Matthew Lynch

Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education, list, Matthew Lynch

3 Initiatives Designed to Help Minorities Succeed in College

It seems that graduating from high school is no longer the end goal of P-12 learning – earning a college degree has replaced it. By 2018, 60 percent of jobs will require a college degree. On Monday, I wrote about the nationwide average high school graduation rate being 80 percent – which is admirable but also means that at least 1 in 5 kids won’t make it to college classes. When you factor in the high school graduates that bypass college completely, it seems that at some point America’s workforce will simply not be able to meet the demands of its employers. When it comes to minorities who graduate high school and are ready for the rigor of college coursework, numbers are bleak.

A new report from the College of Education at the University of Arizona found that less than 1 in 10 minority high school graduates in the state are adequately prepared for college. Non-minority students are not much better off though, with only 2 in 10 prepared for college after graduating from high school. A rise over the past 15 years in minority students in elementary and high school in state, as well as economic disparities between students of color and their white peers, are cited in the study as drivers behind the high school graduation-college readiness gap.

There are several methods that have been proposed to help minorities have better access to education. Here are just three of them.

  1. College scorecards and higher affordability. In 2014, Obama proposed the implementation of a rating system that would provide the general public with greater details about the total cost, graduation rates and alumni earnings of individual colleges and universities.

The program has since been nixed thanks to opposition from lawmakers and university heads, but the idea was that students choosing schools with higher ratings would have more access to Pell Grants and affordable loan programs. The plan was twofold in nature – first, getting more useful information into the hands of consumers and second, providing better affordability for young people who seek out higher education.

The rising cost of a college degree has been a concern of the Obama administration throughout both terms in the White House. College graduates in 2010 left their schools with an average of $26,000 in debt, leading to higher student loan debt in America than credit card debt. In order to reach his goal of leading the world in percentage of college graduates by 2020, Obama has been vocal about lowering the cost of the college process and providing more targeted, useful programs that address the needs of the economy.

This new “college scorecard” proposal was meant to one more step in that direction. Like public K-12 schools, colleges would be held more accountable by the federal government and would be compared to each other through data that truly matters.

Numerous publications claim to have the perfect formula in place for ranking the “best colleges and universities” based on a variety of factors but none are officially sanctioned by the government. The President’s ranking plan would avoid the fluff of other rating systems and address the core of educational matters: cost, graduation success and chances for achievement in the career that follows. These are the real stats that all students, whether recent high school graduates or those returning to campus for the first time in a few decades, need to make informed decisions.

In terms of minority students, the college ranking plan would have been beneficial. Though minority college student numbers are rising, 61 percent of college students in 2010 were considered Caucasian in comparison to just 14 percent Black students, 13 percent Hispanic students and 6 percent Asian or Pacific Islander students. Based on these statistics alone, minority students are at a disadvantage when it comes to attending and graduating from college. Every student situation is different but the cost of college and accompanying loan interest rates certainly play into the unbalanced collective college population.

This idea will not be implemented, but it’s still easy to see how a rankings system that effectively provides more grant money and more affordable loan options to students will make the dream of a college education a reality to more minorities. As more first-generation minorities attend colleges, choosing schools with high graduation rates (many of which likely have strong guidance policies in place) and good job placement will mean more career successes.

  1. Online class offerings. Each year online learning initiatives become less of a fringe movement and more of an incorporated, and accepted, form of education. More than 6.7 million people took at least one online class in the fall of 2011 and 32 percent of college students now take at least one online course during their matriculation. It is even becoming commonplace for high schools to require all students to take an online class before graduation as a way to prep them for the “real world” of secondary education.

The flexibility and convenience of online learning is well known but what is not as readily talked about is the way distance education promotes diversity of the college population. With less red tape than the traditional college format, online students are able to earn credits while still working full time, maintaining families and dealing with illnesses. Whether students take just one course remotely, or obtain an entire degree, they are able to take on the demands of college life more readily – leading to student population with more variety.

The Babson Survey Research Group recently revealed that while online college student enrollment is on the rise, traditional colleges and universities saw their first drop in enrollment in the ten years the survey has been conducted. This drop is small – less than a tenth of one percent – but its significance is big. A trend toward the educational equality of online curriculum is being realized by students, institutions and employers across the board. The benefits of a college education through quality online initiatives are now becoming more accessible to students that simply cannot commit to the constraints of a traditional campus setting.

  1. Free community college. During his sixth State of the Union address, President Barack Obama spelled out a proposal that would offer two years of community college for free to any student that wanted to take advantage of it. Once enrolled, these students would need to maintain a 2.5 grade-point average, stay enrolled at least half time and be on track to graduate on time to keep receiving the tuition-free access.

