Equity

Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Policy & Reform, Secondary Education

Will the pending ESEA actually move funding backward?

By Derek Black of Law Professor Blogs Network

Last week, Nora Gordon focused on one of the more technical aspects of the pending Senate bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act: the supplement not supplant standard. The standard requires that Title I funds for low income students only be used to supplement the resources that state and local entities were already providing those students, not supplant them. Gordon summarized the new revisions and her sense of their importance:

The larger legacy of the Every Child Achieves Act may well be how it cleans up supplement not supplant, a little discussed and often misunderstood fiscal rule with a big impact on how schools actually spend the $14 billion of NCLB Title I funds. The proposed legislation makes two important changes: (1) it requires districts to show they are distributing their state and local funds across schools without regard to the federal funds that each school receives; and (2) it increases local autonomy over how to spend Title I funds.

The problem she says is that:

Under current law, those Title I schools that do not operate school-wide programs must demonstrate that every single thing they buy with Title I funds helps only the neediest students, and would not be purchased with other funds absent the federal aid. In my research, I’ve found this rule often has the unintended consequence of preventing districts from spending money on the things that might help those students most, pushing schools to work around the edges of their central instructional mission. They buy “interventionists” instead of teachers, or “supplemental” curricular materials rather than “core” ones, and are discouraged from investing Title I funds in technology.

Gordon is correct that the supplement not supplant has been a disaster.  As I wrote in The Congressional Failure to Enforce Equal Protection Through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 90 B.U. L. Rev. 313 (2010),

Although well meaning, the prohibition on supplanting has not met its goal. In fact, in a recent report, the GAO recommended eliminating the supplement-not-supplant standard altogether. The GAO concluded that the standard has become almost impossible to enforce. Enforcing the standard requires too much speculation about what a school district would have spent on education and also requires extremely detailed tracking of spending in thousands of school districts. In short, the prohibition on supplanting funds relies on unreliable projections and unusually labor-intensive work. Possibly for these reasons, the Department of Education has effectively stopped attempting to enforce the standard, treating it as a non-priority. The standard, however, remains the law and a measure that well-intentioned schools may expend effort attempting to meet.

But at this point, the question is not whether we should discard the current supplement not supplant rule.  The question is what we should replace it with.  It is far from clear that moving toward more district autonomy (so long as they provide data) fixes the funding inequities and inept state and local funding effort that Congress needed to tackle with supplement not supplant and other related standards.

The new fix in the pending bill is a compromise that dodges that fundamental problems, and has the potential to incentivize backsliding by state and local districts unless other new protections are added.  Yes, the new bill would provide more information on funding inequality from states so that we can see what they are doing.  But that data is generally available anyway.  The challenge is that data’s complexity, not its unavailability.  So the new freedom for states looks like a give away that runs the risk that states will engage in the very behavior it formerly sought to prohibit (even if Congress and the Department of Education never did a good job of prohibiting it).  Under the proposed new approach, federal money could even more easily become part of districts’ general operating budget, which would allow the money to be seriously diluted or state and local dollars to decrease when federal dollars are available to fill the gap.

So what should we do in reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act?  I laid out the solutions in painstaking detail in the article noted above.  But in short, the Elementary and Secondary Act should 1) demand comparability of resources both within and between districts and 2) distribute federal funds to incentivize states to meet student need (get states to progressively fund high poverty schools), and 3) incentivize integration and punish segregation.  The first two proposal are intuitive, but the third is also necessary because the existence of segregation provides the platform for inequality and drives up the cost of delivering an equitable education in high poverty schools.  Unfortunately, there are longstanding headwinds against these solutions, which explains why the Senate’s proposed supplement not supplant approach does so little.

Get my full explanation of how to fix ESEA here.

 

This post originally appeared on the Law Professor Blogs Network and has been republished with permission.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Equity, Policy & Reform, Teachers

Education crisis extends across the United States

The U.S. Education Department reports that the high school graduation rate is at an all time high at 80 percent.  Four out of five students are successful in studies completion and graduate within four years. While these statistics sound like a reason for a standing ovation, they are overshadowed by the crisis that is sweeping the United States. While 80 percent of high school seniors receive a diploma, less than half of those are able to proficiently read or complete math problems.

