Trending Topics

Matthew Lynch published in Assistive Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, Higher Education, Trending Topics May 22, 2017

20 of the Best Virtual Reality Games in Education

As the edtech market explodes, established companies and startups are scrambling to be the first to take advantage of the “next big thing.” For many, that means entering the virtual reality market, or more specifically creating virtual reality games. With so many companies and startups developing virtual reality games, how can schools and private citizens decide what product to spend their money on? This may seem like a simple choice, but making the wrong decision can cost you a lot of your hard earned money, and stunt the user’s intellectual growth and development. As you can see, the stakes are very high, and the margin for error is minuscule.

Since we have been covering this market for several years, we feel as though we are experts in predicting what virtual reality games will give you the most bang for your buck. That’s why we decided to create a list of the best virtual reality games in education so you can make an informed decision. The games that we chose to feature are either free or low cost, and we tried to stay away from more pricey options unless their value proposition was worth the high price tag. Without further ado, here is our list of the best virtual reality games on the market.

Star Chart – with over 20 million users this app brings the universe a little closer. Students can learn about constellations by aiming their phones at the night sky. There are additional features that allow students to interact with facts about planets and space discovery.
Google Translate – while conventional Google Translate may not sound like a VR app, its new camera feature students can translate 30 languages by aiming their camera at a Students can watch in real time as the text is translated. This additional feature is great for language student
Cleanopolis– Fighting climate change becomes interactive with this app. Students learn about CO₂ and battle along with Captain Clean to save the world. Not only is this a fun game but the educational quality would make it great in any science classroom.
Public Speaking VR – practice the skills of public speaking with this immersive VR experience. With photorealistic environments, students can prepare for a job interview of a class presentation.
Quiver – Watch colored in creations come to life with Quiver. Though VR technology, 2D images become 3D and “walk “ off the page. Ideal for younger students.
Boulevard – Art classes can now be supplemented with visits to some of the world’s best art museums. Students can tour six art museums, interact with famous artworks and learn about the art, all thanks to the advancements of VR technology
Unimersiv – History comes alive with the apps developed by Unimersiv. Students can explore ancient Greece, the Titanic or the Egyptian Mysteries.
InMind– Neurons and brain tissue have never looked more realistic. Travel into the brain and learn about anatomy with this great app.
Apollo 11 VR – Be part of one of the most significant space expeditions. Though VR technology, students can have a front seat in this documentary style app. This award winning app is pushing the possibilities of VR as an educational tool
Earth AR – See the globe from new unseen angles. Motion detection and zooming capabilities will make geography more interactive.
Cospaces– creating virtual realities is not as impossible as it sounds. Students are actively involved in the creation and creative process that goes into building a VR world
TiltBrush – Creating 3D paintings is every artist’s dream, and now with TiltBrush, it is a reality. Painting Is done using a handheld “paintbrush,” and the creation possibilities will be awe inspiring for any creative student.
Anatomy 4D – study the human body with clear images that come to life. Ideal for biology students or anyone with interest in the inner workings of the body.
Sites in VR– explore famous landmarks in all their splendor. With an emphasis on Islamic temples, tombs, and ancient cities, students will get to see sites that otherwise would be inaccessible
King Tut VR – Explore the tomb of the legendary Egyptian king and get lost in the secret chambers full of hieroglyphics and treasures
Flashcards- Animal Alphabet – Made for younger students, this immersive flashcard game teaches students words while bringing it all together with some colorful animal friends
Imag-n-o-tron– Stories jump off the page with Imag-n-o-tron. Downloadable content makes this app suitable for any age. Students improve their reading while engaging with complimentary images making the VR world an educational space
EON Experience – This collection of VR lessons encapsulates everything from physics to history. Students or teachers can create their VR lessons from preloaded content.
Titans of Space – This guided tour of space is both informative as it is breathtaking. With voice overs, facts and scored music it is a cutting edge VR product.
Discovery VR Discovery TV channel compiled all the content for this app. Students can explore exotic natural locations and interact with our planet in a futuristic way.