This program would, essentially, make the first two years of a college education a basic American right – aligning it with universal access to a K-12 (and even pre-K in some states) education. Of course there would be some requirements for having access to that right and it would not be mandatory, but the basic premise would be the same: free higher education for any American student.

Arguably this plan helps everyone in the long run. More Americans with access to a college education means a stronger economy and less college debt means more money in the pockets of college graduates that they can then pump back into that economy. Proponents of the plan say that it will particularly help minorities when it comes to college attendance because it removes the cost barrier that tends to discourage these groups from enrolling.

What do you think are some other initiatives that will help make more individuals from minority groups ready for college?

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

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

3 Easy Ways to End the High School Dropout Crisis

Recent high school dropout rates appear to be on the decline. But the numbers are still too high to stomach, especially with all of the alternative options high school students now have to finish their diplomas outside traditional classroom settings. At this juncture in U.S. K-12 progress, the dropout rate should be so small that it’s barely even worth mentioning.

Let’s look at ways to reduce the high school dropout rate to insignificance, once and for all.

  1. Get the business community involved. High school dropouts have a real economic impact. We can’t deny this. In fact, the nation as a whole will miss out on an estimated $154 billion in income over the lifetimes of the dropouts from the Class of 2011.

From a business perspective, this is a missed opportunity. There is money to be made and an economic boost is possible – but only if these students stick around long enough to obtain a high school diploma, and potentially seek out college opportunities. Georgia is a great example of a state that has taken advantage of the business community to help improve graduation rates. Areas like Atlanta Metro have some of the strongest business leaders in the nation, and school officials have begun to call on them for guidance and funding when it comes to improving graduation rates.

The report Building a Grad Nation 2012 found that between 2002 and 2010, Georgia showed high school graduation rate improvement from 61 to 68 percent, in part because of involvement from the business community. In that eight-year span, the number of “dropout factories” (schools with 60 percent or lower graduation rates) fell from 1,634 to 1,550. Making graduation numbers an issue of economic stability, and having backup from business leaders, is just one step toward reducing dropout numbers.

  1. Provide support outside of the classroom. Risk factors for dropouts include coming from low-income or single-parent families. Teachers simply cannot address the academic and emotional needs of every student within normal class time, so programs need to be in place for students who are at risk for dropping out. A pilot program in San Antonio called Communities in Schools has set out to accomplish this through offering on-campus counseling services for students on the fence about dropping out. The program offers a listening ear for whatever the students may need to talk about, from lack of food or anxiety about family financial woes. Of the students in the program in the 2012 – 2013 school year, 97 percent obtained a high school diploma instead of dropping out. While students can certainly talk about their studies, the main point of the program is not academic. It is simply a support system to encourage students who may be facing life obstacles to keep pushing forward to finish high school. These programs are often what students need to feel accountability toward the community as a whole and also worthiness for a high school diploma.
  2. Promote earlier education for everybody. Much of the attack on the dropout rate happens when teens are already at a crossroads. In truth, the learning and social experiences they have from birth influence their attitudes about education, society and their own lives. Perhaps the dip in dropout rates in the past four decades hinges on another statistic: from 1980 to 2000, the number of four-year-old children in the U.S. enrolled in preschool programs rose from half to over two-thirds. Pre-K learning is only an academic right (free of charge) in 40 states and in 2012, total funding for these programs was slashed by $548 million. Instead of putting money where it belongs – upfront, at the beginning of a K-12 career – lawmakers could be contributing to a higher dropout rate, and economic cost, in future decades.

It’s time to stop making the high school dropout issue something that is confronted in the moment. Prevention, as early as pre-K learning, is a long-term solution.

Can you think of any innovative ways to reduce the high school dropout rates?

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

3 Ideas to Consider about Corporal Punishment in Schools

It’s difficult to believe in this day and age that we still have some schools around the nation that are using corporal punishment as a form of discipline. 19 states allow corporal punishment in schools. Such punishment usually includes a spanking of some kind, typically done with a wooden paddle. Although not allowed in the majority of states, it is reported that there are over 200,000 children who are victims of it each year around the country. It’s difficult to imagine that so many children are going home throughout the school year with welts, bruises, and broken vessels, as punishment for something they did in school.

