EdTech & Innovation

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, HBCU's, Higher Education

US losing its dominance in global higher education market

Jason Lane, University at Albany, State University of New York

The Conversation’s international teams are collaborating on a series of articles about the Globalisation of Higher Education, examining how universities are changing in an increasingly globalised world. This is the third article in the series. Read more here.

Students have come back to college. But not all to the United States.

The idea that a student would study in another country is not a new concept. The media frequently reports on the number of international students studying in the United States. And that is exactly how we tend to think about it – students from other countries coming to the United States.

Yet, a growing number of US students are now looking overseas for their college degree. Germany alone, with its essentially free higher education system, is drawing a fair number of prospective US college students. Some 4,660 US students were enrolled in German universities last year – a number that has increased by 20% in three years.

While the number of US students attending college in Germany remains very small relative to the some 21 million individuals pursuing a post-secondary education, it represents two important shifts in the international student market: a rapidly increasing global market for international students and a growing number of US students looking to earn degrees overseas.

As a researcher of international education, a key concern for me is understanding the ways in which the changing global economy is reshaping educational opportunities and potentially how the US dominance in the international education market is being threatened.

US students studying abroad

There is no central source that tracks the total number of US students enrolled in foreign institutions.

There is also no international repository of enrollment trends worldwide. In the US, the federal government tracks enrollments in domestic higher education institutions. In addition, the Institute of International Education (IIE)’s annual Open Doors report gathers data about American students at US colleges studying abroad for academic credit.

In fact, there were about 290,000 students studying abroad for academic credit, but not a full degree, in the 2012 academic year, more than double the number who studied abroad 15 years earlier. However, these numbers do not include students pursuing a full degree from an overseas institution, as they are not tracked by the US government.

But based on national data sets, IIE’s Project Atlas has put together a patchwork picture about students pursuing college degrees elsewhere.

The UK has been the leading destination for US students.
Shane Global, CC BY

According to a Project Atlas report (the most recent aggregated data on this issue), there were more than 43,000 US students enrolled in degree programs in foreign countries in 2010 (this is in addition to the number of students studying abroad not for a degree). However, it should be noted that Project Atlas, has data only from the IIE’s 13 partnering nations. So these data may actually undercount the number of students enrolled in such programs.

Even so, based on these data, we can confidently say that the United Kingdom was the leading destination for US students. Most US students (72%) in this data set head to anglophone countries. Master’s degree programs are the most popular option (followed by undergraduate programs and then doctoral).

Recent reports, such as those about Germany, suggest that the number of students pursuing a degree outside of their home country, including students moving outside of the US, is growing rapidly. But, in order to gather information about US citizens who pursue degrees elsewhere, that information must be gathered from those nations.

Growing competition for international students

The fact is that today, there is a large market for students in higher education.

In 2000, according to UNESCO’s Education at a Glance, there were only 2.1 million students studying abroad in both short-term and full-degree programs. Today, there are roughly 4.5 million.

And, the competition for those students has become quite fierce. Today, countries like China, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Taiwan, Thailand, Argentina, Brazil and Chile, who once primarily sent students abroad, have enacted policies and strategies to actively recruit international students.

In fact, according to our research, places like Singapore, Malaysia and United Arab Emirates want to become regional educational hubs – serving students from their neighboring countries.

With this increase, the market for international students has also become quite volatile in the last decade. Many of the earlier entrants to this market are losing share.

For instance, even though the total number of international students studying in the US continues to grow, the US market share has dropped from 23% in 2000 to 16% in 2012. Countries such as Germany, France, South Africa and Belgium have also lost about 5% market share collectively, with Germany and France having the largest remaining share of the group at about 6% each.

At the same time, places like China, Canada, the United Kingdom, Russia, Korea and New Zealand each picked up larger proportion of the market, with the United Kingdom and Russia both gaining two points of the market and the others a little less. In fact, at 13% of the market share and growing, the United Kingdom may be on track to overtake the US’ market lead.

Opening up borders

In such a market, some countries are taking advantage of their language of instruction which can offer a competitive advantage, while others are offering low-cost or even free tuition.

So, nations whose language of instruction is widely spoken elsewhere, such as English, French and Spanish, are becoming leading receivers of international students.

Some countries are providing nearly free education for international students.
Wellington College, CC BY-NC

Some countries, such as Austria, France, Germany and Norway, are providing de facto free education for all students, including those from foreign countries.

This low cost of education can help countries attract students already looking to go abroad as well as elicit attention from students looking for alternatives to the high costs of higher education in their own countries.

Countries are getting much savvier about their efforts to recruit foreign students – adopting more student-friendly immigration policies, offering financial incentives and even setting national strategic recruitment goals.

The German government, for instance, has a goal of attracting 350,000 international students by 2020. To do so, Germany is actively recruiting students and lowering barriers to entry.

Today, an increasing number of degree programs offered in Germany are in English and searchable through a national database. They have even amended their laws to make it easier for international students to work while going to school. The German academic exchange service, DAAD, also provides scholarships to offset the cost of other academic and living expense.

Competing for brain power

Attracting international students, then, is not just about bringing in tuition dollars. Countries offering free or reduced tuition are often seeking to rebuild national workforce as their domestic population ages and younger talent pools shrink.

So, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden are now developing study-to-work pathways and “train and retain policies” to encourage international students to transition into the workplace.

