Equity

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity February 14, 2017

Why we should talk to children about race

Amanda Williams, University of Bristol

It’s a situation that many parents dread. Encountering a black man in the street for the first time, a white child might loudly ask something like: “Mummy, why does that man have dirty skin?” After cringing, shushing, or offering a distraction, parents may wonder where this kind of question has come from, how to deal with the situation or indeed avoid it in the future.

From a surprisingly early age, children can distinguish between faces from different racial groups. By the time they are three months old, experiments have shown that white, black, and Asian infants tend to look longer at faces from their own racial group or familiar racial groups compared to faces from other, less familiar racial groups. By three to four years old, children can consistently and accurately identify others by race. The ability to differentiate between people on the basis of race improves with age, with teenagers and adults automatically and effortlessly categorising others on the basis of skin colour.

Choosing to be colourblind

In many societies there is a widespread belief that individuals should receive the same treatment regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, and ability. Partly in an attempt to appear egalitarian, many adults adopt a “colourblind” approach to race – avoiding mentioning race under the guise that if one doesn’t “see” race, then one cannot be considered racist. For example, in studies using a photo identification game, white participants asked to identify a particular face from an array of faces are less likely to use race to describe the faces, particularly when paired in the task with a black partner.

The norms enforced by this behaviour have now become so entrenched that adults tend to find situations that force them to talk about race extremely uncomfortable and anxiety-provoking, leading to a complete avoidance of the topic in social interactions.

Even when interacting with their young children, parents avoid race. In one study that observed the way parents read a storybook created to raise issues about race relations and racial prejudice with their four to five-year-olds, the majority of parents tended not to mention race, despite it being the theme of the book.

Let’s talk about race. www.shutterstock.com

But ignoring race does not make it go away. Like adults and older children, young children are aware of race even if no one seems to be talking about it. This may lead young children to ask questions about racial differences, which are sometimes embarrassing and untimely, in order to gain a better understanding of the world around them.

Only after having acquired a better understanding of social norms regarding race, at around ten years old, do children also begin to show colourblind behaviour and avoid using race to identify the target in a photo identification task. Like adults, older children avoid mentioning race even at the expense of how well they might perform in the task at hand.

But taking a colourblind approach to race is not the best way to promote equality and reduce racial prejudice. Studies with white people who avoid talking about race show less friendly behaviour when playing a photo identification task with a black partner compared to a white partner. Like adults, nine to 12-year-olds also tend to find situations where they have to talk about race uncomfortable, nerve-wracking, and unpleasant.

A new approach

But if colourblindness – and the tendency to avoid talking about race – impacts on relationships between diverse people, what approach should we take in order to resolve racial inequalities? The answer lies in embracing and celebrating our racial differences instead of minimising or even altogether ignoring them.

Fully recognising the multiculturalism in our society appears to be a better strategy. For example, in one study children who were read a story that placed value in racial diversity were found to be more likely to identify acts of racial discrimination and more likely to sit next to racially diverse peers in the school lunch room. In another study, white adults who adopted a multicultural approach (as opposed to a colourblind approach) showed less prejudiced behaviour when conversing with an Asian partner about racism and diversity.

We need to see the world in colour. www.shutterstock.com

Our concerns about discussing race can be reduced by placing more value in racial diversity, resulting in less stressful and more successful interactions with people from racial groups different from our own. As a caveat, most of the research mentioned in this article has focused primarily on the reactions of white participants. So there is more work to do researching attitudes and behaviour in diverse contexts with individuals who identify as racial minority group members.

For children, curiosity about their surroundings and the people they meet comes naturally. Rather than brushing aside children’s questions about race in an attempt to avoid social embarrassment, we ought to embrace and celebrate the differences that make us unique, remarkable, and that colour the world we live in.

Talking with children about race from an early age may not only derail embarrassing questions, but may, more importantly, serve to increase children’s comfort when interacting with people from different racial and ethnic groups – and increase the comfort of those they are interacting with too.

Given that we live in a society that is becoming increasingly diverse, children will be expected to interact with individuals from many racial and ethnic backgrounds. Children need to be prepared for this future – one way to do this is to encourage them to see this diversity as a positive feature of their worlds. It’s time to talk about race.

Amanda Williams, Lecturer in Psychology of Education, University of Bristol

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

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform January 26, 2017

How to Help Low-Income Students Succeed

By Matthew Lynch

Students from low-income homes hit the K-12 scene at a disadvantage. Materially, they often do not have the means for the resources they need for basic classroom functions. In non-tangible ways, they often do not have the same academic support as middle- or high-income peers and know less when they arrive in Kindergarten.When parents are unable to provide for their children, that responsibility then falls on the schools and the community. Ensuring that students from low income households succeed in K-12 classrooms is multi-faceted and must include:

Physiological considerations. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, students need to have physiological needs met before they are able to learn. If a child is hungry, he or she will focus on that fact and not on the schoolwork. Federal law allows schools to provide breakfast and lunch for students whose families meet federal poverty guidelines. The law was created in an effort to meet the biological needs of each student if the parent was unable or unwilling to provide the necessary provision. If children have all of their physical needs met, they will be more likely to succeed in school.

Safety considerations. Another need that must be met is the safety of the child. Students need to feel comfortable and safe enough to learn. Students will not be able to focus unless they feel safe in both the home and the school. When teachers become certified to teach, they become mandated reporters of child abuse. This means that a teacher who suspects abuse in the home of a student is compelled by law to report this information, using protocols established by the school and/or the district.

The main job of schools is to deliver effective instruction for student learning. If the school needs to provide some or all of the necessary physical/biological needs, it should do so. Schools should be concerned about the welfare and the safety of the children they serve. The school’s purpose in the community is to ensure that students have the support and resources they need to be successful.

It is important to realize that the schools are not required to provide said support. Schools not operating as full-service organizations should advocate for their students whenever necessary. Ruby K. Payne discusses support systems in her book A Framework for Understanding Poverty. Payne posits that students from poverty need support systems to succeed. She believes that students with the right resources and support systems can succeed even if they are living in poverty.

Why should the burden fall on schools?

Local schools are the only community-service organizations that come in contact with virtually all school-aged children in a given area. Educators and administrators are in a unique position to understand the needs of children and the communities in which they live. Teachers are among the few people who understand children’s hopes, aspirations, and impediments; however, only a small percentage of teachers take advantage of this fact.

With all the problems and the issues that our children face, we can ill afford to miss opportunities to connect with them. A strong student-teacher relationship will in turn help the teachers better educate their students. One of the keys to the teacher-student relationship is the creation of mutual trust and respect. Once students understand that their teacher trusts and respects them, they will do everything in their power to live up to the teacher’s expectations.

How to help low-income students succeed

James P. Comer, a child psychiatrist who studied students from low income neighborhoods In New Haven, Connecticut, developed the Comer Process which focuses on child development in urban schools. The Comer process is based on six interconnected pathways which lead to healthy child development and academic achievement. The pathways are physical, cognitive, psychological, language, social, and ethical.

Comer believed that the pathways should be considered a road map to a child’s successful development into adulthood. If a child’s needs are not met in one of the pathways, there will be likely difficulties in the child’s ability to achieve. Comer explained that a child could be smart, but unable to be socially successful. He wanted teachers to be aware that they should not teach for the sake of teaching, but rather to help the child learn how to negotiate life both inside and outside of the classroom.

According to Comer, if a child is intelligent but cannot socially interact, then the school system did not do its job of preparing the child for the world. The theory pushes teachers to make sure that children are developing emotionally, physically, and socially before the child can learn the school-related topics. Comer believed that children will not be functioning members of society if he or she is only successful in academic skills such as math and reading.