The problem is that students are being passed on to the next grade when they should be held back, and then they are unable to complete grade-level work and keep up with their classmates.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the largest standardized test administered in the United States, reports that fewer than 40 percent of graduating seniors have mastered reading and math and are poorly equipped for college and real world life.  These students who are passed to the next grade are at a serious disadvantage and have an increased chance of falling behind and dropping out of college.

Luckily, the problem isn’t going unnoticed.  The chair of the National Assessment Governing Board, David Driscoll acknowledges the sobering scores. He points out that it is necessary to determine the performance level of high school seniors, and that the data obtained is useful. It can instill a sense of urgency throughout the U.S. education system to better prepare students for college and the real world.

While this isn’t new news to me, I do feel that this crisis is alarming. I agree with David Driscoll and feel that this data can be used to make improvements in education. All students should be able to proficiently read and do math problems prior to high school graduation.

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

The Call to Teach: Urban Legends

Each day 8,000 American students drop out of high school. Over the course of a year, that amounts to 3 million total students who give up on the American right to education through 12th grade and decide they will be better off without a high school diploma. Within those numbers are even more telling statistics that show students of color and from low socio-economic brackets are dropping out in much greater numbers than their white middle- and high-class peers.

In my new book The Call to Teach: An Introduction to Teaching I explore the “real world” of teaching, particularly how new educators are ill-prepared to face the challenges of teaching in urban settings. Traditional university programs for K-12 educators do not adequately prepare students for what awaits them in the urban schools of America where the achievement gap and dropout rates are highest. So how can this problem be remedied? In three ways, as a start:

Target urban backgrounds. Teachers with connections to urban locations and educations are prime candidates to return to these schools and make a difference. Universities are not doing enough to find these qualified future educators and then place them on specific tracks for career success at urban schools. There needs to be greater customization when it comes to college learning for future educators who understand firsthand the challenges that urban students face – and then job placement programs need to be built around the same concept.

Require urban student teaching. All educators-in-training should spend at least a few hours in an urban classroom, in addition to their other teaching assignments. Seeing urban challenges firsthand must be part of every educator’s path to a degree, even if he or she never teaches full time in such a classroom. I believe this would not only raise awareness of issues that tend to plague urban schools (like overcrowding and the impact of poverty on student performance) but may also inspire future teachers to want to teach in those settings. College programs must expose teacher-students to real-world urban settings in order to make progress past the social and academic issues that bring urban K-12 students down.

Reward urban teachers. The test-heavy culture of American K-12 classrooms puts urban teachers at a distinct advantage when it comes to resources and even lifelong salaries. If a teacher whose students score well on standardized tests is rewarded with more money and access to more learning materials, where does that leave the poor-performing educators? Instead of funneling more funds and learning help to teachers with student groups that are likely to do well, despite the teacher, urban teachers should be receiving the support. At the very least, the funding and attention should be evenly split. In almost every case, failing urban students and schools should never be blamed on the teacher. That mentality is what scares away many future educators who may otherwise have given urban teaching a try. There is too much pressure to perform and that leads to many urban teachers leaving their posts after the first year, or not even looking for those jobs in the first place.

Strong teaching in America’s urban schools is the key to overcoming dropout and achievement gap issues. With the right guidance, urban K-12 students can rise above their circumstances to be stand-outs in academics. They may even return the favor as teachers themselves one day. For urban teachers to succeed, however, they need more support and encouragement from their industry, government and society as a whole.

What do you think can be done to recruit more inspired educators into urban schools?

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

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

Multicultural recruiting: What colleges do it best?

By Matthew  Lynch

At least on paper, America’s colleges and universities are interested in creating a diverse student population. Though not perfect in practice, U.S. college campuses are increasingly becoming more nuanced in their population makeups in order to more accurately represent the greater population. Part of this is just a reflection of a changing society but some of it has to do with schools effectively recruiting a student body that has plenty of diversity. This includes recruitment efforts to bring in low-income, first-generation college, immigrant and other minority students.