Some of these efforts are paying off. Students are not only choosing to study abroad; many are also staying abroad after they graduate.

For example, a survey of more than 11,000 international students in Germany found that three in 10 plan to stay in Germany permanently after their studies and four in 10 plan to stay for at least 10 years.

A globally competitive market

The increasing number of students pursuing their college years in a foreign country is symptomatic of two important trends.

First, it reflects a rapidly changing world economy, where it is not only the workforce opportunities that are global, but also the educational experiences that prepare students for those opportunities.

As a result, more and more students from both developed and developing countries are looking beyond their national borders for their collegiate experience.

Second, as economies become more knowledge-based, the competition for brains is heating up.

The US has long dominated this market. But as more nations have seen international students as part of their strategic interests, the US market has begun to shrink significantly.

Without a similar strategic national interest, will the US’ dominance fall all together?

The Conversation

Jason Lane, Associate Professor of Education Policy & Co-Director of the Cross-Border Education Research Team, University at Albany, State University of New York

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

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, HBCU's, Higher Education

Early-career researchers the missing link for STEM diversity

Maggie Hardy, The University of Queensland

When high school physics teacher Moses Rifkin wrote a recent blog post on “Teaching Social Justice in the Physics Classroom,” he ignited a new round of conversation about white privilege and the kinds of skills scientists need. Rifkin outlined how he incorporates into his teaching a unit on “Who does physics, and why?” to highlight the lack of diversity in science, particularly physics.

The problem isn’t new and it isn’t going away by itself. But it is getting more and more attention. The United States National Science Foundation (NSF) recently released a report, “Pathways to Broadening Participation in response to the Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering 2011–2012 Recommendation,” intended to “build on best practices and offer new approaches” that would “increase participation in STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering and Math] from underrepresented groups.” This isn’t the first initiative of its kind for the agency; since 1980, NSF has had a mandate to increase the participation of women and minorities in science and engineering.

A diverse science and engineering workforce is critical for innovation, entrepreneurism and a competitive national economy.

Researchers should reflect the country’s population.
MissTessmacher, CC BY-NC

Scope of the problem

Although women earn about half the bachelor’s degrees awarded in biology and chemistry, they are underrepresented in all other STEM disciplines – mathematics, computer science, earth sciences, engineering and physics. Women are half the population, but hold only 28% of science and engineering jobs.

Native American and Alaska Native students earn bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields at about the same rate as white students (21% for women and 27% for men), but are not employed in STEM fields proportionally. The number of black and Hispanic students earning degrees in STEM fields is lower than the national average, and their employment in STEM – once again – isn’t proportional. We train students in STEM fields, but ultimately they leave the carousel that is employment in research.

The current demographics of scientists do not reflect our population.
National Science Foundation Broadening Participation Report

The issues with relying largely on one demographic group to do science are many, particularly when that group does not reflect the population. Research has shown that “promoting diversity not only promotes representation and fairness but may lead to higher quality science.” Policies that increase equity are often good for everyone – here is a recent example showing this using standardized math test scores.

Increasing the diversity in science opens up the possibility of stable, high-paying jobs in STEM fields to more Americans. Pulling from the entire population, including traditionally underrepresented communities, provides a more robust base for economic innovation and the knowledge-intensive jobs of the future.

Equity is good for business, too. Although women in technology are some of the highest performing entrepreneurs, men receive 2.8 times more startup capital.

Where do we need to be?

The National Science Foundation is a key player for academics, as its budget ($7.3 billion for 2015) funds approximately 24% of all federally supported basic research. NSF uses a peer-based merit review system to invest in basic research that lays the foundation for important discoveries, as well as applied research that provides innovative fodder for our economy. Its prominence as a funding source for colleges and universities is part of the reason its initiatives are important for many researchers.

According to the new diversity report, “the ultimate goal is to have participation in STEM fields mirror the population of the Nation.” Specifically, that means we need to focus on recruiting and retaining the best talent from currently under-represented groups: blacks, Latinos and indigenous communities, including Native Americans, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders. Based on recent estimates, by 2044 the United States will be a majority-minority country, so to have the research workforce mirror the population we need a clear path to retain people in research positions.

By 2044, the United States will be a majority-minority country.
Ruy Teixeria, William H. Frey, Rob Griffin/Center for American Progress

There is a need for a clear, well supported career pathway for early- and mid-career researchers, with an emphasis on retaining traditionally underrepresented groups. And NSF isn’t the only institution focusing on this issue. The National Institutes of Health, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the scientific journals Nature and Science) have all discussed the problematic lack of diversity in science. In 2013 the White House released a 5-year strategic plan for STEM Education, which emphasized creating a diverse STEM workforce.

How do we get there?

NSF has pulled together the most current evidence-based strategies to increase diversity in STEM. The report groups proposed interventions into the following six categories.

  • Financial support, primarily geared toward supporting college students
  • Professional and social support, with renewed emphasis on the importance of learning in both formal and informal settings
  • Mentoring, to provide one-on-one career advice and role models to show the path, as well as the destination
  • Research experience, critical to develop and sustain interest in STEM education and careers
  • Combating stereotype threat, the fear of “confirming a negative stereotype about one’s group (e.g., women aren’t good at math)”
  • Community building, combining all the above ideas, adding institutional commitment and support for building scientific capacity. Setting and measuring the achievement of specific goals, and accountability when they are or are not met, is key

Most importantly, what is the career pathway that will take students on to careers in science and engineering research? The total number of postdoctoral researchers (those who have recently earned their PhD) at federally funded research centers dropped between 2012 and 2013; the loss was more pronounced for women (-13%) than for men (-4%).