Comer proposed that children need a primary social network—one that includes parents, and people from the child’s school and community. Comer emphasizes that the people in this network are concerns all needs that are part of the developmental pathways. Children who have this level of support will likely be more successful in school. This is the main premise behind Comer’s idea of letters home to the parent or caregiver. He wants to make sure that the parents and caregivers are aware of what is happening in their child’s school life so they are able to share in creating a positive experience at school.

Comer’s notion of developmental pathways is now practiced in many schools across America. In fact, there is such interest in his theory that a field guide is now available for creating school-wide interventions to help students achieve academic success. Comer’s theory is concerned with the ways in which the world is changing. He foresees children needing to have more skills and more “book smarts” than previous generations. The future adults of this society will need to be socially accepted while also being “book smart tech savvy” and multi-taskers.

Educators today should understand that when they become teachers, their duty is to advocate for not only the children in their class, but also the students in the entire school. Teachers are often the creators of grassroots advocacy organizations and coalitions. Advocacy is an essential part of a teacher’s profession. When teachers advocate for a student, their action conveys to children a message that the teacher cares about their well being and creates a positive bond between teacher and student.

photo credit: katerha via photopin cc

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch January 26, 2017

3 Startling Facts about Ivy League Schools

Ivy League schools are prestigious, with many students vying for acceptance and few actually earning a spot as an attendee. However, their reputation does not reveal the whole picture about these schools. For example, are these schools really worth the hefty price tag? Here are three interesting facts that should get you thinking about Ivy League schools a little differently.

1. Ivies are among the wealthiest schools in the nation. The truth is that attracting the best and brightest to one’s campus is always easier when money flows as freely as spring water.

According to a report by Moody’s Investor Service, Americans colleges and universities are developing a wealth gap problem.

“One third of all assets held by colleges and universities” are with the country’s 10 wealthiest universities.

A few on the list include Harvard, Texas, Stanford, Yale, MIT, and Duke. Of the top ten, three are public universities. The rest are private.

Harvard, perhaps the nation’s most prestigious university, is also the country’s richest. In terms of wealth, Harvard is stout with $42.8 billion. That’s almost $10 billion more than the University of Texas, which comes in second.

The report also states that the country’s richest schools “capture the bulk of charitable gifts flowing to higher education” to the tune of 60 percent.

But one of the more interesting portions of the study lands with how many schools collect their revenue. The collection of tuition and student fees at the country’s top 20 private educational institutions has a median of 15 percent. That number jumps to 46 percent for public colleges.

Moody’s report concludes that because of the recovering economy and stock market, university endowments for the country’s wealthiest schools have aided in their increased wealth.

2. Ivy League schools are not an instant payoff for graduates. For people seeking the cushiest early-career salaries, the Ivy Leagues aren’t paying off instantly.

Princeton, Harvard, Yale and Columbia don’t make it into the top 30 universities for starting salaries. University of Chicago, a tie for fourth, doesn’t make the top 200.

The top three schools? The U.S. Naval Academy, Harvey Mudd and West Point.

The list of schools that prepare students for a career with a high starting salary post-graduation day include many other elite military and tech schools, according to a report by PayScale that surveyed 1.5 million employees with degrees from over 1,000 colleges.

Graduates of the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis earn a median annual salary of over $80,000 over their first five years post-graduation, earning the school the top number of surveyed schools.

The PayScale survey tells us that Princeton, the highest performing Ivy League school offers its graduates a median starting salary of $60,000 – earning is the 34^th highest in the country.

The nation’s traditionally elite schools distinguish themselves with a salary growth near graduates’ mid-career. Graduates from Ivy League and like schools see their pay jump significantly when they are more than ten years past graduation.

3. Actually, high college tuition may not correlate with high earnings at all. Saving a year’s worth of salary for one year of higher education at Harvard may yield great career results for some but that may not be true for all.

According to U.S. News and World Report, a recent Brookings Study shows that “other schools may either not cost as much and yield a similar salary and success of loan repayment, or they may cost about the same but generate higher earnings potential.”

Harvard is a small sample size and represents a limited portion of the zenith of college costs. But, in essence, the study shows that one may earn just as much for the duration of their career by attending a college with cheaper tuition.

That’s not a knock against Harvard as students, and their parents, are free to choose any school that matches with their educational goals.

This is an alternative that students have always taken. Take Ronald Nelson, a student who was accepted to all eight Ivy League schools.

Instead of choosing a prestigious Ivy League school, and the tuition that came along with it, Nelson went with the University of Alabama.

He said that Alabama “offered him a full scholarship and admittance into their selective honors program.” Nelson also wants to save for medical school and states that going to an Ivy League higher education institution would not allow him that luxury.

Students and parents have to make the decision that’s best for them. Rising costs of higher education will likely force more students to choose cheaper schools over ones with higher tuition rates.

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Diversity, Education Leadership, Equity, Teachers January 4, 2017

English Language Learners and Music Go Together Like Peanut Butter and Jelly

A professor shares her tuneful tips for helping ELLs learn what to expect from English.

Dr. Nancy Drescher is a professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, and has taught both children and adult English language learners (ELLs) in the U.S. and abroad. In this interview, she offers best practices for teaching these students to read, understand structure, and gain background knowledge.

The Edvocate: You believe that simply teaching English vocabulary words and grammar is not the best way to go about teaching ELL students. If that’s not the best way, then what is?

Dr. Nancy Drescher: When it comes to teaching English to a non-native speaker, you first have to build context for the words in the learner’s mind. Rather than teaching a list of standalone words, it is more effective to teach vocabulary using collocations, idioms, and other common phrases. Being a good reader comes from knowing what to expect.

For instance, you would never ask someone for a jelly-and-peanut butter sandwich. It has all the right words, but a native speaker would never phase it that way. It would go against their expectations.

Since ELLs have no pre-built expectations for the language they’re learning, reading becomes a much longer process. They have to stop and process each word and its context individually instead of being able to view a text as a whole. Learning phrasing and how words fit within context helps ELLs build these expectations and facilitate their reading experience.

The Edvocate: So you’re saying this is necessary for reading, too, not just for speaking?

Dr. Drescher: Yes. Students coming from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds can have difficulty with reading because they are used to a different set of expectations, both in terms of how words go together and background experiences. Students who have grown up using standard English (that is the English expected in school) at home and who have experience similar to what teachers expect and naturally build on in their classrooms are at a distinct advantage when it comes to learning to read.

Building these expectations is a normal process of learning to read for any child, not just language learners. Adults often groan when their child asks to read the same book over and over again, but doing this is actually an important part of the process of building these language expectations. Hearing the same book over and over is comforting when children are in the midst of figuring out those expectations. Teachers then build on that initial experience with language structures, but when students come to school with different initial experiences (whether that is a completely different language or a non-standard variety) and their previously learned language doesn’t match that of the classroom and of books, it is much harder for teachers to make those connections and for students to make that transition.

One way teachers and students can make that transition a little easier is narrow reading. Narrow reading involves reading many books on one topic or in a series. The repetition builds expectations by way of building vocabulary and structures in context. This concept is applicable for language learners and for struggling readers in general. If a person reads 10 different books on a topic or in a series, each one will get progressively easier as students gain familiarity with the language and conceptual expectations related to that topic. Another way to build this language repetition is through music.

The Edvocate: Tell us a little more about how using music can help build these expectations you’re talking about.

Dr. Drescher: Educators have been using music in language teaching for years. Music can enhance a student’s ability to read, understand structure, and gain background knowledge. It also adds another learning style, which broadens the reach of the lesson being taught.