Spankings themselves, as well as corporal punishment, are controversial topics at best. There is a lot of evidence and research that has pointed to the fact that spanking as a form of punishment, at any age, can be problematic. We as a society need to be aware of this research, especially when it comes to it still being allowed in the schools of 19 of our states. Here are some of the most troubling aspects of corporal punishment in schools:

  1. Research indicates that children who are disciplined with spanking go on to have more mental illness as adults. Spanking has been linked to children becoming adults who not only have mental health issues, but also experience more depression, and have problems with substance abuse.
  2. Spanking children has also been shown to make them become adults who are more aggressive, antisocial, and who go on to abuse their own spouse and children.
  3. As a nation, we are concerned with our high school dropout rates. This makes me wonder how many adults would want to continue showing up at their jobs if they knew they would be paddled if they didn’t perform their jobs correctly. Perhaps if students were not being paddled, they may hang in there a while longer and take to their studies a little better.

Corporal punishment may be under attack, but until we outlaw it from every state in the country, we will have the problems associated with it each year. And those problems, as we have discussed, are far reaching and long lasting. They impact us as a society long after the child has completed their schooling.

While the Supreme Court allows corporal punishment in whatever states and school districts have it legally on the books, this is a matter of ethics. We as a nation need to do what is right by the next generation. By the looks of it, if corporal punishment continues in the 19 states it is currently allowed in, we will be raising a lot of children who may go on to have mental illnesses, be more aggressive, abuse their spouses, and have addiction problems.

Once they are adults, society can point the finger at them and say that it’s their own fault, and they have created the problems in their life by the choices they have made. But if we can agree that the writing is on the wall, and the potential long term impact is there, then we may need to start pointing a few fingers at the schools, as they are using a form of punishment that experts agree goes on to create more unwanted behavior.

Now is the time for parents around the nation, especially those who live in states where corporal punishment is still allowed, to take a stand. It’s time that we focus on more peaceful and less harmful ways to teach the children of the nation right from wrong. Getting rid of the paddles in the schools of this nation is a great place to start.

 

 

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

Empowering Leadership Behavior in Schools: Lessons Learned from the Business Sector

Empowering leadership behavior includes encouraging of self-reward systems, self-leadership, opportunity awareness, participation in goal setting, and independent behavior by followers and group members. In other words, it’s all about helping followers take ownership of their positions, toward the greater good of the organization. And, as studies have shown, the effects are often positive and far-reaching

Empowering leaders, through positive emotional support and encouragement, increases  motivation and confidence among subordinates as they set out to accomplish their individual and organizational goals. Therefore, empowering leadership can be quite useful, particularly as a behavioral tactic for entrepreneurs, who must gain commitment from those they work with in order to compete against bigger, more established, and resource-rich enterprises.

Additionally, empowering leadership behavior in entrepreneurs is crucial in dynamic environments. Entrepreneurs attempting to lead their ventures toward higher growth while operating in ever-changing conditions can benefit from adopting an  empowering leadership style. It is an effective way to distribute leadership throughout the management team. This enhances the shaping of emerging strategy, which harnesses the individual talents of each team member that are most relevant to the current situation.

However, there are some negative effects that come with empowering leadership, which are often left out of leadership literature. One of the disadvantages of empowering diverse teams is that it can be counterproductive. Empowering leadership can cause incompatibility among certain innovative enterprises.

In addition, empowered management teams tend to seek out too much information before making decisions. They may also attempt to follow too many opportunities, without refining a single business concept to establish a solid basis in the market. These challenges more often occur in experienced firms with diverse top management teams.

Diverse teams can be quite effective at considering multiple alternatives and making sense of challenging situations, but they are much slower to reach agreement on decisions. Different perspectives within top management teams can produce conflict, slowing the decision-making process.

We can conclude that empowering management teams can provide greater opportunity for conflicts to emerge. Conflicts among team members are likely to be particularly damaging to ventures operating in dynamic environments, where decision-making must be speedy in order to take advantage of the brief windows of opportunity . Entrepreneurs should be cautious about when and where to empower their management teams.

In fast-changing environments, empowerment reduces the new enterprise’s performance, causing the relationship between the  management team’s diversity and the new venture’s performance to become increasingly negative. In more stable industry environments, this kind of empowerment leadership behavior is more likely to have a positive effect on the performance of new ventures with non-uniform top management teams . This is because the information available is clearer and there is more time available for planning.

Stable environments allow the empowered top management teams to spend more time considering what alternative strategies are available, and exploring the potential for various innovative activities, since total agreement is not urgent. As a result, there is generally less conflict within empowered diverse teams operating in stable environments.

School leaders seeking effectiveness should learn from entrepreneurs, and particularly those from start-ups in fast-moving industries, which tend to be highly creative. They should strive to create environments in which positive ideas are encouraged, and in which there is ample opportunity for those ideas to be put in place.