These data were compiled from the National Science Foundation (NSF) Survey of Postdocs at Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, Fall 2013.
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES)

NSF could expand postdoctoral fellowship programs, implementing some designed to foster collaboration with industry. They could increase funding for the Centers for Research Excellence in Science and Technology, which earmarks resources for minority-serving institutions and historically black colleges and universities.

Traditionally underrepresented scientists should be more common, and not just in stock photos.
Scientists image via www.shutterstock.com

The bottom line

The research community has made it clear that the reasons for attrition need to be better understood. But more importantly, we need to stem the tide of highly specialized, highly trained people leaving research.

Non-scientists – including journalists and media personalities – who comment on what skills scientists need to be successful are often terrifically far off the mark, but could be influencing the next generation of potential STEM workers. Scientists believe we need to broaden participation so we have the most creative problem-solvers trained and ready to work. Recognizing and rectifying inequity is part of our core work, because it helps us do better research. Researchers working at the cold face of problems that didn’t even exist ten years ago realize we need a diverse range of scientists to pull from to be competitive, and this is exactly what the report from NSF illustrates.

If we really want the best scientists doing research, as we say we do, then we must have a hiring pool that reflects the diversity of the nation. Our best scientists aren’t getting any younger, and we need support for early-career researchers in academic, industry and government positions now.

Editor’s note: Maggie will be available online to answer questions about the STEM/diversity job connection from 5-6pm EST on Thursday March 5, which is 8-9am AEST on Friday March 6 . You can ask your questions about the article in the comments below.

The Conversation

Maggie Hardy, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

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

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

Virtual Reality and Education in 2016

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

A guest post by Daphne Stanford 

I recently came across an especially heated op-ed piece by Joshua Kim in Inside Higher Ed about the recent hoopla over virtual reality in education and was struck by its especially sour and weary tone. However, I can’t say I blame him. Like many educators before him—I remember because I, too, used to be a weary educator—here was another gadget or technological trend that was being said to change education unalterably, and for the better! But when it comes to virtual reality and education, I’m trying to be open minded.

Let us, rather, explore what virtual reality can do. One of the most common uses is virtual travel around the globe or to places not ordinarily feasible, in terms of a physical visit—via, for example, Google Expeditions. Recently, students at University of Maryland were immersed in a virtual classroom experience in order to test out a potential distance platform that simulates what it’s like to be in an actual college classroom, potentially allowing online students to have a more immersive, authentic-feeling experience. “You want the instructor to feel as if they’re right in front of you,” said Ramani Duraiswami, a computer-science professor and co-founder of the startup company VisiSonics. They showcased the technology recently at the university’s virtual-reality lab, called The Augmentarium. There’s a similar set up at Rutgers University with the use of Second Life to immerse students into a virtual reality with their classmates that is potentially more motivating than typical online interaction using instant messaging platforms.

In addition to business and marketing-based user-created experiences, there are also applications in simulating heart surgery. The medical field, in particular, is one of the frontiers that is being particularly well-explored. For example, at George Washington University, the nursing school uses a full-blown simulation lab for training future surgeons. Their lab utilizes mannequins that have a pulse; they also can speak, blink their eyes, and spurt blood! I suppose, strictly speaking the latter scenario more akin to theatre or an elaborate staging scenario, as opposed to virtual reality.

Apparently, “there has been an explosion in the use of simulation medicine to help physicians gain preparation for performing lifesaving procedures as well as approaching delicate or difficult situations related to patient care.” We can see this with programs that utilize virtual reality simulations, in the computerized sense: for example, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.   Virtual reality is being successfully used as an educational tool at institutions like Brown University to elucidate subjects such as anatomy and archeology in an interactive, 3D space. Similarly, a tool called Microsoft Hololens is being implemented into medical training classes at Case Western Reserve University in order to help teach anatomy.

Other smart uses of Virtual Reality and Education

One other exciting realm where Virtual Reality and education is being successfully utilized is physical rehabilitation. For example, a Spanish-based company, Neurodigital, is in the process of developing a device called Gloveone, which allows users to feel texture—for example, a recently returned combat veteran with brain damage is temporarily able to feel their dog’s fur coat. The glove uses ten different sensors and motors that vibrate when its user “touches” something in the virtual realm. Because of the potential for personal connection between the user and his or her personal, home-based environment, there’s an increased level of motivation to continue with therapy—more so than there would be without the virtual reality component.

There’s another way to look at all this virtual reality and education —returning, perhaps, to a perspective more similar to that of Mr. Kim in the Inside Higher Ed opinion piece I cited, at the beginning of the article. Jorge Suarez of Arizona State University writes about the potential dark side of virtual reality with the impending release of Oculus Rift VR goggles and the growing interpersonal detachment that the widespread use of virtual reality could further exacerbate: “Ironically,” Ramos writes, “because of social media, many people have become disconnected from the world around them, and have instead become so attached to their phones, that they have not been able to put them down and have decent face to face conversations.” He offers as an extreme example a 32-year-old man who died after a three-day gaming binge at an Internet café in Taiwan.