The Edvocate: How can music help enhance reading?

Dr. Drescher: Connecting music, language, and books makes language easier to remember. The repetitive nature of songs helps set linguistic expectations. An especially catchy song will remain in students’ heads long after the lesson has ended, enabling them to hold on to the information in an enjoyable format.

Music and songs can also make language learning enjoyable. This is especially helpful for younger children, but also true for adult learners. Songs don’t feel like a grammar drill. Music is something people do for fun, and every culture and group has its own songs. Music brings people together in a fun and engaging way.

The Edvocate: What sort of curriculum is necessary for teaching ELLs?

Dr. Drescher: A lot of times there isn’t a curriculum already in place for ELLs. The current push is to have inclusive classrooms, where ELL students and teachers integrate with mainstream classrooms. This makes it all the more important to find additional scaffolds and supports for students in these types of classrooms. These scaffolds will help everybody, but they are completely necessary for language learners.

The Edvocate: Are there any particular scaffolds you’d recommend?

Dr. Drescher: A few years ago, I started working with Cantata Learning. They create picture books and corresponding songs with educational content for pre-K–3 students. Cantata’s materials benefit language learners, but also mainstream students. Inspired by Cantata, I wrote a few connected lessons geared towards English language learners. The songs integrated well into lessons, and it was easy to find a song about a particular unit. That is the sort of thing I recommend. If we can bring in multiple ways for students to engage with the language we hope they will be able to use and the content we want them to learn without drilling and killing their love of books and learning, I think we will find the most success for all kids.

The Edvocate: What do you think is the key to teaching English language learners?

Dr. Drescher: You have to keep in mind, learning any language is challenging, but our culture sometimes treats these challenges differently depending on the language being learned. For instance, a child learning English as a second language is often seen as having a deficit when compared to other children. However, when a native English speaker is learning a second language, or is enrolled in a second language emersion school, this is often viewed as an impressive feat.

It’s important to remember that English language learners do have knowledge and experience in their own language and in the world. By learning English, they are taking on a second language in addition to the one they already know. They are used to a different set of expectations, and so ELL lessons need to meet learners where they are in order to build on what they already have.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform, Teachers December 24, 2016

How Did We Get Here? Part IX: A Melting Pot of Educational Ideology

This is one of a multi-part series on the progression of education policies in the U.S. from its founding. Click here to see a list of all the posts in this series.

By Matthew Lynch

When looking at the public school systems of today there seems to be a marked return to the roots of the U.S. education system in the late 1700s. Students are once again being corralled into career paths and being prescribed the best course to reach workforce goals in the fastest way possible. Children as young as Kindergarten are being enrolled in specialty schools for math, or science, or performing arts and quarantined off from their peers on other specific or general paths.

It has somehow become the job of parents, and teachers, to discover for their students exactly what they should do with their working lives a full 12 years before those careers start and to lead them down the paths that will get them there eventually. Children who are left to their own devices when it comes to important life choices like how to earn a living must belong to irresponsible parents, or below-par school districts. The economy, it seems, is the only point to public education and really to private education too. If schools aren’t prepping their students to ace assessments, get into colleges and end up in the perfect career that fits their talents, than what good are they anyway?

This teach-to-career specificity has infiltrated even the highest ranks of American society. President Obama’s Race to the Top program links federal funding to states following a point system that relies heavily on assessment of the materials deemed most important for U.S. students to be learning – much of which is determined by the increasing need for math, science, technology and engineering occupations in the U.S.

The President has also been vocal about his support for stronger teaching to technology programs to meet the expected explosion of computer science and related field jobs in the next half decade. His “Educate to Innovate” campaign is designed to move U.S. students from the middle to the top of science and math achievement in the next decade. This initiative relies on interactive games, private partnerships with organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and national science competitions with visits to the White House as prizes. According to the White House website, Educate to Innovate is about “increasing STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) literacy so all students can think critically in science, math, engineering and technology; improving the quality of math and science teaching so American students are no longer outperformed by those in other nations; and expanding STEM education and career opportunities for underrepresented groups, including women and minorities.” Schools that make a commitment to the program will earn extra brownie points when it comes to Race to the Top fund allocation.

So what is so wrong with trying to strengthen areas like technology, science, engineering and math? We hear at least once every month on the news that U.S. students lag significantly behind other nations when it comes to these subjects. We should be doing something to fix that, shouldn’t we? In the eyes of Americans, the country should never be behind other nations in well… anything. We should erect the biggest buildings, have the highest gross domestic product and know the most about everything. When something threatens our “best” mentality, we worry. What will become of us? What will happen to our way of life? What sort of second-best (or worse) country are we leaving to our children?

The problem with this fear is that learning is forsaken in the process. Sure, our kids learn some things but what about the other items that are left off the priority list? In another decade, when Americans lag in language arts and critical thinking skills, will federal school funding be linked to programs that stress these subjects above all others?

For all of the strides Americans have made since post-Revolutionary days, we seem to have the same archaic mindset when it comes to our schools – specifically our publicly-funded ones. Education is inextricably tied to our perception of what it will earn individual students and the economy as a whole and not to the pursuit and furthering of learning as a nation.

There is still a lot to love about public schools, though. In a world that often seems fraught with unfairness and discrimination, public schools are the true equalizers. Do they always provide the same qualities of education to student of differing socioeconomic backgrounds? No, not always. But the principles are there. Do public schools prepare all students adequately for the college and the workforce? Not by a longshot. Public schools do serve as the main agent of positive change between one generation and the next, though, and bring the right of an education to students exactly where they are.

With the right tweaks to the system, public schools in America can continue to educate their students from all life circumstances and backgrounds and in ways that are better than ever. It will take some work though, from all of us. It is not enough to simply accept the shortcomings of today’s public schools, or abandon them in search of other choices. In order to ensure coming generations are ready to keep America at the global forefront, and enjoy their freedoms with responsible citizenship, public schools are a necessity. They are the only places that can effectively reach the majority of generations with the same messages about the value of learning, importance of equality and vitality of preserving the American way of life. For these reasons and many more, public schools need to not only be preserved but supported and constantly improved. Follow my series on the progress of the U.S. educational system to learn more about where we’ve been, and where we need to go, as collective educators.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform, Teachers December 23, 2016

How Did We Get Here? Part VIII: Minority Education in America

This is one of a multi-part series on the progression of education policies in the U.S. from its founding. Click here to see a list of all the posts in this series.

By Matthew Lynch

The recounting of education to this point has been just one side to the American story. There are, of course, many other parallel versions of exactly how the youth of America have been educated since the founding of the nation. Perhaps the most impactful, and telling, is the history of how black children, during and following slavery, have fit into the educational system.

In the earliest American days, there were no public school options available to black children. Even states that did not have slavery did not offer public education to residents who were of color. In Southern states deeply entrenched in slave culture, the education of black children was actually illegal. White slave owners believed that literacy and knowledge would threaten the slave system and so laws were passed to forbid it. For example, in South Carolina a sum of one hundred pounds was demanded of anyone caught teaching a slave to read or write. Teacher Margaret Douglass was taught teaching slave children in Norfolk, Virginia and was sent to prison. African American educator and Presbyterian minister John Chavis operated an elite white day school in North Carolina, and a secret school for black children in the evening, despite it being expressly outlawed.