While nearly every college or university has a diversity policy on the books, some are succeeding in practice more than others. Take a look at these five colleges or universities that are doing an excellent job with multicultural recruiting and how they are making it happen:

Bates College: With its Prologue Program for first-generation and diverse background students, this Maine-based school welcomes these students with a three-day intensive initiation. For new students who want to enter in the fall of 2016, the Prologue Program will offer tours, class attendance, meet-and-greet sessions with faculty members, and even an admission interview. The purpose is to give these students a more accurate idea of what to expect when they arrive as official students.  Literally putting students in classroom seats helps them envision their futures as college students.

Princeton University: Though Ivy League schools are generally regarded as being elitist, many are making large strides to create more diverse campuses. Princeton has specific recruiting tactics that include partnering with the Leadership Enterprise Diverse of America organization to reach talented high school students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. A seven-week summer program is also available for incoming freshman from low-income and other disadvantaged backgrounds in order to help them adjust to the rigors of Princeton before their official time on the campus begins. A release from the university states that the “Class of 2018 has a record 290 students from low-income backgrounds, making up 22 percent of the class; approximately 12 percent of the Class of 2018 are first-generation college students.” These numbers are certainly a reflection of successful recruiting but to get those students across the graduation stage, Princeton recognizes that support programs are necessary too.

University of North Carolina, Charlotte. This public does a great job addressing the needs of students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. The graduation gap between white and Latino or black students at UNC Charlotte is nearly non-existent. In addition, generous needs-based scholarships ensure that these disadvantaged students graduate with less debt. UNC Charlotte also offers a six-week summer “bridge” program that has increased its freshman-to-sophomore retention by 12 percent.

Rutgers University: Though not as traditionally diverse as some of the other schools on this list, Rutgers does have multicultural strengths in two areas: international students and LGBT students. Students from more than 110 countries attend Rutgers, and it is consistently ranked as a top 100 campus for LGBT students. Women represent almost half of the students (49 percent) and just over one-quarter are of Asian descent. Where Rutgers lacks is in African-American representation (just 7 percent) but overall, the university is doing a good job of recruiting diverse students.

When it comes to economic diversity, the Rutgers Future Scholars program is offered to first-generation and low-income middle schoolers who live in the vicinity of the university who show promise for attending it in the future. The students who complete the precollege initiative are given a scholarship to cover tuition for four years. More support for lower-income students comes from an additional Educational Opportunity Fund.

Cornell University: More specifically, the College of Engineering. The department is designed to assist students who are “traditionally underrepresented in engineering.” In 2011, President Obama bestowed the Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring on Cornell for its successful attempts at Diversity. Mentoring is a big part of what makes this program so successful. Since 2004, this niche initiative of the larger university has connected minority high school students with mentors who are already in the college program, faculty or working in the field of engineering. The program works because it shows younger engineers-to-be other successful people who look like them.

 

What college-level multicultural recruiting tactics do you believe work the best?

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

Male graduates earn more than female graduates: study

Alexandra Hansen, The Conversation

Male university graduates earn more than their female counterparts and the pay gap will likely increase with the more time spent in the workforce, according to new research.

A study by Graduate Careers Australia found an aggregate gender wage gap of 9.4% in favour of male graduates, which decreased to 4.4% when allowances were made for controls such as the courses studied by males and females.

This means more males enrol in courses with higher earnings such as engineering, whereas humanities, which provide less monetary return, are studied mainly by women.

However, the 4.4% gender wage gap couldn’t be explained by these factors, and is potentially due to inequalities in workplaces.

When looking at specific occupations, the study found male graduate nurses and primary school teachers earned more than their female counterparts.

Statistics from 2013 show the gender wage gap across the board in Australia is 17.5%, leading to the conclusion that the pay gap increases with time in the workforce.

Author of the study Edwina Lindsay said this greater figure examines the aggregate gap within the broader Australian labour market, and does not control for vital determinants which may mediate the gap, such as age and career breaks in employment which stem from family responsibilities.

However, she said many studies have shown the pay gap widens with age.

Ms Lindsay said females need to be given more information about career choices and should be encouraged to consider training for occupations that are often traditionally thought of as male roles.

“Implementing education campaigns and programs that encourage the participation of women in STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) during secondary schooling could see the aggregate wage gap in favour of males reduced for future generations,” she said.

Currently, field of education choices of men and women can be influenced by gender stereotypes socialised at a young age, she said.