Well, that’s it for our list. Did we miss any?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics May 22, 2017

Pass or Fail: Who are the Students at Risk for Retention?

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

As an educator, how should potentially “at risk” students be identified? Is there a sector of the student population that should receive more attention based solely on their disadvantages or lack of support?

Fundamentally, both social promotion and retention work on the principle that typical children should master certain material according to an age-grade classroom structure. In other words, both policies assume there is such a thing as a typical child, and that most children are typical.

They also assume there is a ready way to gauge how typical children develop. While this last contention is fairly reasonable and is foundational to a whole range of developmental research, the merits of the other two are debatable. Are they reasonable enough to be a foundation for education? For an entire institution of public education?

We can at least agree that the emphasis on what is “typical” is an obvious limitation of both policies. Is it logical to base an education policy on this notion? At best, there is an applicable range for developmental trends and abilities. Those trends and ranges serve to help parents, educators, and even health practitioners garner a basic idea of how a child should be developing. But there is always a scale, and there’s seldom the expectation that every child will meet the same developmental criteria at the same time. That is, in any area except education.

Retention often takes place in earlier grades, with most retention occurring in grades K–3. The vast majority of these retentions take place in kindergarten or first grade, which is consistent with the focus of state-level retention policies. Children with certain background characteristics are at a higher risk for retention, inevitably creating a public policy issue for the public education system.

Perhaps most strikingly, we see that children from low socioeconomic backgrounds and children of color are more likely to be at risk for retention. Research shows that boys are more likely to find themselves retained than girls. Children with attention issues, behavior issues, or delayed development are also more at risk for retention, as are students whose families tend to be more mobile. Children from single parent homes, or homes where parents have low educational attainment, are also at higher risk for retention.

Children who are young for their grade level and children are who are small for their age seem to have a higher risk of retention, although the evidence for this is inconsistent. The increasing population of English Language Learners constitutes yet another group of children at risk for failure. For children with multiple at-risk characteristics, the incidence of retention increases.

Because of the varying strategies for addressing learning issues by state, students are also at a relatively higher risk for retention in certain states. Those states employing more regular and rigorous assessments by age tend to create a greater risk for retention for students. These assessments are interventions in their ways, though, further clouding the actual benefits or disadvantages inherent to retention.

Given that retention is so often based on testing, there are inevitable risks based on whether students are good exam takers. Some exceptional students just do not perform well under exam conditions. In addition to this, we see some disparity in terms of subject testing, since there are different assessment types and methodologies depending on the knowledge area or skills under examination. Subjectivity comes into play to some degree, with written assessments and even non-test-based assessments, for which retention policies rarely make allowance.

In the states that administer high school exit exams, there are pass rates between 70-90 percent. For states that report disaggregated data, a substantial gap exists between pass rates for white students and students of color. For example, there are gaps ranging from 13-36 percentage points between white and African American students on mathematics tests, and 8-19 percentage points on tests of English Language Arts.

The differences between white and Hispanic students range between 2-23 percentage points, and 9-19 percentage points, respectively, for mathematics and English Language Arts. High school exit exams leave no time for improvement, however. Poor performance on state high school exit exams often leave students discouraged, and many end up dropping out of school rather than opting to retake the exam. The obvious problem being that students may be permanently set back as a result of a single test or because of a single area of struggle.

How do you feel educators can impact at risk students best? Should different instructional methods be utilized for various at risk student groups? Further, how does one determine which instruction techniques will be best suited for the particular group of students needing intervention?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics May 19, 2017

Pass or Fail: Effective Retention Polices – The Chicago Case

The goal of retention policies is to ensure that students who move to the next level of learning have mastered the required knowledge and skills. The accompanying exemptions and alternative paths surely beg the question: do retention and the various related supported elements thwart social promotion?