Slavery laws aside, the first 50 years following the signing of the Constitution were not particularly educationally-focused for children of any race. For black children, there were some limited educational options in the form of religious schools. The exact intent of these schools was likely more about conversion than bringing equality to black Americans through education, but the learning scenarios did exist. The French Catholics in Louisiana had schools established for black students as early as the 1600s, and the Pennsylvania Quakers would follow suit in the 1700s. The first African Free School opened in New York City in 1787 with the express mission of educating black children in order to bring them educational equality with their white peers. Like other schools of the time period, the African Free ones began as one-room schoolhouses. Public funds began being funneled to these eventual seven schools in 1824 – an extreme departure at the time.

Public schools for slaves and free black children in larger numbers began to pop up in the 19^th century. The state of Maine was the first to grant public school privileges to students of all races in 1820, and Rhode Island voted to do the same in 1843. In 1849, young Sarah C. Roberts sued the city of Boston for not allowing black students like her to be in public schools. She lost her case, but just seven years later the Massachusetts legislature changed the state policy to make it illegal to refuse any public school student based on race. Black teachers at public schools made less than their white counterparts – with the exception of in Washington D.C. where teachers were considered federal employees and were paid the same regardless of where they taught.

Even when public schools opened doors to black students, they were separated from their white peers, thus establishing the practice of segregation in America’s public schools. Following the Civil War, states were required to provide public education to black students, thus ushering in the establishment of Jim Crow laws pertaining to education. These practices followed the law when it came to providing a public education to black Americans, but kept black students separate from white ones. The phrase “separate but equal” was floated around as justification for the segregation but public schools were far from equitable.

Schools for black children lacked in resources throughout the country and overcrowding flourished despite there being many less black children in school than white ones. As far back as 1900, Virginia black schools had 37 percent more students than white ones (not more students overall, just more students per school building) and in the late 1930s, black school properties were valued at only one-third of white ones.

It’s interesting to take pause here and consider the fact that for all the strides public education has made in equality in the past 150 years, schools with majority black populations still tend to be the most overcrowded and underfunded. In the summer of 2013, the Chicago Board of Education voted to close 50 public schools in the city. Of the students impacted by the school closures, 88 percent were black and 94 percent came from low-income households. Those students were then sent to other schools, further crowding them and being uprooted from their school surroundings. During the school year ending in 2011, there were 670 New York City school with student-to-teacher ratios above accepted, contract levels – the majority of which serve minority students[v]. Overcrowding is still a very real problem when it comes to the nation’s black and disadvantaged students, despite the guise of public, equitable schools.

The results of limited black public and private primary education in the 19^th century were the first black American college graduates. Following the end of the Civil War, the first “black” colleges were established and by 1900, more than 2,000 African American students had earned college degrees. It’s interesting to note that despite a dramatic rise in that number over the next century, it was not until 1985 that Harvard University finally appointed its first black tenured professor.

Black students are not the only ones who have faced disadvantages when navigating the educational system of the U.S. While K-12 students today may learn that the Brown v. Board of Education ruling in 1954 was the final injustice in America’s public schools to be struck down, the journey toward true equality in education has still been laborious and 60 years later, has still not been achieved.

There is still an achievement gap between white students and black and other minority students. The National Assessment of Educational Progress consistently finds large achievement gaps, or lags in academic success between one student demographic and another, between white students and minority ones. The latest comprehensive data is from 2009 and shows that there is a 26 percent gap in achievement in both mathematics and reading between fourth- and eighth-grade Hispanic students and their white peers. For Black students, the numbers were similar. Reading scores saw an achievement gap of 27 percent for fourth graders and 26 percent for eighth graders, and in math Black students had an achievement gap disadvantage of 26 percent for fourth graders and 31 percent for eighth graders.

Since the laws are in place to prevent inequality from infringing on K-12 education, why aren’t they working? Is there some unspoken prejudice against minority groups that is keeping each generation of K-12 students from achieving as much as their white peers? Though there are certainly plenty of conspiracy theories out there, the truth is much more complex.

Minorities have always had a tough go when it comes to achieving equality, in education and otherwise. Think back to the large Irish immigration of the late 19^th century. This group of people in search of basic needs like food, shelter and religious freedoms faced an uphill battle when arriving on U.S. soil. The prevalence of the Catholic school system today is due in part to the need for the institutions when Irish children were refused an education, or severely bullied or discriminated against, in public or other private settings. Generally speaking, first-generation immigrants and their children have less, live in poorer neighborhoods and struggle on a greater scale with assimilation and language barriers. This is nothing new but it does impact the contemporary students in today’s classrooms.

The Hispanic population in the U.S., for example, grew 43 percent from the 2000 to 2010 Census reports, which was more than half of the total U.S. population increase ¹⁰. These students arrive in American classrooms and are already at a disadvantage to their peers who were born and raised on U.S. soil. Language, social and cultural barriers exist. And yes, there is some outright prejudice and discrimination too. The difference between these first-generation American students and the ones from a century ago is that fanning the flames of underachievement and intolerance are no longer acceptable – which gives them an advantage over their immigrant predecessors and leaves at least a glimmer of light that achievement gaps can be narrowed, or eliminated.

Differences in achievement of minorities are also based on simple logistics. In most states, public school selection is based on location – making true integration of the races impossible. Most Black students are still segregated to schools in predominantly black neighborhoods, and Hispanic ones tend to gravitate toward inner-city and urban schools that deal with larger issues of overcrowding and underfunding. Even if they minorities attend “white” schools, they are not quite at home in the surroundings. The basic public school principle of schooling students in their own neighborhoods or districts, which seems logical and smart on the surface, has actually led to segregation and unfair educational opportunities.

Some of the barriers that districting have put up are starting to come down due to states like California and New Jersey allowing for intra- and inter-district options for students. The implementation of public charter and magnet schools, or privately-run schools that use state funding and are tuition-free, have also given black students more options when it comes to choosing their schools, instead of being confined to the ones in their neighborhoods. The jury is still out on whether these tactics actually help the minority community as a whole, or hinder it. Is fleeing public schools, and trying desperately to escape disadvantaged neighborhoods, for the betterment of these communities – or does it undercut the community that already exists and bring it down even further?

Can we come up with solutions to the U.S. K-12 public school system that address the less-than-stellar history of education that has been unkind to minorities? I believe that we are just a generation or two away from truly reaching an equality point – we just need to continue to acknowledge that a problem exists and concentrate efforts on remedying it. Follow my series on the progress of the U.S. educational system to learn more about where we’ve been, and where we need to go, as collective educators.

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform December 17, 2016

Zero tolerance laws increase suspension rates for black students

F. Chris Curran, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

The State Senate of Michigan is currently considering legislation that would scale back “zero tolerance” discipline policies in the state’s public schools.

Zero tolerance discipline laws require automatic and generally severe punishment for specified offenses that could range from possessing weapons to physical assault. They leave little leeway for consideration of the circumstances of the offense.

The bill, already approved by the State House, proposes to add provisions that would consider the contextual factors around an incident, such as the student’s disciplinary history, and would ask whether lesser forms of punishment would suffice.

In other words, suspension and expulsion would no longer be as “mandatory” and there would be a little more “tolerance” in these state discipline laws.

As a researcher of education policy and school discipline, I would highlight that these revisions, some of which have been passed in other states, represent a significant change of course for state school discipline law.

In fact, my recent work and that of others suggests that the shift away from zero tolerance approaches is for the better.

Why zero tolerance policies were introduced

Throughout the 1990s, the number of states with zero tolerance laws, those requiring suspension or expulsion for specified offenses, increased significantly.

The rapid adoption of such laws was spurred in part by the passage of the 1994 Gun-Free Schools Act, federal legislation that required states to adopt mandatory expulsion laws for possessing a firearm in school.

These safety concerns were further heightened by the shooting that took place at Columbine High School, a public high school in Littleton, Colorado.