“This may help to explain the notable differences in the fields of education studied by young men and women in Australia.”

Eva Cox, Professorial Fellow at the University of Technology, Sydney, said the debate shouldn’t be how to get women in to these higher paying jobs, but rather why jobs dominated by males are better paid than jobs dominated by females.

“The question here ignored is whether salaries are higher because of more intrinsic value in a STEM degree, or whether the gender composition of the workforce influences the way it is valued,” she said.

“On that basis one can question whether the differences between fields of education pay levels are in themselves gender biased. Why is engineering of so much more value than social work?”

Ms Cox said rather than thinking of ways to get more women in higher paid areas, we need to raise pay rates in feminised occupations.

Executive Director of the Australian Centre for Leadership for Women Dr Diann Rodgers-Healey said the wage gap had remained unchanged for almost 20 years.

To remedy the gap, we need to address gender-based direct and indirect discrimination so assumptions aren’t made about the industries, careers, positions and job assignments for women, she said.

The Conversation

Alexandra Hansen, Editor, The Conversation

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

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

When researchers ask for data on penalization of black kids, schools resist, cover up

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

 

Muhammad Khalifa, Michigan State University & Felecia Briscoe, University of Texas at San Antonio
Students of color are more likely to be suspended. Rod Library, CC BY

That students of color bear the brunt of the zero tolerance discipline policies in schools has been well-established. What is not so well known is that some school administrations are actually complicit in this act of racial disciplining.

Nationally, students of color are more likely to be suspended than white students. On average, black boys are suspended four times more than white boys. Latino students are also suspended more frequently than white students, and female students of color are also disciplined more frequently than white female students.

The policy ‘problem’

But this is not all. A recent study that we conducted over a period of two years in Texas found that schools were in fact negligent when it came to addressing such practices of disciplining. The study covered four school districts in Texas with a population of nearly 200,000 students.

As researchers, we have been studying this issue since 2010. But what prompted this study was the suspension of one of the researcher’s sons from school. The child was given a US $500 court citation. And when we showed up for our court appointment, we saw that all the children were either black or brown. Did it mean that white children never fought in school?

We knew this was part of what is now known as the school-to-prison pipeline for children of color. It led us to take on a scholar-activist role.

Most schools and districts claim to be following “race-neutral” discipline policies. School officials even point to their race-neutral suspension and expulsion policies to show how they are “fair” with students of all race and ethnic subgroups.

However, researchers have found that the problem lies in the application of these policies.

For example, black students are more likely to be suspended for breaking subjective school rules such as a lack of respect for teachers than for objective ones, like having a weapon. Researchers point to cultural stereotypes and misunderstandings from a primarily white teaching force as the reasons for the “disciplining gaps.”

Data on discipline

Our recent study found that some schools are, in fact, negligent and even defensive when it comes to addressing the problem of school discipline practices and the discipline gap.

The kind of responses we got when we asked for school districts’ discipline data resembled a “corporate cover-up.”

Some school administrators resisted our attempts to provide information under the  Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and some others released data that were not helpful. For example, in the discipline data submitted by a school district, we were not able to discern the race of the children who had been suspended or expelled from school.

Some schools have been found to be negligent about school disciplining issues. Student image via www.shutterstock.com

It is hard for us to imagine that schools are not keeping track of usable disciplinary data, considering that in recent years, widespread attention has focused on the disciplinary treatment of black boys and other students of color. President Obama has even initiated My Brother’s Keeper, a national program intended to help black and Latino boys succeed.

Responses from schools

Our biggest surprise was finding out that districts perceived our request for data as a threat. We found that school administrations became secretive, defensive and even more protective of the data. It seemed to us that districts were essentially complicit in the process of oppression of youth of color.

Even the districts that provided the data were very defensive when informed of the discipline gaps that occurred in their schools. For example, when presented with data in his district, one data administrator responded, “Well, other districts in Texas are higher than us” and “We are not far off from the state average.”

It was very troubling for us to see schools reacting in this way, especially when lives of youth were at risk. These responses were unacceptable and deflected the district’s responsibility.

In the end, only one school district, out of four, instituted a district-wide program for the principals of their schools to learn more about the racial discipline gaps. It was the only one to take steps on how to begin reducing and eliminating racial discipline gaps at both the school and at the district level.