The problem is simple: some children may progress from grade to grade without reaching state required benchmarks. Most states and school districts worry about the number of students who are retained without alternative avenues for promotion being made available. The consensus, spoken or not, is that retention does very little to solve the underlying problem of retention and social promotion.

The retention policy path in Chicago, for instance, provides an overt example of the challenges associated with the implementation of retention policies, and how social promotion can creep into well-intended policies meant to discontinue the practice.

The Chicago Public School System (CPS) developed a retention policy where none existed at the state level. CPS believed that a retention policy would result in students working harder, receiving more attention from parents with respect to their schooling, and experiencing more focus from teachers when at risk for retention.

Initiated in 1996, the CPS policy required students in the third, sixth, and eighth grades to reach specified scores on standardized tests for reading and mathematics, or face retention. The policy also included a summer school attendance requirement for students – the top method for avoiding retention and a transition program designed to improve reading skills of eighth-grade students. The goal was to ensure that upon entering high school, students would be able to read high school level textbooks. By 2011, the retention rate had shrunk from 15 percent (at the time the policy was initiated) to 4 percent.

However, reduced retention rates have reportedly not been the result of improved achievement among students. Both implementation and structural components of the policy have weakened over the years, which in effect compromised the policy’s original intent. CPS did not have effective means to enforce consequences for children who were not meeting policy promotion requirements. Students who were obligated to pass summer school to avoid retention were allowed to enter the next highest grade, without attending summer classes. High school freshmen were required to pass all freshmen level classes, however, and to achieve certain scores on standardized tests, or attend summer school to escape retention. Following later adjustments, all students who did not meet the freshman promotion requirements after their summer school attendance went into a class for failing students when they returned to school in the fall.

Given that summer school was an instrumental component of the CPS’s policy, there was concern that if too many students were scheduled for retention, the number of summer school slots would be insufficient to handle the volume of students required to attend. The number of students performing below grade level was already substantial at the inception of the policy. Setting unattainable expectations for performance on standardized tests would simply result in an imbalance in the number of students required to attend summer school and slots available to accommodate them. Ultimately, the CPS made it easier for students to avoid retention despite poor academic performance. Achievement test scores needed for promotion were lowered so that more students were eligible to move ahead.

In the end, summer school and other interventions outlined in the CPS retention policy proved insufficient to support the number of children affected – which was somewhat inevitable, based on early number projections. Further disaster followed, with budget cuts that reduced the impact of the policy even further. As a result of the CPS budget cuts, summer schools were in session for fewer days. Summer school class sizes also increased, undermining the potential for teachers to give proper attention to students. Budget cuts also meant a redistribution of funds initially slated to add additional teachers to schools with high numbers of retained students. Various tutoring programs were either cut or discontinued through the process. As is the case with many retention policies today, educators went ahead and promoted students if the alternative was retention for more than one year.

Social promotion was not the primary problem facing CPS, though. Replacing social promotion with retention did not address the paramount and critical objective of the system: to increase learning among more students.

The CPS retention program is a good example of noble intentions gone awry. What can we learn and apply from the CPS initiative moving forward?

Matthew Lynch published in Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, EdTech & Innovation, Trending Topics May 18, 2017

What Are the Benefits of Using Virtual Reality in K-12 Schools?

Virtual reality is one of the biggest trends in education, right alongside makerspaces. However, if you ask the average educator what the benefits of using VR in the classroom are, many would draw a blank. Why? Because a lot of educators literally jump on the bandwagon of the newest technologies without doing their homework. In the end, their students suffer. If you are an educator who currently uses or wants to use virtual reality, but don’t fully understand its full capabilities and benefits, then I am talking to you. Not to fret, if you keep reading this article, you will find out what all the hype is about, and how virtual reality technology can help your students prosper.