Following Columbine, by the early 2000s, nearly every state had a zero tolerance law in place. Many of these laws expanded beyond firearms to include other weapons, physical assaults and drug offenses.

Push back against zero tolerance

Clearly, such zero tolerance laws were meant to improve the safety and order of the school environment. However, in recent years, they have been seen as being overly prescriptive and as contributing to racial disparities in school discipline.

For instance, there are cases of students being suspended for accidentally bringing a pocketknife to school. In one high-profile case, a student was suspended for chewing a pastry into the shape of a gun.

Black kids are suspended at a higher rate. Children image via www.shutterstock.com

Additionally, federal data show that black students are suspended at rates two to three times higher than their white peers.

As a result, in 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Education issued a joint “Dear Colleague” letter directed to public school districts. The letter was a call for reductions in the use of suspensions and expulsions and, instead, for a focus on ensuring the fair use of school discipline for students of all backgrounds.

Here’s what new research shows

In a newly published study, I explored the implications of state zero tolerance laws – laws that require school districts to adopt zero tolerance policies.

In particular, I sought to find out if they contributed to increased use of suspensions and if they led to racial disparities. Given claims by proponents of such laws that they increase the safety and order of the school overall, I also wanted to see if these laws contributed to decreases in perceptions of problem behaviors in the school as a whole.

I used national data collected by the U.S. Department of Education as part of the Civil Rights Data Collection and the Schools and Staffing Survey. The sample included thousands of school districts and principals spanning the late 1980s to the mid-2000s.

The study revealed three important findings.

First, the study showed that state laws requiring schools to have zero tolerance policies increased suspension rates for all students. Second, suspension rates increased at a higher rate for African-American students, potentially contributing to racial disparities in discipline. Finally, principals reported few decreases in problem behaviors in schools, suggesting that the laws did not improve the safety and order of schools.

The findings, in context

The findings show that the adoption of state zero tolerance laws result in increases in district suspension rates. For the average-sized district, such laws resulted in approximately 35 more suspensions per year.

Though this number may seem small, the potential impact is quite large.

A recent study by researchers at UCLA, for example, suggests that a one percentage point reduction in the suspension rate nationally would result in societal gains of over US$2 billion through reduced dropout and increased economic productivity. In short, state zero tolerance laws may be imposing significant financial costs on society.

Burden of zero tolerance laws is not shared equally. Boy image via www.shutterstock.com

Furthermore, the burden of these costs are not equally shared across all groups.

The results of my study suggest that the increase in suspension rates for black students as a result of these laws is approximately three times the size of that for white students.

Coupled with other research that finds links between zero tolerance policies and racial disparities, this finding demonstrates that these laws, though supposedly neutral with regard to race, are disproportionately impacting students of color.

Recent data released by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights also point to persistent disparities by race in the use of school discipline.

No reduction in misbehavior

Proponents of zero tolerance discipline have argued that the use of suspensions and expulsions increases the safety and order of the learning environment as a whole. My study found evidence to refute the claim.

In my data set, principals rated the degree to which various behavior problems (i.e., fighting, disrespect, use of drugs, weapons) were problems in their schools.

I found that, in the view of principals, the presence of a state zero tolerance law did not decrease their rating of the degree to which these various behaviors are problems. In other words, state zero tolerance laws did not appear to be contributing to improved levels of safety and order overall.

What the results mean for policy and practice

Students, parents and other stakeholders have an expectation that schools should be safe and orderly environments that treat all students equitably. While it is imperative that schools take active steps to achieve these goals, the findings of my work call into question whether state zero tolerance discipline laws are the most effective way to do so.

While suspension and expulsion may still be appropriate tools in some circumstances, it is important for schools to consider context, and states to allow such discretion, in the administration of school discipline. Furthermore, it is important to have safeguards in place to ensure that such discretion is utilized equitably for students of color, who too often experience disproportionate disciplinary exclusion.

The revised disciplinary laws under consideration in Michigan and similar revisions to school disciplinary policies in other states represent more promising steps to ensuring effective and fair school discipline.

F. Chris Curran, Assistant Professor of Public Policy, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

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

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, HBCU's, Higher Education December 15, 2016

After Fisher: affirmative action and Asian-American students

Michele S. Moses, University of Colorado; Christina Paguyo, Colorado State University, and Daryl Maeda, University of Colorado

After eight years, the Abigail Fisher case finally has been put to rest. In a landmark judgment on June 23, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of race-conscious affirmative action in university admissions.

Abigail Fisher, a white woman, had sued the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) for its race-conscious admissions policy after she was denied admission. She had argued that the university violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Supporters of race-conscious admissions programs are understandably gratified. But has the case resolved the larger moral and political disagreements over affirmative action?

Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, which supports colorblind policies, has already called the decision just “a temporary setback.”

Indeed, over the last 40 years, affirmative action opponents have repeatedly strategized anew after important Supreme Court decisions in favor of affirmative action. They did so after the 1978 decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, when the Supreme Court, while allowing race to be one of the factors in choosing a diverse student body, held the use of quotas to be “impermissible.“

And they did so after the 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, when the high court again ruled that race-conscious affirmative action was constitutional.

We are scholars who study affirmative action, race, and diversity in higher education. We believe that the disagreement about affirmative action will not
end anytime soon. And it may well center on lawsuits on behalf of Asian-American college applicants.

Here is what is coming next

Through his organization, the Project on Fair Representation, Abigail Fisher’s advisor, Edward Blum, is currently engaged in a lawsuit challenging Harvard University’s race-conscious admissions policy.

What is different about the Harvard lawsuit is that the lead plaintiff in the case is not a white student. The plaintiff is an Asian-American student.

Asian-Americans participate in an Advancing Justice conference. Advancing Justice Conference, CC BY-NC-SA

“Students for Fair Admissions,” an arm of the Project on Fair Representation, filed a suit against Harvard College on November 17, 2014, on behalf of a Chinese-American applicant who had been rejected from Harvard. The lawsuit charges that Harvard’s admissions policy violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars federally funded entities from discriminating based on race or ethnicity.

The “Harvard University Not Fair” website greets readers with a photo of an Asian-American student accompanied by the following text:

“Were you denied admission to Harvard? It may be because you’re the wrong race.”

How it started

This controversy over how Asian-Americans are being treated in selective college admission was jump-started in 2005, when sociologists Thomas Espenshade and Chang Chung published findings from their study on the effects of affirmative action bans on the racial and ethnic composition of student bodies at selective colleges and universities.

Espenshade and Chung found that if affirmative action were to be eliminated, the acceptance rates for black and Latino applicants would likely decrease substantially, while the acceptance rate for white applicants would increase slightly. But more than that, what they noted was that the acceptance rate for Asian-American applicants would increase the most by far.

As the researchers explained, Asian-American students “would occupy four out of every five seats created by accepting fewer African-American and Hispanic students.”

Such research has been cited to support claims of admissions discrimination against Asian-Americans.

In the complaint against Harvard, Espenshade’s research was cited as evidence of discrimination against Asian-Americans. Specifically, the lawsuit cited research from 2009 in which Espenshade, this time with coauthor Alexandria Radford, found that Asian-American applicants accepted at selective colleges had higher standardized test scores, on average, than other accepted students.

Are elite institutions discriminating against Asian-Americans in their admissions process? Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

These findings, especially that Asian-American applicants seem to need a higher SAT score than white applicants or other applicants of color in order to be admitted to a selective college are being used as proof that elite institutions like Harvard are discriminating against Asian-Americans in their admissions processes.

The picture is more complicated

As we know, selective admissions processes are much more complicated than SAT score data can show. There are many factors that are taken into consideration for college admission.

