need to be identified with PII in order for their online behavior to be tracked.

Second, bills designed to protect student privacy sometimes expressly preserve the ability of an operator to use student information for adaptive or personalized learning purposes. In order to personalize the assignments that a program gives a student, it must by necessity track that student’s behavior.

This weakens the privacy protections the bills otherwise offer. Although it protects companies that collect data for adaptive learning purposes only, it also provides a loophole that enables data collection.

Finally, the Student Privacy Pledge has no real enforcement mechanism. As it is a voluntary pledge, many companies may scrupulously abide by the promises in the pledge, but many others may not.

What to do?

While education technologies show promise in some areas, they also hold the potential to harm students profoundly if they are not properly understood, thoughtfully managed and carefully controlled.

Parents, teachers and administrators, who serve as the closest protectors of children’s privacy at their schools, and legislators responsible for enacting relevant policy, need to recognize the threats of such data tracking.

The first step toward protecting children is to know that that such targeted marketing is going on while children do their schoolwork. And that it is powerful.

The Conversation

Faith Boninger, Research Associate in Education Policy, University of Colorado and Alex Molnar, Research Professor, University of Colorado

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

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

Kindergartners get little time to play. Why does it matter?

Christopher Brown, University of Texas at Austin

Being a kindergartner today is very different from being a kindergartner 20 years ago. In fact it is more like first grade.

Researchers have demonstrated that five-year-olds are spending more time engaged in teacher-led academic learning activities than play-based learning opportunities that facilitate child-initiated investigations and foster social development among peers.

As a former kindergarten teacher, a father of three girls who’ve recently gone through kindergarten, and as researcher and teacher-educator in early childhood education, I have had kindergarten as a part of my adult life for almost 20 years.

As a parent, I have seen how student-led projects, sensory tables (that include sand or water) and dramatic play areas have been replaced with teacher-led instructional time, writing centers and sight words lists that children need to memorize. And as a researcher, I found, along with my colleague Yi Chin Lan, that early childhood teachers expect children to have academic knowledge, social skills and the ability to control themselves when they enter kindergarten.

So, why does this matter?

All work, and almost no play

First, let’s look at what kindergarten looks like today.

As part of my ongoing research, I have been conducting interviews with a range of kindergarten stakeholders – children, teachers, parents – about what they think kindergarten is and what it should be. During the interviews, I share a 23-minute film that I made last spring about a typical day in a public school kindergarten classroom.

Learning for tests? MJGDSLibrary, CC BY-NC-ND

The classroom I filmed had 22 kindergartners and one teacher. They were together for almost the entire school day. During that time, they engaged in about 15 different academic activities, which included decoding word drills, practicing sight words, reading to themselves and then to a buddy, counting up to 100 by 1’s, 5’s and 10’s, practicing simple addition, counting money, completing science activities about living things and writing in journals on multiple occasions. Recess did not occur until last hour of the day, and that too for about 15 minutes.

For children between the ages of five and six, this is tremendous amount of work. Teachers too are under pressure to cover the material.

When I asked the teacher, who I interviewed for the short film, why she covered so much material in a few hours, she stated,

There’s pressure on me and the kids to perform at a higher level academically.

So even though the teacher admitted that the workload on kindergartners was an awful lot, she also said she was unable to do anything about changing it.

She was required to assess her students continuously, not only for her own instruction, but also for multiple assessments such as quarterly report cards, school-based reading assessments, district-based literacy and math assessments, as well as state-mandated literacy assessments.

In turn, when I asked the kindergartners what they were learning, their replies reflected two things: one, they were learning to follow rules; two, learning was for the sake of getting to the next grade and eventually to find a job. Almost all of them said to me that they wanted more time to play. One boy said:

I wish we had more recess.

These findings mirror the findings of researchers Daphna Bassok, Scott Latham and Anna Rorem that kindergarten now focuses on literacy and math instruction. They also echo the statements of other kindergarten teachers that kids are being prepared for high-stakes tests as early as kindergarten.

Here’s how play helps children

Research has consistently shown classrooms that offer children the opportunities to engage in play-based and child-centered learning activities help children grow academically, socially and emotionally. Furthermore, recess in particular helps children restore their attention for learning in the classroom.

Focus on rules can diminish children’s willingness to take academic risks and curiosity as well as impede their self-confidence and motivation as learners – all of which can negatively impact their performance in school and in later life.

Giving children a chance to play and engage in hands-on learning activities helps them internalize new information as well as compare and contrast what they’re learning with what they already know. It also provides them with the chance to interact with their peers in a more natural setting and to solve problems on their own. Lastly, it allows kindergartners to make sense of their emotional experiences in and out of school.

Children learn through play. woodleywonderworks, CC BY

So children asking for more time to play are not trying to get out of work. They know they have to work in school. Rather, they’re asking for a chance to recharge as well as be themselves.

As another kindergarten boy in my study told me,

We learn about stuff we need to learn, because if we don’t learn stuff, then we don’t know anything.

Learning by exploring

So what can we do to help kindergartners?

I am not advocating for the elimination of academics in kindergarten. All of the stakeholders I’ve talked with up to this point, even the children, know and recognize that kindergartners need to learn academic skills so that they can succeed in school.

However, it is the free exploration that is missing. As a kindergarten teacher I filmed noted,

Free and exploratory learning has been replaced with sit, focus, learn, get it done and maybe you can have time to play later.

Policymakers, schools systems and schools need to recognize that the standards and tests they mandate have altered the kindergarten classroom in significant ways. Families need to be more proactive as well. They can help their children’s teachers by being their advocates for a more balanced approach to instruction.

Kindergartners deserve learning experiences in school that nurtures their development as well as their desire to learn and interact with others. Doing so will assist them in seeing school as a place that will help them and their friends be better people.

The Conversation

Christopher Brown, Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction in Early Childhood Education, University of Texas at Austin

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

  • no reactions
0
Share