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

Higher Accountability for College Dropout Rates

There are a lot of metrics in place that gauge the effectiveness of P-12 schooling in the U.S. and shine a particularly bright light on public schools, particularly when they are failing students. Dropout rates are just one of the factors taken into account when these numbers are calculated and tend to weigh heavily on the schools and districts who have low percentages. The same does not seem to be true once the high school years pass though. Compared to P-12 institutions, colleges and universities seemingly get a pass when it comes to college dropout rates – perhaps because in the past, higher education was considered more of a privilege and less of a right. A college dropout was simply walking away from the assumed higher quality of life that came with the degree, but still had opportunity to excel without it.

That’s not the case anymore. As of 2013, 17.5 million students were enrolled in U.S. colleges and universities.  More than ever, colleges and universities have a responsibility to not simply admit students, but ensure they are guided properly to graduation. In other words, institutions of higher education should not be able to just take their student’s money and say “good luck.” They should provide the tools necessary for students to successfully achieve a college education and anticipate the issues that could prevent that.

Authors Ben Miller and Phuong Ly discussed the issue of the U.S. colleges with the worst graduation rates in their book College Dropout Factories. Within the pages, the authors encouraged educators at all levels to acknowledge that colleges and universities should share responsibility for successful or failing graduation rates, and that the institutions with the worst rates should be shut down. Perhaps the most terrifying suggestion in the book (for colleges and universities) was that public institutions with low graduation rates would be subjected to reduced state funding.

The book was written based on findings from Washington Monthly that ranked the U.S. schools with the lowest six-year graduation rates among colleges and universities, including public ones like the University of the District of Columbia (8%), Haskell Indian Nations University (9%), Oglala Lakota College (11%), Texas Southern University (13%) and Chicago State University (13%). These stats were published in 2010 so they are not the most current available but a quick scan of the University of the District Columbia’s official page shows graduation rate numbers through the end of the 2003 – 2004 school year. The past nine years are nowhere to be found. The school boasts 51.2 percent underrepresented minorities in the study body, including 47 percent that are Black – but what good are those numbers if these students are not actually benefitting from their time in college because they receive no degree?

In the case of Chicago State University, the latest statistics show some improvement from the 2010 ones. The six-year graduation rate is up to 21 percent – but the transfer-out rate is nearly 30 percent. The school has 92 percent underrepresented minorities that attend – 86 percent who are black and 70 percent who are female – but again, what good does any of that do if these traditionally disadvantaged students are not graduating?

In all cases of college dropout factories, the P-12 institutions chalk up a victory on their end. They graduated the students and also saw them accepted into a college. What happens after that is between the students and their higher education choices.

This, to me, is a problem. The accountability for student success extends beyond the years that they are in P-12 classrooms. Graduation from high school, and acceptance into college, should never be the final goal of P-12 educators. That is not a victory. That is only halftime.

As far as the colleges and universities are concerned, higher accountability should be demanded from educators, students, parents and really any Americans that want the best economy and highest-educated population. Public institutions, in particular, should be subject to restructuring or take over if dropout rates are too high. The lack of delivery on the college degree dream at many of these schools is appalling, frankly, and has gone on long enough.

What do you think an accountability system for colleges should look like when it comes to dropout rates?

 

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

Diverse Conversations: 5 Questions For Securing the Perfect Internship

You may think that the cold of winter is too early to start thinking about summer internships, but the competition for placement is already heating up. Companies have already begun accepting applications for summer, and as a result, students vying for top spots need to start preparing now. This can be easier said than done, as students have more choices, but also greater competition.

For this week’s installment of “Diverse Conversations,” I interviewed L.J. Brock, Vice President, Talent Acquisition and People Infrastructure at Red Hat. L.J. and I discussed Red Hat’s internship program and the 5 questions he says all interns should ask to increase their options and make sure they secure the best opportunity to drive their future.

Q: How has today’s young workforce changed from the workforce of, for example, 10 years ago?

A: The workforce of today, as a whole, has the same attitude that the startup workforce had 10 years ago. There’s a lot of confidence and willingness to take chances. People want to make their marks at a company and be recognized for the amount of work they put in and I think jobseekers are looking for a job they care about, doing work that excites them, at a company whose mission they can believe in. It’s really competitive, especially in the technology industry. The stigma of moving from job to job is gone and people don’t feel they have to pay their dues in order to move up. Everyone is looking for, and finding, what they want, now.

Q: Is there any particular type of environment that college graduates expect when they enter the workforce? For example, do they expect companies to be open to their ideas, or is it just a matter of “come in and do your job?”