As we conducted the study, we also realized that there is no national legislation that prompts schools to address disparities in education. While No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and other national legislation have at least attempted to draw attention to racial disparities in achievement, no legislation exists that actually compels schools to address the problem.

This is unfortunate, given the close connection between the academic achievement gap and the discipline gap.

What must be done?

It is important that schools make policies and goals for racial and ethnic groups more explicit. For example, a goal for “75% proficiency for students in math” is not as impactful as “75% proficiency for each student subgroup based on their racial, gender or language-based identity.” The reason we say this is: what if the population of a school is 25% Latino and that happens to be the same population of nonproficient math students?

At the policy level, what is needed is intensive training on implicit racial bias in most districts. In addition, school districts should be required to report overall suspension rates and discipline gaps within each of their schools.

Furthermore, state or federal policies must begin to regulate both the collection of discipline data and the rate of compliance of schools.

Parents too need to pay more attention. Parents of color and from other subgroups should begin to identify which schools are more likely to suspend students of color.

All this together can be a powerful impetus for districts and schools to attend to this problem. Otherwise, disciplining practices will continue to have devastating consequences for our kids.

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

________________________________

Muhammad Khalifa is Assistant Professor of Educational Administration at Michigan State University.

Felecia Briscoe is Associate Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at The University of Texas at San Antonio

This article was originally published on The Conversation.

Read the original article.

 

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

Educational opportunity rises 80 percent since 1970

According to the Historical Report of Opportunity, released by Opportunity Nation and Measure of America, educational opportunity has escalated by 80 percent since 1970. The Report defines Educational Opportunity as the number of children in preschool, the number of high school students who graduate on time, and the number of adults with an associate’s degree or higher. Over the past four decades, Massachusetts improved the most; Nevada, the least.

Between 1970 and 2010, the number of 3- and 4-year-olds enrolled in preschool increased by nearly four times, emphasizing the growing awareness of the benefits of early childhood education. Studies show that low-income children who attend high-quality preschool are more successful academically and more likely to graduate from high school and enroll in postsecondary education. Some states have cut funding for public pre-K, yet early childhood education continues to be a priority in many states.

Every state experienced growth in the percentage of adults aged 25 or older who obtained at least an associate’s degree. This indicates the changing global economy that requires higher levels of education of employees. During the four decades measured, Americans with at least an associates degree increased by 105 percent.

In 2013, 28 percent of children nationwide were enrolled in state-financed preschool. While 36.3 percent of Americans have at least an associate’s degree, economists predict that by 2020, two-thirds of American jobs will require some form of post-secondary degree or credential.

While Americans should be proud of the educational improvements our country has seen, we need to continue, or even pick up the pace to ensure people possess the skills required to build a powerful 21st-century workforce. This Report acts as a good reminder to value the importance of education as the pathway to many of life’s successes.

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

Diverse Conversations: Supporting Underserved Populations in Higher Education

The field of higher education has changed completely in the past couple of decades. Unlike before, when only a few talented and intelligent students went on to get a college education, now it has become a necessity as the jobs available in the new economy require more than just a high school diploma. Because of this, American institutions of higher learning are experiencing an influx of students that may not have been part of the college scene as early as a decade ago. Recently, I sat down with Dr. Stella M. Flores, Assistant Professor of Higher Education at Vanderbilt University, to discuss how institutions of higher learning can better support underserved populations.

ML: How are first-generation, low-income, and minority students faring in the modern academy in relation to the past? How can we get things to where they should be?

SF: The trends show that we have more access to higher education due to increased options via the community colleges and now online learning programs. So the modern academy does not look like an older traditional academy. However, when we account for other characteristics, the demographic trends are less favorable. We are not doing as well with some groups such as Hispanics, while we’ve seen some improvements with other groups.

First-generation, low-income and minority students fare better when they have adequate access to financial aid, support programs that properly introduce them to and sustain them through the academy, and proper high school preparation that equips them to handle the rigor of college work. The reality is that many of the high schools that launch these students have not provided this preparation placing the burden on the academy to make up for this lost ground.

ML: What can policy and decision makers do to help historically underserved students to succeed in college?