Although I don’t foresee a student dying anytime soon from the use of virtual reality  and education in the classroom, it is wise to be aware of the pitfalls of over-reliance on technology and virtual realms. This caution can also be applied directly to education: we must remember that education is inherently relational; that, as Kim stresses in his op-ed, a higher quality education begins with deeper investment in our teachers, rather than throwing money at quick technological fixes and instructional gadgets. However, there is also a great deal of potential in much of this new technology. It is up to us to balance our use of quality instructional time and technology that we judiciously implement into our class time. I don’t know about you, but I know I’d much rather examine a human body in virtual form than in the form of a cadaver! But, then again, that’s why I didn’t go into medicine!

What uses can you think of for virtual reality in your classroom? Comment in the space below!

Bio: Daphne Stanford grew up near the ocean, and she loves taking pictures of the mountains and rivers in Idaho, where she now lives. She believes in the power of writing, education, and community radio to change the world. She hosts “The Poetry Show!” Sundays on Radio Boise.  Find her on Twitter​ @daphne_stanford.

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

Google diversity: Will the tech giant get it right?

As the first tech company to announce its diversity statistics in May of 2014, Google admits to poor numbers again in 2015. A whopping 70 percent of Google’s workforce in 2014 was male, while just 3 percent of its U.S. staff was Hispanic and only 2 percent were Black. Google diversity, or lack thereof, is just a small sampling of the industry as a whole, though.

For 2015, overall gender Google diversity by in large remained the same. However, there was slight improvement with a 1 percent increase in the number of women in tech positions. There was also a slim increase in women in leadership positions within Google. However, the same can not be said for Hispanic and Black representation, as they remained at 3 and 2 percent respectively, and only 2 and 1 percent in technology-focused jobs.

How can Google diversity improve?

Though the figures are alarming, Google has committed to rectifying the situation and has invested nearly $150 million in diversity goals for 2015.

Google diversity funds are being used to recruit on non-Ivy League university campuses, which include state schools with diverse student bodies and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (or HBCUs). Current employees are being trained and participating in diversity enhancing projects. The investment is also being made in computer science education for girls and diverse underrepresented populations. Although 72 percent of Google’s leadership team is white, Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, is Indian-born and committed to diversifying the company.

It’s clear that Google diversity numbers are incredibly lackluster. There is a huge imbalance in gender and minority representation. At the same time, Google deserves recognition for bringing this information to light and prompting the entire tech industry to take a closer look at its diversity figures. With Google’s investment of hundreds of millions of dollars, the proper steps are being taken to ensure that more women and minorities get into computer science and engineering programs and eventually, tech jobs in the first place.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

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

Learning to Code the Hard Way

A guest post on learning to code by Megan Harney

Learning to code is something that happened organically for me. I come from a family of teachers. My dad taught woodshop for 30 years in some of Milwaukee’s toughest schools, and my mom taught briefly, too. When I was a sophomore in college, I wrote my own curriculum and taught SAT and ACT prep. As a student who had always done my homework, I was dismayed when my students didn’t do theirs, and I was frustrated by their excuses. I needed a better way to hold them accountable. I was an English major and a computer science minor, so I built a system for online homework delivery and performance analytics.

I tried to share my system with my teacher friends, but they said that they were using too many different software solutions already and didn’t want to add another one. So instead of looking to integrate my software with other products, I decided to build an all-in-one system—and to build it myself.

I was still a student, and I was doing well in my English classes but not as well in organic chemistry. Based on my own performance and my experience teaching kids with a wide range of abilities and learning styles, I became a strong believer in individualized instruction. I designed my system, called MIDAS (Massively Integrated Data Analytics System), from the ground up with the goal of guiding students to mastery by letting them learn at their own pace. MIDAS takes into account individual and aggregate student performance, demographics, and socioeconomic data to recommend what students should study next—all while accommodating individual needs and allowing students to submit their work using various media.

Learning to code for myself

When I started building MIDAS, I had zero coding experience. I hired a team of offshore developers to help me. When we talked on Skype, I asked lots of questions and studied the code. Those questions and their answers were the start of me learning to code. As a senior (a year into building the system), I finally took three programming classes. Eventually, I realized that language, time, and cultural differences were hampering my work with the developers, so I took over building MIDAS myself. Ultimately, doing it myself was easier than trying to explain to programmers how teachers think.

I stored the code for MIDAS on my local server, made changes, deployed those changes to see if what I’d done worked, and did it again and again. I learned by trial and error. When I got stuck, I read online articles on Stack Overflow or just Googled the topic I was looking for. I found snippets of code online in repositories like GitHub and CodePen; most of these snippets are under MIT or GNU license, which means that programmers can use them or change them however they want. (Some snippets do require a paid license, though.)

As I built the system, I showed it to teachers, and they would say, “Hey, it would be great if it could do XYZ,” and I would add that feature. This went on for eight years, so as of right now, MIDAS combines the utility of up to 13 siloed systems, including SIS, LMS, CMS, SPED forms, graduation planning, transportation, scheduling, teacher mentoring and professional development, data analytics, state reporting, and the ability to build and curate curriculum and assessments.

 

The truth is, the system will never be finished. I wrote a major feature the other night that lets you post a video (for example, of a teacher teaching to demonstrate instructional practice), add time-stamped comments, and link those to a standard. I thought it was beyond me, but I searched online and found that Google has an API to deal with timestamps, so I thought, “Cool, I could use this.”