For example, in the “holistic” admissions processes endorsed by the Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bollinger, standardized text scores are not the only, or even the main, criterion for admission. “Holistic” review takes many relevant factors into account, including academic achievement, of course, but also factors such as a commitment to public service, overcoming difficult life circumstances, achievements in the arts or athletics, or leadership qualities.

So, why would the plaintiff in the Harvard case conclude that the disparities in SAT scores shown by Espenshade and Radford necessarily indicate that Asian-American applicants are being harmed by race-conscious affirmative action?

Legal scholar William Kidder has shown that the way Espenshade and Radford’s findings have been interpreted by affirmative action opponents is not accurate. The interpretation of this research itself rests on the faulty assumption that affirmative action is to blame if an academically accomplished Asian-American applicant gets rejected from an elite institution.

Based on his analysis, Kidder concluded,

“Exaggerated claims about the benefits for APAs [Asian Pacific Americans] of ending affirmative action foster a divisive public discourse in which APAs are falsely portrayed as natural adversaries of affirmative action and the interests of African American and Latinos in particular.”

In our opinion as well, focusing on simplistic ideas about standardized tests as the primary evidence for who “deserves” to be admitted to elite institutions like Harvard may serve to stir up resentment among accomplished applicants who get rejected.

As the “Harvard Not Fair” website and accompanying lawsuit demonstrate, these findings have been used to fuel a politics of resentment among rejected Asian-American applicants.

When speaking with reporters, Espenshade himself has acknowledged that his data are incomplete – given that colleges take myriad factors into account in admissions decisions – and his findings have been overinterpreted and actually do not prove that colleges discriminate against Asian-American applicants.

Are Asian-American students a monolithic group? Charlie Nguyen, CC BY

Moreover, in using images of Asian-American students to recruit complainants against Harvard and other highly selective institutions of higher education, the Project on Fair Representation relies on the idea that Asian-Americans comprise a monolithic group. In fact, the term “Asian-American” refers to a diversity of Asian ethnicities in the United States, whose educational opportunities and achievements vary widely.

The 2010 census question on race included check boxes for six Asian groups – Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese – along with a box for “Other Asian,” with a prompt for detailed responses such as “Hmong, Laotian, Thai, Pakistani, Cambodian, and so on.”

In addition, by casting plaintiffs as meritorious and deserving of a spot at an elite university, it also conveys the stereotypical received wisdom about Asian-American “model” students who are wronged by race-conscious affirmative action programs.

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

At this time, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, is pending.

Now that Fisher has been decided, this case is the next front in the divisive politics surrounding race-conscious affirmative action in higher education admissions.

Relevant to the Harvard case is that a civil rights complaint alleging that Princeton University discriminates against Asian-American applicants was dismissed in 2015 after a long federal Office of Civil Rights investigation.

Although public disagreement about the policy continues, affirmative action is an imperfect, but as yet necessary tool that universities can leverage to cultivate robust and diverse spaces where students learn. June 23’s Fisher ruling underscores that important idea.

Related to the coming public discussions about the Harvard lawsuit, we are of the opinion that race-conscious policies like affirmative action need to be supported. The fact is that “Asian-Americans” have diverse social and educational experiences. And many Asian-Americans benefit from affirmative action policies.

Michele S. Moses, Professor of Educational Foundations, Policy, and Practice, University of Colorado; Christina Paguyo, Post Doctoral Fellow, Colorado State University, and Daryl Maeda, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies, University of Colorado

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

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity December 13, 2016

How learning a new language improves tolerance

This article was written by Amy Thompson

There are many benefits to knowing more than one language. For example, it has been shown that aging adults who speak more than one language have less likelihood of developing dementia.

Additionally, the bilingual brain becomes better at filtering out distractions, and learning multiple languages improves creativity. Evidence also shows that learning subsequent languages is easier than learning the first foreign language.

Unfortunately, not all American universities consider learning foreign languages a worthwhile investment.

Why is foreign language study important at the university level?

As an applied linguist, I study how learning multiple languages can have cognitive and emotional benefits. One of these benefits that’s not obvious is that language learning improves tolerance.

This happens in two important ways.

The first is that it opens people’s eyes to a way of doing things in a way that’s different from their own, which is called “cultural competence.”

The second is related to the comfort level of a person when dealing with unfamiliar situations, or “tolerance of ambiguity.”

Gaining cross-cultural understanding

Cultural competence is key to thriving in our increasingly globalized world. How specifically does language learning improve cultural competence? The answer can be illuminated by examining different types of intelligence.

Psychologist Robert Sternberg’s research on intelligence describes different types of intelligence and how they are related to adult language learning. What he refers to as “practical intelligence” is similar to social intelligence in that it helps individuals learn nonexplicit information from their environments, including meaningful gestures or other social cues.

Learning a foreign language reduces social anxiety. COD Newsroom, CC BY

Language learning inevitably involves learning about different cultures. Students pick up clues about the culture both in language classes and through meaningful immersion experiences.

Researchers Hanh Thi Nguyen and Guy Kellogg have shown that when students learn another language, they develop new ways of understanding culture through analyzing cultural stereotypes. They explain that “learning a second language involves the acquisition not only of linguistic forms but also ways of thinking and behaving.”

With the help of an instructor, students can critically think about stereotypes of different cultures related to food, appearance and conversation styles.

Dealing with the unknown

The second way that adult language learning increases tolerance is related to the comfort level of a person when dealing with “tolerance of ambiguity.”

Someone with a high tolerance of ambiguity finds unfamiliar situations exciting, rather than frightening. My research on motivation, anxiety and beliefs indicates that language learning improves people’s tolerance of ambiguity, especially when more than one foreign language is involved.

It’s not difficult to see why this may be so. Conversations in a foreign language will inevitably involve unknown words. It wouldn’t be a successful conversation if one of the speakers constantly stopped to say, “Hang on – I don’t know that word. Let me look it up in the dictionary.” Those with a high tolerance of ambiguity would feel comfortable maintaining the conversation despite the unfamiliar words involved.

Applied linguists Jean-Marc Dewaele and Li Wei also study tolerance of ambiguity and have indicated that those with experience learning more than one foreign language in an instructed setting have more tolerance of ambiguity.

What changes with this understanding

A high tolerance of ambiguity brings many advantages. It helps students become less anxious in social interactions and in subsequent language learning experiences. Not surprisingly, the more experience a person has with language learning, the more comfortable the person gets with this ambiguity.

And that’s not all.

Individuals with higher levels of tolerance of ambiguity have also been found to be more entrepreneurial (i.e., are more optimistic, innovative and don’t mind taking risks).

In the current climate, universities are frequently being judged by the salaries of their graduates. Taking it one step further, based on the relationship of tolerance of ambiguity and entrepreneurial intention, increased tolerance of ambiguity could lead to higher salaries for graduates, which in turn, I believe, could help increase funding for those universities that require foreign language study.

Those who have devoted their lives to theorizing about and the teaching of languages would say, “It’s not about the money.” But perhaps it is.

Language learning in higher ed

Most American universities have a minimal language requirement that often varies depending on the student’s major. However, students can typically opt out of the requirement by taking a placement test or providing some other proof of competency.

Why more universities should teach a foreign language. sarspri, CC BY-NC

In contrast to this trend, Princeton recently announced that all students, regardless of their competency when entering the university, would be required to study an additional language.

I’d argue that more universities should follow Princeton’s lead, as language study at the university level could lead to an increased tolerance of the different cultural norms represented in American society, which is desperately needed in the current political climate with the wave of hate crimes sweeping university campuses nationwide.