SF: First, policymakers and decision makers can come to the table as stakeholders in support of educating underserved students as a larger societal and economic mandate. Educational attainment is beyond an individual good yet we behave as if it is a zero-sum game in almost every instance. Second, succeeding in college is largely based on succeeding in high school. While it seems that aiming for the high school diploma is no longer a problem, the new battle, it seems to me, is an equity fight for the courses that lead to reasonable and serious college eligibility for all groups.

Some states have enacted policies to make the college curriculum a default curriculum. This is a great step but we have to know when policy is not enough. Stakeholders as a group can identify what levers will also have to be in place for the policy to work. Policy is an essential but insufficient step in helping students succeed in college. I would also argue it also not only the responsibility of education policymakers as health care, family, and employment decisions are especially competing options in low-income and underrepresented student lives.

At the college level, I would suggest the funding and expansion of interventions we know work for students based on their institutional culture. Institutions that enroll a moderate to high percentage of students in need of remediation will require different interventions than an institution with innovative retention programs for students with the preparation and motivation to major in a STEM field.

Third, reducing time to degree to the extent possible, will likely be a key element in all of these programming efforts. Fourth, many highly successful historically underrepresented students will point to at least one minority faculty who made a difference in their pathway to greater achievements. That is not to say that non-minority faculty members don’t play a role in this pathway to success. However, this is one element that seems to be consistent in the average underrepresented student success story. I know my life would have been different had I not seen the first Mexican-American female professor at my university.

ML: Historically underserved students are disproportionally burdened with student debt when compared to other groups. What can be done to close this gap and alleviate their burden?

SF: There is emerging research on financial literacy on how to plan for college, choose college based on options and loan debt, and the timing of the receipt of this information. One reality, however, is that many students faced with a “first” in completing college, specifically a selective college, take on more debt than they can handle in efforts to make family history. My advice would be to understand the tradeoffs in these decisions.

Second, there are many schools now that offer free tuition to high achieving, low-income students if parental contribution is under a certain amount. The lesson here is to tell the low-income eighth grader that if he or she is able to achieve at high levels, college may be reasonably affordable if not nearly free at a good school. This is of course dependent on the economy and institutional sustainability of programs. However, it seems we are providing incorrect information when we say a public school education will always be cheaper than a private school education.

One good formula to suggest to our younger students is to aim to be academically high achieving, get information on options across all institutions, don’t “undermatch” yourself, and plan to finish in time if at all possible. For those of us with loan debt, I can imagine a new pool of teachers, professors, health care professionals with simple loan forgiveness programs administered at the state or federal level. It seems to me this would be a relatively easy marketing campaign that could change the structure of the labor market in ways the labor market needs to stretch – stronger teachers in the professions, more nurses in our hospitals, etc.

ML: By 2050, Caucasians will no longer constitute a majority in the United States. What does this mean for higher education?

SF: This is an important demographic to keep in mind as we plan for a future. Will we respond with safeguarding stratification at institutions based on race, ethnicity, and income, or will we prepare leaders from all groups for all institutions? In essence, this means state economies will likely thrive or die based on how they educate their least educated group. This will have even more dire consequences for states whose least educated group is also its most populous group.

ML: What is your vision for higher education in the 21st century, and what are the key opportunities and challenges suggested by this vision?

SF: My vision for the 21st century is to more profoundly understand the potential of our individuals and institutions in the context of historical and remaining challenges. By that I mean moving past stereotypes, fears, and anxieties to a place where we have the opportunity to see all groups as equals because we have seen leadership, research, success, and vision from everyone in our circles. In my vision, we won’t second-guess each other’s talents and contributions based on what we look like.

My vision is also to speak up for each other’s educational well-being even if that person is different from ourselves. In sum, we create a vision in which all have an opportunity for a solid high school education that prepares you to succeed in college and a college education that prepares you for a job and dare I say the opportunity to attend a graduate or professional program. The challenge will be to do this in a world with exploding and evolving technology in which the “have-nots” will likely be the last in line to access the future.

Well, that concludes my interview with Dr. Flores. I would like to thank her for taking time out of her busy schedule to speak with us.