Allows students to experience things that are not possible in a traditional classroom. By using a VR headset or device, students can be transported to places and environments which are not readily available to them. This enhances their learning experience and can help them visualize things that were previously only theoretical. Imagine if you a student who is learning about the American Revolution and are curious about the life of a “redcoat” or British soldier. With the help of virtual reality, you could be transported to the Battle of Bunker Hill and experience it firsthand. The first thing that you would probably notice is the sense of urgency in the air, and the fierce fighting going on all around. While this would not be appropriate for younger students, older students could certainly benefit from the experience. These types of experiences also help students connect to the material being presented, and the importance of learning history.

Makes students interested in learning. Students love to watch something as opposed to reading or hearing it. By creating a visual representation of the materials being taught, students become engaged more than ever before. Things that they would never be able to experience in real life, all of a sudden become tangible. This motivates students to learn, and suddenly learning becomes a passion, not a requirement. It doesn’t feel like work anymore, it seems like fun. As a general rule, when we enjoy something, we do it with more purpose and drive.

Eliminates the language barrier. The language barrier is usually a problem when it comes to international education. If you want to study in another country, you have to have a decent command of the language. With virtual reality and its subsequent software, every possible language can be embedded into the learning experience. Language is no longer a barrier.

Did I leave anything out?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Trending Topics May 18, 2017

4 Things That Educators Should Know About Education Reform

The United States educational system has undergone several reforms in response to the ever-changing needs of society. As high school graduates are expected to become a part of the national workforce, the output of schools needs to be in line with the expectations conferred on the national workforce as a whole. In this article, you will be guided through the major reforms that have taken place in the United States.

Reform refers to rectifying something that is unfit for its purpose. It is an ongoing process. Your educational experience was likely influenced by reform, and no doubt you too will be required to make certain adjustments or changes in your style of teaching on the basis of new reforms. Reform initiatives are also powerful sociopolitical agendas, which may determine the education you receive to become a teacher, the structure of the school in which you will teach, or the perception of what constitutes “effective teaching” as you begin your work as a new teacher.

To understand actions to change today’s education environment, you must have an understanding of reforms of the past. This will not only help you to become a better teacher; it will also allow you to use this knowledge when you become involved in the making and shaping of educational policy. Developments in technology, growing concerns around sustainability and increasing globalization, and the diverse multicultural society that has developed all put pressure on the educational system to change and undergo reforms. You never know what challenges the future will hold in this regard, or when you will be called upon to comment on or participate in reform initiatives.

Of fundamental importance to any discussion of educational reform is the role played by major stakeholders in the U.S. educational enterprise. As result, throughout this article we address the roles played by school districts, the states, and the federal government, and the impact of each on education reform. We also look at your calling to be a teacher, and the role you will play in enacting and participating in educational reform.

What education reforms in the United States have influenced how education is viewed and practiced today? The Commission of the Reorganization of Secondary Education’s 1918 report recommended that high schools offer a more diverse array of material than purely academic subjects. Subsequent reforms bolstered the provision of electives, and introduced guidance counselors and vocational training. The 1983 A Nation at Risk report suggested that the United States was failing to provide an adequate education. This report led to reforms in standardizing academic content and to a focus on standardized testing. In the 1980s and 1990s, teachers reacted against the confines of the standardized testing model. Growing awareness of poverty led to “full-service” schools, which provided health care, parent instruction, and more. In the 2000s, more diverse opportunities were on offer, including a rise in homeschooling, charter schools, and virtual schools. With the school voucher system, magnet schools, and open enrollment, strictures on attending public schools loosened somewhat.

What role (current and historical) has the school district, state, and federal government played in educational reform in the United States? District involvement in educational reform has traditionally been heavy, but recently districts are becoming more decentralized, giving more power to school boards and principals. States were initially interested in results-based reforms, focusing on grades and test scores. In the late 1980s, states moved toward more deregulation, which lasted about a decade. In the 1990s, states restructured schools in ways that fostered student development and empowered teachers. The No Child Left Behind Act in the early 2000s returned to a focus on standards-based education, though it has been heavily criticized and is viewed as being in need of reform. In the early 2010s, the federal government created the Common Core Standards, which provide teachers with insights into the skills and knowledge students require to excel.