Knowledge of different languages is crucial to becoming global citizens. As former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan noted,

“Our country needs to create a future in which all Americans understand that by speaking more than one language, they are enabling our country to compete successfully and work collaboratively with partners across the globe.”

Considering the evidence that studying languages as adults increases tolerance in two important ways, the question shouldn’t be “Why should universities require foreign language study?” but rather “Why in the world wouldn’t they?”

Amy Thompson, Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics, University of South Florida

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

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, HBCU's, Higher Education, Special Report December 11, 2016

The HBCU Advantage, Part II: Or How to Win When the Competition is Tough

HBCUs came into existence in vastly different times, when they were necessary for black students to attend college. Today, they have to be savvy if they want to stick around. Let’s take a look at the shift HBCUs are making to become prominent in today’s integrated culture.

There are many different business models out there, but in general, some serve the mass market and some appeal to niches. When it comes to today’s colleges, it’s easy to see PWIs (or predominantly white institutions) as “mass market” and HBCUs as “niche” schools.

HBCUs have also had long histories, were created to give a healthy university experience to specific populations of students, and are facing closures today as more and more students choose to attend mainstream colleges.

The question stands. How will HBCUs compete against PWIs that now accept and actively recruit minority students and have more resources to serve them? To stick around, HBCUs need to find solutions.

We’re seeing a lot of these solutions in action today. Here is how they are handling situations where the deck is stacked against them.

A solution for when affordability is no longer a good selling point

Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders wants to help students by giving them a free ride to college. Sanders’ plan calls for making public colleges and universities tuition free. It is, to him at least, a way to make American students the most educated in the world by making the way to college easier.

But some are criticizing Sanders for his plan because it would force states to pick up the extra tab; something that many states are struggling with currently. State legislatures have cut k-12 and higher education for years and don’t seem to be slowing down, even with improvements in the economy.

Another criticism being levied towards Sanders and his plan for college is that it will potentially destroy HBCUs. Representative James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who is supporting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for president, has taken issue with Sanders’ free college plan.

Talking to the press earlier this week, Clyburn said that private HBCUs will begin to shut down because states will start to offer free tuition to public colleges. He continued his hits on Senator Sanders by saying that nothing in life is free including college.

For what it’s worth, Clyburn said that he believes in making college more affordable for anyone who wants to attend, just not free.

Clyburn’s assessment of Sanders and his plan for college was devoid of what it will cost as he is attempting to bolster Clinton’s stock with black voters.

To the point of what it may cost to make college free, Sanders has said that he will have to raise taxes to pay for covering college tuition. He wants to place a larger tax on Wall Street speculators which is likely to be a tough sell.

But for what he’s at least attempting to do, it’s not a bad idea. The cost of college has spiraled out of control, and many students have been priced out of even thinking of going to college. But he’ll have to deal with the potential consequences of what this may do to private colleges, including HBCUs.

A solution for when the state isn’t on your side

Issues with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) in Maryland continue as the Maryland HBCU faculty caucus put forth a protest at the state’s capitol in March 2016.

The group is demanding equality for HBCUs in the state as they claim that PWIs (Predominately White Institutions) receive better treatment from the state’s lawmakers.

From academic programs to funding, the caucus believes that the state is mistreating its HBCUs and demands better.

The divide runs so deep that a group of former students who attended the state’s four HBCUs filed a lawsuit that claimed that the state gave cover for Maryland PWI’s to commit academic segregation.

In essence, the state allowed for duplicate program offerings at Maryland PWIs when the state’s HBCUs already offered the same coursework.

A judge sided with the former students in their claim that segregation had indeed taken place.

Although the legal wrangling continues as neither side has been able to compromise on a solution that will satisfy either party, the protest leads its way back to the merits of the lawsuit: HBCUs receive improper treatment from the state.

To gain equal footing with Maryland’s PWIs, the caucus wants to eradicate all duplicate programs that are already offered at HBCUs within the state. Secondly, the group wants programs that are in high demand to be offered at Maryland’s HBCUs.

This will partially satisfy its needs, but there is still work to be done.

No resolution has been found, and there is no word on if the group’s suggestions, or demands, will be acted upon.

If anything, this shows just how fragile the relationship may be between state lawmakers and leaders at HBCUs. Some struggle financially, and because of that, those issues may show up in how the schools perform academically.

Hopefully, both sides may soon find a solution to an almost decade-old legal issue.

A solution that may lead to mixed results

In 2015, Historically Black College and University (HBCU) Albany State University (ASU) was forced to merge with Darton State College, a predominately white institution.

The merger was presented as ASU faced mounting financial issues. The school’s enrollment was declining as it dropped nearly 11 percentage points last year, and 15 academic programs were canceled due to money and enrollment issues.

Albany State had problems, and one way to fix them was to merge the HBCU with another school.

That’s where we find Darton State College; a predominately white institution (PWI) of higher education that focuses on two-year degrees.

But no matter, this move was seen as a way to eventually save a struggling ASU from itself. Bleeding money and students, the merger gave some students and leaders hope for the future.

That was until the school’s new mission statement was released. Operating under the banner of Albany State University, students were under the impression that the school would still be considered an HBCU and have that distinction noted in the mission statement.

Darton State’s student body is more diverse as just 45 percent of its student body is black. To accommodate, the state Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia proposed, and approved, a new mission statement that does not include Albany State University as an HBCU.

The old statement notes ASU’s status as an HBCU in the first sentence, while the new one only mentions that the school has historical roots.

Upset over the missing nomenclature, more than 300 ASU students protested the altered mission statement and walked out of the school’s Honor’s Day festivities as ASU President Dr. Art Dunning prepared to speak.

He promised those remaining that while HBCU is missing from the mission statement that ASU will remain an HBCU. Dunning was careful to note that ASU isn’t the only HBCU that doesn’t explicitly note that in its mission statement as seven other HBCUs fail to do so as well.

Dr. Dunning makes good points, but students there are likely feeling that their school is being taken away from them. Many black students choose to attend HBCUs because of the rich history and cultural significance that cannot be found on the campuses of PWIs.

Some probably feel that that experience may be taken away from them if even the smallest things–like a mission statement–is changed.

On the one hand, it’s great that ASU is here to stay. On the other hand, will moves such as the new mission statement dilute the HBCU experience and message? Could this school’s roots and purpose be forgotten in the long run now that its mission statement does not explicitly state that it is an HBCU?

A solution that fills a desperate need

Actor Nate Parker, best known for his work in movies Red Tails, The Great Debaters, and The Birth of a Nation, has started a new film school at Wiley College, a Historically Black College, and University.

The name of the program will be the Nate Parker School of Film and Drama and will open this fall.

Parker launched the school to increase opportunities for persons of color, specifically black people, who are interested in working in film. Parker said that that he wants the new school to cover everything involved in the filmmaking process including sound and lighting.

Familiar with Wiley College, Parker filmed the move The Great Debaters with actors Denzel Washington and Jurnee Smollett-Bell there nearly ten years ago.

In addition to creating the new school, Parker recently sold his newest and latest independent project, The Birth of a Nation, to Fox Searchlight for nearly $18 million.

The movie is based on Nate Turner’s slave rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia in 1831. Parker directs and stars in the film about Turner. Still, in production, The Birth of a Nation has a scheduled release date of October 7th, 2016.

The good news continues for Wiley as the state of Texas honored the school with three historical markers. Professor H.B. Pemberton, Matthew W. Dogan, and the man responsible for coaching the debate team known as the Great Debaters, Professor Melvin B. Tolson.

Between Parker starting a new film school at Wiley, and three figures that were vital to the success of the school, history continues to be made at Wiley College.