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

 

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

4 Reasons We Should Stop “Waiting for Superman”

Recently I viewed the documentary, Waiting for Superman, for the umpteenth time, and I noted that almost 5 years after the film’s September 24, 2010 U. S. premiere, the American educational system is still not living up to its potential. Sure, education reform was the phrase on the tip of everyone’s tongue, but after a year most of the fervor and commitment to educational change that was initially exhibited has all but subsided.

It’s time to recommit to the change that the documentary called for. Here are four reasons we should all stop “waiting for Superman”—and, together, make positive steps toward a better educational system in America.

  1. We are falling behind academically, despite spending lots of money on our pupils.

The comparisons with other developed countries show that the strongest nation in the world is still falling behind academically. The cost per pupil in the U.S. has soared to five times the level in the 1950s, after adjusting for inflation. With this kind of money being pumped into the system, why are many our school systems of such a low caliber, and further falling behind?

  1. Everyone in the United States could benefit from an improved educational system—not just students from low-income backgrounds.

Statistics and common sense born of observation tell us that the biggest crisis in our schools is finding ways to educate students in low-income areas. However, as Waiting for Superman illustrates, our educational problems are not limited to poverty-stricken areas alone. As Lesley Chilcott, producer of the Waiting for Superman put it, “the dirty little secret… is that middle- and upper-class communities are suffering as well. When we talk about U.S. students ranking twenty-fifth in math, we’re not just talking about underserved communities, we’re talking overall.” Yet, despite decades of knowing that these problems exist, little improvement is being made to the system itself.

Of course everyone wants to improve America’s education system. They just do not seem to know how, or they can’t agree on how to do it.

  1. Education is not viewed as a top priority in the United States.

The American public must believe that educational reform is a top priority issue in these times of severe economic troubles. It is understandable that, in today’s economy, people are primarily concerned about their jobs and putting food on the table. Upgrading education, although important to most, can hold a low priority in the mind of the average American, who is mostly concerned with keeping a roof over their head. The paradox here is that this is precisely the time to make that investment into education. When times are tough in an economy such as ours, workers need to improve their skills to compete effectively in the local (and global) marketplace. The education system is where people turn to acquire these skills.

  1. The demand for highly skilled workers is growing.

Furthermore, enhanced skills and technological talents are going to be desperately needed in the future as America continues to struggle towards sustaining a dynamic 21st century labor force. Production is not getting easier and simpler — in fact, it is just the opposite. Along the same lines, workers down the road will need to be able to adapt to technologies that are just now being developed. If American students and workers find themselves in an educational system that cannot fulfill these necessary, required functions because it is sub-par, not only will these individuals and their families find little success in an economy that has left them behind; it will cripple America’s competitiveness.

How do we fix this?

Waiting for Superman has been criticized as being against teacher’s unions, placing the blame too squarely on the shoulders of educators, and misrepresenting educational statistics. Nevertheless, the film shined a bright spotlight on the harsh reality of our educational system, showing the exodus of middle and upper class children from our public schools; the sadness of the lottery system; and the general hopelessness that some express about our educational system and its future.

One segment of Waiting for Superman illustrates American self-confidence through an image of kids doing daredevil bike stunts, and then crashing. This scene shows, in a metaphorical sense, that while our students seem to have confidence, many do not have the skills to actually succeed.

A year later, Waiting for Superman still serves as a stark reminder of just how bad our educational system has become, and just how ineffective most of our efforts at improving it have been. The American educational system has reached a turning point, a time when things seem at their most dire, and yet many appear to simply sit idly by “Waiting for Superman.”

America needs to view this film as a public call to action, where each of us is summoned to be a Superman (or Superwoman, as the case may be), or at least to lend a hand in saving our educational system, perhaps without the flashy heroics and cape. Rather than waiting, we should strive towards getting every educator, educational leader, government official, parent, and citizen to educate themselves about the problems that exist in our educational system, and to work together to fix them.

What is most important is that we understand the deficiencies in our educational system, and strictly forbid placing blame — which rarely serves to encourage cooperation. Rather, we must demonstrate accountability for our situation and fulfill our responsibility to our children. Collectively, we must come together with an understanding that “Superman” is not coming to save our children, and it is up to us to work together to find innovative ways to rise to the challenge of fixing our education system.