I’d say I wrote 90% of the code for MIDAS myself. I hired four other developers in the last year. (The size of the development team has quintupled!) We’re continuing to build additional modules and interactions between the modules, adding new functions over existing data structures. We do product demos a couple times a week, and when a teacher says, “It would be cool if it could do this,” I add it to my list.

My goal is to help school superintendents and IT directors help students and teachers who are tired of struggling to support dozens of different software packages. I built MIDAS on a single Amazon Web Services database, so reporting and analytics can be automated and simplified; this makes complying with state reporting requirements easier and frees educators to do what they do best: teach.

It has taken me eight years to wrap my head around MIDAS, but I know what every field in our database of more than 600 tables does. Growing up, I absorbed a lot about how educators work and how schools work just by talking with my parents and teachers and being that kid who hung around the office while counselors built the master schedule.

Being a woman has helped, too. I think my approach to solving problems and writing code is more global, whereas many men I’ve worked with engineer more linearly. If I were advising girls who are learning to code, I would say, “Do it, and don’t let anybody tell you you can’t do it. And just keep at it.” Oh, and getting a degree in computer science would be a good thing to do.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

 

Megan Harney is the founder and CEO of MIDAS Education. She holds a master’s degree in Technology, Innovation, and Education as well as a bachelor’s degree, cum laude, in English and computer science from Harvard University. Megan has previously managed developers at Microsoft, taught students and teachers, consulted with district administrators to solve business problems, and conducted neurodegenerative research.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Teachers, Testing

Stealth assessment: Reimagining learning and testing for the 21st Century

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

A guest post by Dr. Gregory Firn

History is replete with examples of innovation and invention that outpaced the necessary shifts in thinking and ingrained habits delaying the full impact of the “new.” It comes as no surprise that education has lagged behind innovation. However, many of the factors underpinning educational lag are beyond the control of the classroom teacher.

Fueled by the proliferation of technology, we are in the early stages of “reimagining” teaching and learning. We have learned the hard way that devices alone will not result in the much-promised transformation of teaching and learning. The presence of devices in education has revealed limitations, constraints, and liabilities in several ways. Chief among these has been the reluctance or outright resistance to necessary shifts in instructional methodology and practices. This is both natural and expected.

Instructional shifts are complicated by the expectation that classroom teachers have the requisite capacities, competencies, and confidences to navigate technology-rich as well as technology-challenged learning environments. Another challenge is the diversity and variance of technology skill, knowledge, and experience of learners.

Other constraints include budget and time, as well as the very real issue of access to reliable broadband connectivity—not to mention bandwidth and device compatibility, availability, and functionality. All of these limitations place teachers in a perplexing and conflicted position. They may indeed want to shift practice, but can’t.

Arguably, the restrictions and adverse impact of narrowly defined accountability models, including the obsession with assessments, will not necessarily go away with the much-heralded reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (otherwise known as the Every Student Succeeds Act). States must now begin the process of figuring out their assessments and assessment schedules. However, the daunting challenges of reimagining teaching and learning in this digital age remain.

I posit that, against this backdrop, teaching and learning cannot and will not be fully reimagined without the awareness, understanding, and application of assessment and instruction congruency. Instruction and assessment cannot be separated or thought to be two independent components of the teaching and learning process. The true promise and application of technology is in its ability to provide feedback in the form of information and insight during the learning process—not just at the end of a learning activity.

Evidence of certain competencies cannot be monitored and measured through traditional assessment practices. Thus, expanding assessment thinking and design are essential to navigating a reimagined version of teaching and learning.

Stealth assessment in the classroom

One method that is slowly gaining momentum is “stealth” assessment. The key to stealth assessment is its unobtrusive nature, which has roots in gaming. The idea is that a player’s choices and strategies are constantly and consistently informing the player of their progress and success. Applied to education, stealth assessment presents a powerful step in minimizing and eventually closing the teaching and learning immediacy loop.

The immediacy of feedback is critical. For far too long, we have focused on the trailing indicators of learning. Technology now affords us the ability to focus on the leading indicators of both teaching and learning. In fact, we can now at best disrupt or at worst interrupt the failure to learn, rather than continuing to remediate failed learning.

Disrupting the failure to learn does not necessarily mean disrupting the learning process. For example, as more teachers adopt project-based learning, their ability to peek inside the learning process by monitoring the collaboration, construction, contribution, and co-authoring of meaning by each learner is critical. Yet the challenge for the educator to be in all places at once has never been more daunting.

As a Superintendent, I have seen that technology can help address this challenge and make stealth assessment possible. For example, the Flexcat system from Lightspeed Learning is a powerful tool to implement  “stealth” assessment. Flexcat gives teachers the ability to listen to any small group on demand, without students knowing. This allows teachers to monitor and assess authentic interactions and collaboration from anywhere in the room—a giant step towards personalized teaching and learning.

Present and future technologies should cause a fundamental shift in instruction due to the stealth assessment concept, not just a minor adjustment. As I mentioned above the teacher and learner are empowered to monitor, provide and receive immediate feedback as well as participate in the thoughts, insights, and observations of learning as it is occurring. Participatory learning and participatory assessing are fundamental to the “student as worker, teacher as guide” mindset in which learners as key architects of their own learning. They co-author, co-construct, and co-produce knowledge, meaning and application. Moreover, critical thinking; examination; and assessing ideas, concepts, and constructs are essential skills in the 21st century.