A: The main things that attract people, including college graduates, to Red Hat are our environment and culture. The ability to make an impact and see that impact on day one is paramount and I think a lot of these jobseekers are over the idea of “just doing a job” and going home. They want to influence. They want to be recognized. And they want to do this on a grand scale, no matter their title and time in the job. Red Hat has always operated as a meritocracy – your ideas really matter here and the best ideas will rise to the top. It’s how we work in developing software and it’s how our company moves forward– through our people, their hard work, and their ideas.

Q: What should the ultimate goal of the internship be? Gain knowledge? Get a better idea of what the working world is like? Get a job at the company you’re interning at?

A: When it comes to our internship program, we treat these students as peers. We’ve been operating this program for over 10 years and while the size and scope has certainly grown, the idea of how it works has stayed the same. The goal, of course, is to find young talent and get them in the door. We show them the opportunities that Red Hat offers and they’re given the chance to come in and experience our culture and to work on projects that matter. There’s no benefit in having these intelligent people come in and work on imaginary problems or push papers around– we want them solving real problems and getting real experience they can use no matter where they end up. We want them to make an impact. The ultimate goal is to have them continue on with Red Hat, but it takes a lot of initiative, a cultural fit, and the ability to adapt to change. We love the idea of hiring interns because they already understand our mission and what it takes to succeed at Red Hat.

Q: Can you provide some background on Red Hat’s internship program?

A: Our internship program has been around for over 10 years and keeps growing in size and to new geographies. We work to identify the best and brightest college students, usually in their junior or senior years, and bring them in to work on various teams across Red Hat. We’ve had interns in engineering, finance, human resources, marketing, legal, design, and customer support in the past, and we work to expose them to other areas of the organization for a multi-disciplinary look into what it is to be a Red Hatter. They get hands-on meetings with our executives and participate in many activities geared toward giving them the full Red Hat experience in just a few short months.

Q: Why is it important for applicants to start applying to internships so early in the year? And, how has this process changed over the past several years?

A: There’s not just a huge amount of competition out there for talent, but also for jobs and internships. Students should get the earliest possible jump on an internship to give themselves the longest period of time to find the right fit. The job they may want will not be there forever, so getting in early is key. We’re looking to fill these open jobs and if we don’t know about the candidate and their abilities, there’s no guarantee. Job fairs also take place early in the school year and that’s another great way to find out about what is offered and for the students to, in some cases, meet the person hiring for specific roles. This has changed somewhat over the years as internships are no longer an add-on for a company’s strategy. It’s become an integral key in how they find and hire talent.

Q: In a past interview I conducted with Dr. Lynn C. Owens, Associate Professor of Communication, William Peace University, Raleigh, NC, she reported that research shows students are not as prepared as they should be for the workforce. How can initiatives like Red Hat’s internship program help shift those statistics?

A: Knowledge is power, but experience is what gets you hired. Red Hat believes that the key to having a young workforce succeed is to get them the experience they need as soon as possible. And that’s real-world experience. Internships should be all about learning how to take your knowledge and apply it in a professional setting. Internships are also about making yourself an asset to employers, so we hope that as internships as a whole become more serious and focused, we will see some of these statistics around preparedness improve.

Q: So, you mention there are 5 questions all intern applicants should consider if they make it to an in-person interview. What are those questions and why are they important?

A: Always remember that you’re not the only one being questioned. The employer is also being interviewed by you, so find out as much about the job as they are finding out about you:

1) What kinds of projects would I be working on? Make sure this internship aligns with your career goals and builds on the knowledge and skills you’ve already gained. If there’s not a clear set of goals for your time at the company, that may be a red flag that you should look elsewhere.

2) What would a typical day look like? This will help you decide whether the environment and work is for you. Internships run the gamut from major learning opportunities to extreme grunt work. Know what you’re getting into.

3) Are there regular activities for the interns outside of normal work? Many companies, including Red Hat, have a full-fledged intern program that include activities such as volunteering, seminars, ballgames, cook-outs, and the like. These can be valuable in meeting new people, executives, and other hiring managers from around the company.

4) What do you like most about working here? Learning about the company’s culture and work experience can help you determine whether it’s a good fit for you.

5) Have you stayed in contact with previous interns? Ideally, the employer can reference past interns that now work there full time. In addition, it’s a good sign if that individual can think of interns who have moved on to interesting roles within the company or in other highly regarded companies.

We would like to thank L.J. Brock for taking the time to speak to us.