The future must be planned for; now. It certainly will not be an overnight process. However, by taking positive, productive steps, one at a time, an enormous amount of ground can be covered in the coming years. If we simply work together, we can restore the U.S. educational system to its former preeminence, and give our children the bright futures they deserve in our great country and aboard. We must become the Super-citizens that we have been waiting for.

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

Diverse Conversations: Let’s Talk About Financial Aid

The Washington Post reports that the average college student will graduate with $25,000 in debt. With over $1 trillion in outstanding loans, student debt outweighs credit card debt and is exempt from bankruptcy protection. Even with these startling statistics, students will continue to borrow money in order to pay for college. College and university financial aid departments must operate at an optimal level in order to ensure that students have access to viable financial aid options and that federal regulations are followed. In order to find out more about the financial aid side of higher education, I decided to interview Steve Booker, director of financial aid at Rollins College in Winter Park, Fla.

Q: How do financial aid operations fit into your overall campus environment?

A: Financial aid is a critical piece in ensuring students who enroll at Rollins College are able to graduate on time. We work with families to plan out their four year college career and estimate total loan debt as well as out-of-pocket amounts. This way, we eliminate as much of the unknown costs as possible.

Q: How is your financial aid office perceived by your office, others on campus, and students?

A: Finances are personal and can be intimidating for families and students. As such, faculty and staff across campus are the first line of identifying potential issues through interactions with students. They often identify students who are struggling financially and help these students contact our office. When faculty and staff provide the introduction to the Financial Aid Office, students are more at ease and we can work together to find solutions.

Q: What is greatest challenge related to financial aid that you will face on your campus in the next five years? How is your institution preparing to address this challenge?

A: Our greatest challenge continues to be the rising cost of education and the lack of planning by many families. More families seek financial aid and need assistance. In
order to encourage more planning, our office visits local high schools for presentations as well as partners with programs such as Take Stock in Children and College for Every Student in order to get the word out about financial aid options earlier in a student’s education. The earlier we can raise the awareness of college and need for planning, the more options available to the family to save and prepare for the cost of college.

Q: What effects have state budget cuts had on your institution?

A: As a private institution, the state budget cuts impacted us a bit differently. Many of our students receive Bright Futures and/or the Florida Resident Access Grant (FRAG) which provide funding for Florida residents. Bright Futures has not risen as quickly as the cost of college and the test score requirements have increased significantly, which reduces the number of eligible recipients. FRAG has been reduced over the past few years, but is now steadily rising. These programs are important to our Florida residents and help reduce the amount of loans a student will borrow.

Q: What, if anything, can institutions do to stop the upward spiral of college costs and the increasing need for additional student aid funds?

A: Alternative delivery methods can help reduce certain costs. For example, online courses reduce the costs of transportation and potentially books. Also, providing information earlier to families including options to save can help families be in a better position at the point of college entry.

Q: Federal regulations stemming from a school’s participation in the federal student aid programs are increasingly reaching into other departments at a school (e.g., campus safety, admissions, records). How is your school making sure the entire institution is in compliance with these increasingly far-reaching regulations?

A: Through external and internal audits, we are able to stay on top of the reporting and disclosure requirements. In addition, the Office of Institutional Research provides a secondary check to ensure documents and notifications are available.

Q: How can a financial aid director raise the status of his or her office in the eyes of a college president?

A: Make sure that the Financial Aid Director either has a “seat at the table” or ensure that his/her direct supervisor is able to articulate the financial aid needs of the student body.

Q: If you were standing before Congress today, what would you want to tell them about student aid?

A: Financial aid is an important piece of the puzzle in bridging the gap between a family’s finances and the cost of higher education. Providing clear, concise, and accurate information for families to rely on and plan their educational career is critical. As a community, we need to reach families much earlier in elementary school in order to assist in the planning and preparation process. This should include incentives for families to save for higher education as well as provide a blueprint for children to succeed at each grade level. Recognizing the behaviors of academically successful students and breaking that down into achievable steps at each grade level (i.e., learning how to study, how to ask thoughtful questions) will provide opportunities for students to flourish.

This concludes my interview with Steve Booker. I would like to thank him for consenting to this interview.

  • no reactions
0
Share