Technology is a powerful tool that presents the opportunity and access for each learner to design, construct, collaborate, demonstrate, and assess their learning. To ensure this impact, educators must remain vigilant in their own learning to develop the capacity, competence, and confidence to shift instructional practices leveraged by technology to give each learner the best possible chance at success.

Dr. Gregory Firn has served as a Superintendent, Deputy Superintendent, and in several other educational leadership roles in Texas, North Carolina, Connecticut, Washington State, Nevada, and overseas. Dr. Firn twice led systemwide digital transformation initiatives, including the design and implementation of robust human capital development programs. Dr. Firn earned his doctorate from Seattle Pacific University, where his research focused on learner-centered education. 

 Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

1
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Education News, Equity

Closing the computer science gender gap: How one woman is making a difference in many lives

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

Maria Klawe, Harvey Mudd College  

I’ve been passionate about increasing women’s participation in computer science for more than 25 years. While the number of undergraduate women pursuing some STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) fields like biology and chemistry has steadily increased over the past couple of decades, women’s participation in computer science (CS) has actually been declining.

Indeed, within the last 20 years the percentage of undergraduate women who received CS degrees plummeted by almost 40%. According to the National Science Foundation, in 1995, 29% of bachelor’s degrees in CS were awarded to women; by 2012, the most recent year for which NSF data is available, only 18% of CS undergraduates were women.

The Computing Research Association (CRA) reports even lower numbers. CRA’s annual Taulbee Survey of over 100 major computer science departments in North America found that by the mid-2000s, the percentage of women graduating with CS bachelor’s degrees averaged 14%.

For me this issue is both personal and global.

Working to remove barriers

I’m a mathematician and a computer scientist. Back when I was getting my PhD in math, there were very few women in my field. Despite receiving discouragement because of my gender, I worked hard.

And I excelled. I went on to take up leadership roles in many places – at IBM, University of British Columbia, Princeton and now at Harvey Mudd. I’ve been the first woman in nearly all these positions.

I know the struggles that can hinder women when they are working in a predominantly male field. I also know firsthand how computer science and technology make for a great career, offering a good income, work-life balance and opportunities to travel. They also offer a chance to make significant contributions to the world, by working on important societal problems.

I want young women to have these opportunities.

I’ve been working on this issue for decades. When I came to Harvey Mudd College in 2006, the CS department was averaging only about 10% women majors. The faculty had decided to make significant changes to attract more women.

They redesigned their introductory computer science courses to focus less on straight programming and more on creative problem-solving. They included topics to show the breadth of the field and the ways in which it could benefit society.

In order to reduce the intimidation factor for women and other students with no prior coding experience, they split the course into two sections, black and gold (Harvey Mudd’s colors), with black for those who had prior programming experience and gold for those with no prior experience.

This worked wonders to create a supportive atmosphere.

Making the field exciting for women

Instead of traditional homework, which can be isolating, the faculty assigned team-based projects so that students coded together. And most importantly, they made the courses fun. The intro CS courses went from being the least-liked course in our core curriculum to being the most popular.

After the courses were introduced in 2007, we saw an immediate and steady increase in the percentage of female students majoring in CS. Within four years, we went from averaging around 10% women majors to averaging 40%. We have continued to average 40% since 2011.

In addition, faculty created early summer research opportunities designed for students who had completed only one or two CS courses, and encouraged their first-year female students to participate. A number of studies have shown that research experiences for undergraduate students increase retention and confidence in STEM fields, factors that are particularly important for women and minorities.

Harvey Mudd’s female students who participated in early CS research projects indeed reported greatly increased interest in the discipline and a boost in confidence. They realized they could do the work of a computer scientist and that they enjoyed it as well.

Even today, there aren’t enough women entering the field of computer science. Harvey Mudd College, CC BY

We also send large contingents of women students each year to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing,the largest conference for women working in technology fields. At this event, students get to see role models and are excited about the many amazing technology career paths they can pursue.

Other institutions are starting to take up our approaches.

For instance, the Building Recruiting And Inclusion for Diversity (BRAID) initiative that we launched with the Anita Borg Institute is working to build computer science diversity at 15 academic institutions. We are about to offer our intro computer science course as a free MOOC on edX, so that professors and students can access the course materials.

There’s still work to be done

However, many barriers and challenges remain.

The National Science Foundation’s most recent (2012) report shows that computer science has the lowest proportion of women receiving bachelor degrees of all the STEM fields. The percentage dipped to a mere 11% from 2007-2009 and gradually returned to 14% by 2013-2014.

Computer science should be a required part of secondary education, but a lot of schools don’t have computer science teachers. Most young people who go to college today have not had much exposure to computer science.

We also have to combat the cultural belief that some people are simply born with math, science or computer talent and others are simply “not good at it.” There’s lots of research that shows that persistence and hard work play a much larger role in success in any area of science and engineering than “native ability.” Another serious challenge is posed by the media portrayal of careers in technology, which builds certain stereotypes.

I want people to think about how we can change our images of who we consider to be competent in technology. At the moment, the image of the computer scientist is limited to a white or Asian male.

One thing we know for sure is that you get better solutions if you have more diverse teams working on them. We need the female perspective to get the best solutions to very pressing problems.

Need for diversity

We also need more African Americans, Latinos/Latinas, poets, football players and artists involved in creating technology. Right now there is unfilled demand for computer science grads and not just in the tech industry.