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

3 Developments on No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. Fifteen years have blown by since the last time No Child Left Behind was updated. That’s a significant period of time when we are talking about the treatment of our students in every school of the nation.

But just because No Child Left Behind has not been updated does not mean that it has been forgotten. In fact, there are some relatively recent developments. Let’s take a look at three of them.

  1. “No Child” Waivers extended to 2018. The Department of Education has released a letter stating the new guidance for securing waivers from No Child Left Behind, President George W. Bush’s education reform law, for three or even four more years. The waivers stop states from being tied to the rigorous expectations of Bush-led Adequate Yearly Progress, but in turn, each state must adhere to education reforms encouraged by the Obama administration.

The DOE informed chief state school officers that they would be eligible to apply to renew their waivers through the 2017-2018 school year.

The Bush-era law has been due an update since 2007. In 2012, the administration began granting waivers to state if they met certain requirement such as adopting college- and career ready standards and developing teacher and principal evaluation systems based largely on how much students learn.

Currently, 43 states and the District of Columbia have received waivers from No Child Left Behind, which allow them to forego certain accountability requirements law in exchange for implementing education reforms backed by the Obama administration.

Some education advocacy groups were pleased with the emphasis placed on ensuring states have a plan to improve student achievement for all groups of students — including students with disabilities, those from low-income homes and English language learners — and prohibiting states from giving schools high scores on state accountability reports if they have large achievement gaps.

The requirements also sparked some widespread criticism across the political spectrum.

  1. The Senate attempted to rewrite NCLB. According to The Washington Post, No Child Left Behind faced a 600-page rewrite. The Senate HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) worked on adjusting language and amendments that would seriously alter the bill’s impact.

Some of the revisions include a pivot towards allowing states to assume control over how teachers are evaluated and would drop the federal definition “of a highly qualified teacher.”

The bill  also gives additional support for charter schools by providing “incentives for states to adopt stronger charter school authorizing practices.”

No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 after lawmakers couldn’t come to a compromise over its renewal. But this time seems to be different. The bill has a bipartisan tone and any amendment that did not have support from Democrats and Republicans was withdrawn during the bill’s mark up.

Yet those amendments will likely appear again when the full Senate has an opportunity to vote on the measure. Republican Senator Tim Scott has an idea  to funnel federal money meant to help poor students into a voucher system that any child attending a high-poverty school may use to transfer into a new school district.

His amendment failed in committee but he will reintroduce on the Senate floor.

Other inclusions and provisions included are an update to federal testing requirements, the peer review process, and an alteration to funding for early childhood learning programs.

  1. The Senate approved the changes to the law in July, a move that finally sets up negotiations with the U.S. House on updating the federal law on education.

“The Senate-passed measure would prohibit the federal government from setting performance targets or requiring specific standards such as the Common Core curriculum. It would make states responsible for establishing systems of accountability, including how much weight should be put on testing to determine whether schools are succeeding.”

According to ReviewJournal.com, the bill faces critics that believe it doesn’t reach far enough to help “minorities and low-income students.”

It is highly unlikely that the Senate’s bill will end up being passed as the final version as there is too much wrangling left to do with the House.

But besides that point, what may catch the eye of educators as they follow along with the progress of No Child Left Behind is how heavily it leans on allowing states the make final decisions on education.

Instead of receiving direction from the federal government, each state may end up having the ability to create policy surrounding how it decides to approach education. If you think about it, that is a scary prospect and would go completely against the idea of national standards.

Even that, though, is sure to change before the final version actually passes.

What do you think of the changes being made to No Child Left Behind?

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

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

These 3 Studies on Education Results May Shock You

Studies are a dime a dozen these days, but there are still plenty that force you to pay attention. Let’s talk about three education related ones that just might surprise you.

  1. Being uneducated is more dangerous than chain smoking. According to the Post’s  review of a study published in PLOS ONE, “more than 145,000 deaths could have been prevented in 2010 if adults who did not finish high school had earned a GED or high school diploma – comparable to the mortality rates of smoking.”

That’s staggering considering smoking and education aren’t necessarily congruent.

For decades Americans have been warned about the horrors of smoking because of the adverse effects that it has on one’s health. While having an education has always been synonymous with success, not sure if anyone, or any study for that matter, has ever gone this far to connect poor health, or death related to poor health, to lacking a proper education.

The study, according to the Post, doesn’t directly correlate poor education with death. Rather it counts death as “an estimate of education’s impact on mortality, and do not indicate direct causality.”

While this study doesn’t directly state that failure to attain an education will result in death, it does portend that death is a consequence of one’s failure to gain an education. Make sense?