With varying news about the health and viability of HBCUs, Wiley College’s ability to remain innovative while attracting new talent is important and worth celebrating. This shows just how much America, and black students, needs HBCUs — for new opportunities like the new one that Nate Parker is creating on the campus of Wiley College.

A solution that promotes an interdisciplinary experience

North Carolina Central University (NCCU) is set to offer a new minor in the fall of 2016. Women and Gender Studies will make its debut at NCCU, and the school will be the first historically black college and university (HBCU) in North Carolina to introduce such a minor.

Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Carlton Wilson believes that the minor will allow students new chances to research how events– current and in the past — are identified with women and gender.

In essence, this minor may be viewed as a subtopic of intersectionality where as one theory or subject may not be properly studied without the other. While the two words women and gender are certainly separate, it is tough to dismember each because of the power structures that are connected to them.

For example, we cannot gain context of what it is to be a woman without examining how hyper-masculinity, or just masculinity in general, has affected women. The same goes for gender.

The minor will delve deeper than what I just mentioned as African diaspora, women and their global experiences, equality, and more will also be studied by students who choose to select Women and Gender Studies as a minor.

Women and Gender Studies will be available to all students to select, and hopefully many will choose to do so. Courses attached to minors like this will teach students to think critically about issues and areas that impact them or their social structures directly. Race, class, sexism, religion, and so much more will be better understood once students successfully move through the coursework associated with Women and Gender Studies.

It will also give men who take the course a better understanding of just how privilege and masculinity create avenues of opportunities for them that may not be the same for women. I look forward to hearing more about the program once it launches.

A solution where companies are created just to serve HBCUs

Four former Historically Black College and University administrators have partnered with the Thurgood Marshall College Fund to start a new executive search firm.

Titled TM2 Executive Search, the goal of the new company is to pair candidates with administrative jobs at HBCUs.

Former president of Howard University, Sidney Ribeau; Dorothy Yancy, former president of Shaw University; John Garland, former president of Central State University; and Wayne Watson, former president of Chicago State University have all come together to form the aforementioned TM2.

What’s interesting and intuitive about the new venture is that it is the first of its kind for HBCUs. No other company will focus on the needs of HBCUs by searching for prospective employees to fill positions at these schools.

Getting into an arena that will surely help HBCU graduates, and help HBCU schools in the process, is a plus for those who support HBCUs and would like to continue that support post-graduation.

But one reason the effort was started was because many search firms that help colleges find administrators rarely focus on the need of HBCUs. There was an opening in the marketplace to address a specific need, and TM2 did just that.

Because HBCUs are steeped in history and have a deep culture that some may find intimidating or hard to read, the positions may be hard to fill through a traditional head hunting firm.

That may no longer be the case as TM2 gets started.

While the company is certainly focused on servicing HBCUs, one does not have to be a graduate of a Historically Black College and University to be considered for a position found through TM2.

More companies of this nature will hopefully be created in the future as the needs of HBCUs can be vastly different than those of predominately white institutions of higher learning.

A solution where HBCUs diversify their student bodies

Institutions of higher education have the felt the sting of budget cuts due to cramped state budgets. None more so than Historically Black Colleges and Universities as many black schools have turned to creative means to remain viable.

Some HBCUs are looking to their student bodies as a means to find new revenue. Recruiting students that aren’t traditional may eventually save some of the nation’s HBCUs.

Non-black students are starting to litter many HBCU campuses due to educational opportunities but also because so many schools are strapped for cash.

From students who are white to Asian, to Latino, HBCUs have to recruit non-traditional students to keep its doors open.

While this isn’t necessarily a discovery as HBCUs have always welcomed students who aren’t black, the number of non-black students on HBCU campuses is starting to rise.

As recent as 2014, the University of Pennsylvania reported that the non-black population of students at HBCUs is at least 20 percent.

It’s also worth noting that many colleges that have a traditional student population of white students have stepped up efforts to diversify its campuses with black students, which has decreased the enrollment at many HBCUs.

Of course, without a steady flow of students, schools are unable to keep its doors open, and with state legislatures continuing to cut money from education, HBCUs have to find new avenues of revenue.

But this news hasn’t come without controversy or concern. Some alumni at HBCUs that are turning its focus to welcome more non-traditional students on campus are concerned that their school’s changing demographic will upset the history and culture that many alumni and black students enjoy about HBCUs.

It is unlikely that HBCU campuses will be so overrun with non-black students that some will have to drop the HBCU moniker, but without a diversifying campus population and new ways to make money, HBCUs will be unable to remain open if the trend of tightening state budgets continues.

When you look for solutions, others notice

Take Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, for instance.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has kicked off a tour of Historically Black Colleges, and Universities called “Feel the Bern.”

The presidential candidate will tour a host of HBCUs including Howard University, South Carolina State University, Jackson State University, Alabama State University, Florida A&M University, and many more.

Sanders is attempting to connect with young black voters by talking about issues that matter to them, such as income inequality and criminal justice reform.

According to nbcnews.com, Sanders, and his team face an uphill battle in states where black voters will be crucial, such as South Carolina.

“A recent Monmouth University poll showed Hillary Clinton’s lead at 69 to 21 percent over Sanders and other major polls show Clinton with a sizable lead over the Vermont senator.”

Sanders will need to ensure that his reach goes farther than just black students, but he also understands that the youth vote helped to welcome President Barack Obama to the Oval Office.

But Sanders has a radical message that resonates with college students. He has a plan to make college free for anyone who wants to attend and also wants to change America’s healthcare system over to single-payer.

That’s radical enough to bend the ear of any first-year political science major. While most believe Sanders isn’t a true contender for President, his messages are stirring up a lot of debate, particularly what some feel is a socialist view on what American life should be. His free college plan isn’t so radical, though, as President Obama has proposed the same for the first two years of community college for students who can keep their grades up.

It will be interesting to see how the young vote, and the minority vote, stacks up for Sanders. Will it be enough to elect him to the highest office in the land?

HBCUs are in the business of looking for solutions

There are many ways to react to the fact that PWIs are taking over. Giving up is one way, and as I’ve discussed on my website, some schools have. Fortunately, many schools are finding ways to serve the students of today. The HBCU advantage in 2016 is finding and providing the “missing link” for its students—and it’s different from what students needed in 1956.

Why we should talk to children about race

Choosing to be colourblind

A new approach

How to Help Low-Income Students Succeed

3 Startling Facts about Ivy League Schools

English Language Learners and Music Go Together Like Peanut Butter and Jelly

How Did We Get Here? Part IX: A Melting Pot of Educational Ideology

How Did We Get Here? Part VIII: Minority Education in America

Zero tolerance laws increase suspension rates for black students

Why zero tolerance policies were introduced

Push back against zero tolerance

Here’s what new research shows

The findings, in context

No reduction in misbehavior

What the results mean for policy and practice

After Fisher: affirmative action and Asian-American students

Here is what is coming next

How it started

The picture is more complicated

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

How learning a new language improves tolerance

Gaining cross-cultural understanding

Dealing with the unknown

What changes with this understanding

Language learning in higher ed

The HBCU Advantage, Part II: Or How to Win When the Competition is Tough

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Choosing to be colourblind

A new approach

Why zero tolerance policies were introduced

Push back against zero tolerance

Here’s what new research shows

The findings, in context

No reduction in misbehavior

What the results mean for policy and practice

Here is what is coming next

How it started

The picture is more complicated

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

Gaining cross-cultural understanding

Dealing with the unknown

What changes with this understanding

Language learning in higher ed

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Are you sure you want to delete post?