I want computer science and technology to be a world that embraces everyone who has passion, ability and interest, whether they look like the dominant group or not.

Today, computer science touches all industries. Its products are embedded in our daily lives. Addressing the significant problems of the world – from climate change to health care to poverty – will involve technology.

I think the world will be an incredibly exciting place and we will see amazing technological developments when we create a much more diverse tech community.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

_________________________

Maria Klawe is President at Harvey Mudd College.

This article was originally published on The Conversation.

Read the original article.

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

6 Ways to Help K-12 Students Fall in Love with Learning

What students desire from their school experience is not necessarily what their parents and members of the larger community want them to learn or experience. Only a small percentage of students come to school with an overwhelming desire to learn. Many attend school on a daily basis because that is simply what they are supposed to do. That doesn’t mean they don’t end up finding subjects they enjoy, but American students do not make the active choice to begin attending school.

So teachers come to the table already behind, in some ways. Not only is it the job of educators to teach, but they must also find ways to make the learning process enjoyable and desirable to students who didn’t make the choice to be in the classroom in the first place. With authentic lessons and inquiry learning, educators can clear this hurdle, though. Here are a few ways how:

1. Seek feedback. To assist in motivating students, schools could put out a survey asking them what they want to learn, what they have already learned, and what the teacher could do to make learning more exciting. With the stress of standardized tests, it might be difficult to take the time out of the day to distribute the survey, but every effort should be made to do so.

2. Create safety. Students are more prone to become engaged in assignments when the teacher has created a safe and inviting learning environment. Students want to work in an educational environment where a teacher’s expectations are explicitly outlined. In order to be successful, students must be given the opportunity to engage in activities just above their abilities.

3. Prioritize learning. It may seem like a smart idea to entertain students to motivate them, but solid learning is always the best path. The teacher also has an obligation to create a teaching environment that promotes learning. This means, for example, that teachers should not embarrass students for a wrong answer or a below-standard test score—nor should they allow other students to make fun of wrong answers and below-standard test scores. We need to make sure that the debate on the quality of American schools focuses on the academic practices directly affecting student learning.

4. Strive for equality. Schools are not only concerned with test scores, but are also concerned with equality. All students should be considered equal, regardless of their age, race, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, cultural beliefs, and ability levels. If all students feel they are being treated equally, then they will be more motivated to work. Students will feel intrinsically motivated to learn when they feel respected by teachers and the staff, and will work harder to achieve the goals that teachers and schools have outlined.

5. Consider outside support systems. Student-teacher and family-student relationships also influence intrinsic motivation. In order for students to perform well in school, they will need to have the proper support system both in school and at home. Most students are only interested in performing for the people that matter most to them. If these people do not hold education in high regard, then the student will not hold education in high regard either.

When students are in the elementary grades, they will usually perform for their parents and for their teachers with little to no resistance. Once students develop social networks, parents and teachers are quickly replaced by peers. Adolescents are prone to peer pressure and succumb easily to their peers’ suggestions and viewpoints. It is important for high school teachers to create strong student-teacher relationships, in order to more effectively motivate the students to remain engaged in behaviors that lead to positive academic achievement and outcomes.

6. Encourage collaboration. It is also important for teachers to create and support opportunities for students to collaborate with others. Schools and teachers that create the high levels of student engagement understand the possibilities learning group collaboration affords. Teachers can also provide opportunities students to collaborate with students in other countries. Collaboration among students in and outside the classroom will have to be closely facilitated by the teacher. If carried out appropriately, outcomes for this strategy can be very positive for all students concerned.

Why is it so important to have motivated students?

Student engagement is one of the potential indicators of the effectiveness of a school. Educators and administrators have to concentrate their efforts on activities that engage students in order to foster academic achievement. If they do not, they will have a room full of students who are either academically disengaged or who are merely giving the impression that they are academically engaged. Students are less likely to pay attention when they are on board with what is being taught.

If students complete a task they feel is boring, then they do so to comply with the teacher’s directions, and not because they are intrinsically motivated to do so. In too many instances, students operate from a point of extrinsic motivation, sadly to include the motivation to avoid being singled out or to incurring the teacher’s wrath. If school is not fun and exciting, students won’t develop the love of learning—leaving them less likely to move on to higher education.

What do you think are some ways to get students excited to learn? Share your insights and experiences in the comments below.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

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

3 Important Digital Resources for Student Success

The Internet is full of resources for teachers – time-management software, lesson plan ideas, and wealth upon wealth of informative websites. But the Internet isn’t just for educators – it’s chock full of tools for students, too. Below are some of the top three resources that modern technology can offer your pupils:

1. Drill-and-Practice Programs

These game-like programs function at different levels that students can progress through toward the final level. If a level has not been passed, the next level cannot be accessed. For educational purposes, this is created in such a way that the game cannot continue until a concept is mastered entirely. The concepts build from one level to the next. The learning of each level of the game prepares the student for the next level. This feature increases the fluency of a skill.

A different type of these drill-and-practice programs is called a “clicker.” These programs are basically response systems. Students enter the answers to the questions into a system, and they are automatically compiled and displayed for the teacher to see. This can be used for questions, competitions, discussion classes, and debates according to the answers.