This type of information is multi-faceted because of how far it stretches. Personal responsibility plays a role; the government has an act in this play; the private sector and many other areas are also complicit.

How we move along with the information posted from this story will be interesting as well. Because, maybe more than anything, this shows just how stark the consequences are for our society if we fail to properly educate our children.

The results may be death.

  1. The Ivy Leagues may not be worth it. 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.

Still–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.

  1. Closing the achievement gap would increase the GDP by $10 trillion by 2050.

Talk about boosting the economy.

One study after another has shown a wide educational achievement gap between the poorest and wealthiest children in the United States. This prompted researchers at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a group focused on narrowing inequality, to study and conclude that if America could improve education performance for the average student, everyone would benefit.

The U.S.  ranks behind more than 33 advanced industrialized countries that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development when it comes to math and science scores. The study used scores from the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment, a test used around the world to measure and compare achievement.

America ranks behind countries such as Korea, Poland and Slovenia in the 24th spot.

Elimination of the achievement gap in the U.S. will boost the economy — but this requires raising the country’s average score to 1,080.  The average combined score for the U.S. is 978, and the O.E.C.D average is 995.

If the U.S. could move up a few notches to number 19 – so the average American score would match the O.E.C.D. average – it would add 1.7 percent to the nation’s gross domestic product over the next 35 years, according to estimates by the Washington Center. This could lead to approximately $900 billion in higher government revenue.

If the U.S. scores matched Canada, number 7 of the O.E.C.D. scale, America’s gross domestic product would increase by 6.7 percent. After taking inflation into account, this is a cumulative increase of $10 trillion by 2050.

The achievement gap in America is a pressing issue, and it is certainly something we have to hone in on to eliminate. I hope to see our country’s O.E.C.D. ranking improve in the near future so we can narrow, and eventually close, the achievement gap and benefit from the boost in the economy too.

What do you think of these bizarre study results? Do any of these statistics surprise you?

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

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

The Principal’s Role in Improving Student Learning

Increased attention at both the local and national levels on improving student learning has resulted in a growing expectation in some states and districts for principals to be effective instructional leaders. Consider these statistics: nearly 7,000 students drop out of U.S. high schools every day and, every year approximately 1.2 million teenagers leave the public school system without a diploma or an adequate education. There are 2,000 high schools in America in which less than 60% of students graduate within four years after entering ninth grade.

The situation is not much brighter for students who do earn a high school diploma, and enter a two –year or four-year institutions. In community colleges, approximately 40% of freshmen (and approximately 20% in public, four-year institutions) are in need of basic instruction in reading, writing, or mathematics before they can perform in college-level courses. It is vital that principals advocate for these students and provide leadership to reverse this appalling educational outcome.

The failure of many public school districts to provide the working conditions that well-trained principals need to prosper is often a central reason for these ongoing graduation and future preparation issues. By having access to resources and being committed to school reform, principals are able to work with teachers to create school environments that facilitate excellence in learning.

The issues that principals need to work on with teachers include aligning instruction with a standards-based curriculum to provide a good measure of achievement, and improving both student learning and classroom instruction by effectively organizing resources. Principals must use sound hiring practices, ensure professional development is available at their schools, and keep abreast of issues that may influence the quality of teaching in schools.

While having good leaders in place is crucial, it is not always enough. If principals don’t have supportive work environments for their improvement efforts, then even the most talented and best-trained individuals may be discouraged by the challenges they face on a daily basis. Districts where no major high school improvements have been made don’t have a cohesive agenda for improvement. Such an agenda would specify clear goals, research-based practices, improvement-focused accountability, and strategies to support implementation. In practice, schools without such an agenda can often be characterized by disjointed actions. Many of the principals in such schools report that they are not involved in defining existing instructional issues in their schools.

The district (or state) makes these decisions , meaning that principals have little ownership of their problems or the proposed solutions to them. They also report having little support or motivation to find solutions, and that they do not feel there is a well-designed system of improvement. Rather, they feel that “improvements” are undertaken in a series of random acts.

When decision-making is shared, leadership roles are redefined at all levels. Principals are supported by district staff members, not blocked by them. District staff members make frequent visits to schools to provide coaching, technical assistance, and staff development. Teachers benefit from continuous professional development;principals have sufficient autonomy and resources to engage and develop staff. Professional development may target groups or individual teachers, and the teachers are given opportunities to work together on curriculum and instruction.

In contrast, many districts focus on educational management instead of educational leadership. The support provided to improve instruction in these districts is not grounded in research on effective teaching. In addition, these districts lack a systemic approach to improvement and fail to provide principals with the guidance and support they require to reform processes and put effective instructional practices into place.