2. Multimedia Software

Multimedia software allows users to create presentations with pictures, audio clips, videos, and even short movies. Imagine teaching history by showing a presentation of pictures and videos of the civil war, or teaching geography by exploring Google Maps with a projector, or watching an earthquake or a tornado developing in real time. As discussed earlier, these technology resources make classes richer and much more interesting to students. They can actually see that the lessons are real and that they are related to real-world problems and people. Multimedia resources can also be useful to present charts, graphs, and mind maps and project them for the whole class. Students can even provide feedback and re-create the concepts and diagrams after a class discussion. Resources such as these allow students to visualize concepts instead of passively listening to a lesson, leading to greater understanding.

GIS software applications are used to create, display, and manage geographic information digitally. This may seem costly, but, as mentioned, most city governments own this type of software, and the option of partnering with the schools is generally available. Such a partnership includes technical support and the resources for the school to take full advantage of the software, as well as the opportunity to work with experts and learn from them. Students can have access to unlimited project opportunities. Teachers can have access to a great amount of opportunities to include students in scientific environments otherwise inaccessible to them. These opportunities could include, for example, observation of how NASA experts take samples of water and find the pH level, temperature, oxygen dissolution, and contamination in just minutes. The software will also allow students to graph the data. Geography studies are also highly improved with this software.

3. Tutorials

As mentioned, these are educational software applications that provide instruction on a specific topic. The software generally includes visual materials and examples to present a certain concept, and then evaluates the student’s understanding after he or she is finished. Some tutorial subjects include different levels of evaluation, so until a specific concept is mastered, the program does not continue.

Online resources can fling your students’ education wide-open, especially if they have access at home. Learning is no longer limited to the walls of any building. Your students can delve into their education anytime, anywhere. The web lets your students take their learning worldwide.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

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

The 5 Obstacles You Must Overcome As a Tech-Savvy Educator

As amazing an impact as technology can have on education, modern digital resources are unfortunately far from evenly available. Do you know what technological poverty can look like? Do you know what causes lie behind it? Below, we’ve listed the top five most common barriers to introducing technology to the classroom.

1. The Digital Divide

Earlier in this chapter, we looked at the digital divide and broke it down by race, class, and gender. The digital divide is considered one of the biggest barriers to introducing technology into the classroom. All students are expected to have computer skills, and often it is just assumed that they all do. Unfortunately, this is not the case: access to technology is still not equal. Students who have less access to technology are mostly those living in low-income homes. Even if these students have a technology-based education at school, with a computer and Internet access, they will still not have the same advantages as those who have computer access at home. Access to technology by itself, however, is not a guarantee of computer literacy and skills. It also depends on how the technology is used. Some schools use computers for drill-and-practice exercises, while others foster problem-solving activities, challenging students to develop deeper levels of understanding.

The digital divide has been closing recently, due to lower prices for computers, new mobile phone technology, and a growing number of schools that have computer equipment. But the digital divide in the differences in the quality of hardware, software, and connectivity resources doesn’t seem to be closing. More wealthy homes will always be ahead of homes living in poverty, and urban and suburban students will always have better and faster Internet connections than rural students, who sometimes don’t have an Internet connection at all.

2. Lack of Funds

Maintaining a network within a school with decent hardware and software requires a considerable amount of money, which many schools simply do not have. Information technology is expensive. State and local governments spend more than $5 billion annually to equip schools with computers, networks, hardware, and software. Apart from the cost of providing the school with the necessary equipment to maintain this, schools have to have a technology budget each year that includes hardware and software maintenance, in addition to the hiring of trained personnel to handle technical issues.

3. Lack of Training

To achieve a successful introduction of technology into the classroom, trained support personnel and training for teachers are essential. Teachers can’t be expected to use technologies that they’re not comfortable working with. Technical problems can discourage teachers from using the technology, so it’s important to have a technical support professional available at all times. This way, problems will be only minor inconveniences. Providing teachers with complete training on the technology they will be using, as well as the possible problems and how to solve them, is a valuable investment for education. Teachers who are comfortable with and understand these technologies are the most likely to effectively use these technologies in the classroom.

In response to the fact that teacher training on technology is “hit and miss” in American schools, many educational institutions are including technology training in their course work for obtaining an initial teacher license.

4. Internet Access

Access to cyberspace—the world of information provided through the Internet—is of huge benefit to students and teachers. Access creates opportunities for communicating with any part of the world, opportunities for online simulation applications, social networking, Web-based documents, and endless other sources of information. These are just some of the benefits that a school without Internet access misses out on. During the 1990s, President Bill Clinton created the National Information Infrastructure (NII), the goal of which was to encourage all schools, hospitals, and government agencies to become connected to the Internet. This program included an E-rate, or Education Rate, which were discounted rates for schools and libraries, based on the income levels of the students’ families and location of the school. Since NII was implemented, the number of public schools with Internet access has risen dramatically. By 2005, fifteen years after the NII was established, there was virtually no difference in access between poorer and wealthier schools.

5. Access to Technology

As mentioned, differential access to technology creates a digital divide. Schools are making big efforts to reduce this gap, and making it possible for all students have access to high-end technology in both poor and wealthy schools. Schools have been able to reduce the number of students per computer, but despite this, the digital divide concerning the difference in technology access at home has not changed as much. This gap between quality technology access in low-income homes and more affluent homes remains wide.

Does your classroom experience any of these issues? If so, have you taken any steps to try to overcome the obstacle? Talk to the other teachers in your school and to your administrators about how you can work together to remove the hurdles standing between your students and their chance at a maximized education.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

  • no reactions
0
Share