Many principals spend much of their time finding ways to work around the district office, rather than with them. To obtain the support they need, they often decide to avoid hiring protocols and develop “underground” relationships with individual staff in the district office. Supportive district leaders understand the challenging work principals must do, as in many cases they have been successful principals themselves.

These district leaders support principals’ focus on instruction and acknowledge that priority by publicly focusing on curriculum and instruction in school board and superintendents’ meetings. Rather than micromanaging staff, they routinely involve school and teacher-leaders in developing and using tools such as walk-throughs, pacing guides, and research-based instructional practices.

The best districts have developed a collaborative “lattice” approach between the central office and the school. This entails districts providing good principals with the support they need to enable their schools to succeed. When given the space by the district to focus on improving their schools, principals can then support their teachers to do the same. The focus of districts must be on raising standards and achievement, and improving instruction by supporting and enabling principals to develop their ability as instructional leaders.

 

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

Understanding Strategy and Strategic Leadership

Strategy leadership involves decision-making aimed at shaping the direction of the organization. In a school, creating strategy takes time, three to five years and beyond. Strategy also includes considering broader core issues and themes for development in the school, instead of day-to-day issues.
Strategic planning is held to be one among a number of development approaches. While strategy can be a framework to set future direction and action, it can also be used to judge current activities. A strategically focused school is educationally effective in the short term, but also has a clear set of processes to translate the core purpose and vision into an excellent educational provision that is sustainable over time.

Through strategic leadership, this broad activity is linked to shorter-term operational planning, responses to immediate events, and the long-term strategic direction. In simple terms, strategic leadership defines the vision and moral purpose of the school and translates them into the desired action.

In their analysis of data from interviews with leaders possessing high-level strategic skills, Davies, Davies, and Ellison (2005) split their research findings into two categories – what strategic leaders do and what characteristics they possess. Their analysis established that strategic leaders participate in five main activities.

1. They Set the Direction of the School

This activity relates to the traditional definition of strategy as a pattern of decisions that set the direction of the organization. Strategy is the actual framework of choices that is relied upon to determine the nature and direction of an organization. The following summarizes what strategic leaders do:

• They set the direction of the school.
• Dissatisfied with the present, they challenge and question..
• They turn strategy into action.
• They prioritize their own strategic thinking and learning by re-framing their understanding and that of others.
• They align the people and the organization with the strategy.
• They display strategic wisdom based on a clear value system.
• They know when to intervene.
• They network.
• They develop strategic capabilities within the school.
• They have high-quality people skills.

2. They Translate Strategy into Action

While most schools establish plans, few translate them into action. Strategic leaders are good “completer-finishers.” They were capable of not only “seeing ahead” but also “seeing it through.” This characteristic of strategic leaders is born of their ability to focus on a limited number of issues and move forward on those issues.

It is key that a leader be seen as a person who not only builds a sense of purpose and direction in the school, but also as one who translates them into reality.

There is a danger where strategy is seen as a desirable activity, and in consequence so much time is spent designing strategic frameworks and plans. Thus the question that emerges is: “How do we translate these frameworks into the capacity to move toward better outcomes in the school?” A strategic leader uses his or her strategic ability to translate strategic vision into action.

3. They Align the People, the Organization, and the Strategy

It is vital that school leaders build in-depth capacity within the school to deliver the strategy. Davies (2003) suggested a four-stage approach that, first, articulates the strategy in oral, written, or structural ways; second, builds a common understanding through shared experiences; third, creates a shared mental image of the future through dialogue; and fourth, defines the desired outcomes.

4. They Determine Effective Strategic Intervention Points

An important aspect of strategic leadership is timing. Knowing when to make a change is as important as the change itself. This critical issue arises from rational analysis or leadership intuition. Discerning when both external circumstances and internal conditions can be effectively managed toward successful change is significant in effective leadership.

The issue of strategic timing goes hand in hand with the concept of strategic abandonment. The issue that comes up is that of differentiating between abandonment of things that are not working well and abandoning those that were satisfactory in pursuit.

A key ability of strategic leaders is not only knowing when to make a change, but knowing how to free up organizational space to have the capacity to move into a new strategic direction.

5. They Develop Strategic Capabilities in the School

A good example of long-term competency is the fundamental understanding of learning and the varying needs of students. Strategic leaders agree that more focus should be on the development of long-term abilities.
If leaders develop strategic abilities, they would achieve more, in the form of a reflective-learning culture in teaching staff, a no-blame problem-solving approach, and a deeper understanding of learning.

  • no reactions
0
Share