At the end of December 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) into law, effectively sweeping away NCLB (Nelson 2015). The new bill made major changes to federal education policy. One thing that changed with the ESSA was how teacher performance is evaluated. States now have the ability to individually appraise how well its teachers are doing performance wise. Another alteration under the new law will allow states “to come up with their own way to determine the quality of their local schools.” This means that test scores are no longer the sole deciding factor for school performance.

ESSA lists music as a component of a well-rounded education and gives it more support than previous policies when it comes to access and funding. The law also means federal grant funding is opened for states and local school districts to support music education programs and further train music teachers. ESSA has been a long time coming. Considering that NCLB had needed an update since 2007, it is shocking how long it took to sign this new law.

What are the most significant trends and developments in educational reform in the United States today? Alternative teacher education programs are growing, though there have been criticisms that they focus on quantity rather than quality. The Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) are in the process of merging into a single body called the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). NCLB has expanded parental rights by giving them more public school options. More collaboration between educational bodies at the state and district levels are helping to improve policy coordination. The idea of year-round schools is gaining ground among some reformers. Value-added assessment, which focuses on individual improvement rather than comparative scores, is another idea on the rise.

What factors promote successful reform? The creation of a “road map” is key to sustaining reform. Schools need commitment; ongoing improvement and development; adequate time to accomplish reform; effective, sustained leadership; and adequate funding. Accurate and effective evaluation of the reforms is also crucial.

Did we miss anything?

Click here to read all of the articles from this series.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics May 16, 2017

Pass or Fail: Did you Know that State Policies Impact Retention Rates?

The state you live in determines retention policy and procedures. Do you think state level mandates are a fair and appropriate way of addressing the challenges we face in education? Does it make sense that a student in one state may be promoted to the next grade, yet retained in another state based on differing policies?

The first point of consideration for state retention policies is the Taking Responsibility Report that suggested that children lacking reading skills should not be promoted beyond the fourth grade. The report precipitated the move by some states to establish “no social promotion” policies in the form of retention laws. In most instances, however, and at a state level, this policy established third-grade reading skills as a benchmark for promotion beyond third grade. The first of these policies emerged quickly.

The second point of consideration is the so-called benchmark for educational progression. Indeed, a basic state-level policy review shows that most states require the retention of children who do not meet stated promotion requirements. Colorado’s statute, for instance, recommends retention when students do not meet learning standards. West Virginia’s statute also allows for but does not require, retention.

So-called model retention laws, such as those passed in Florida, still allow for “good cause” retention exemptions. Schools can promote children if they pass an alternative state-approved reading assessment or demonstrate they have met the state required level of mastery based on their student portfolios. Limited English speakers – those students with less than two years of English instruction – are also exempt. So too are special needs students whose Individualized Education Plans, or IEPs, state that standardized testing is inappropriate.

Florida students with IEPs or 504 plans who were retained in kindergarten or first or second grade, and who continue to have deficiencies after two or more years of reading remediation; and students who continue to have deficiencies after two or more years of reading remediation or who were retained in kindergarten or first or second grade for a total of two years are exempt, as well. Basically, no special education students have to meet state standards.

Most states with retention and exemption laws include categories similar to those included in the Florida law to get around the issue of those with special education needs. Other states, however, allow for teacher or principal recommendations as an exemption category. Georgia is the only state that allows for a parental appeal of retention. Many state policies also include contingencies for retention. They may, for example, require that the child is retained if he or she does not participate in a summer school intervention plan. A child may also be promoted only if he or she receives remediation at the next grade level.

Most retention takes place in kindergarten through third grade. Some states do not have policies that allow retention at higher grade levels. Of those that do, it’s notable that West Virginia’s statute also requires retention in the third through eighth grade. Texas children can be retained in grades three, five, and eight if they do not perform at required levels on reading and mathematics exams. Although the state of New York does not have a retention policy, New York City established a policy for grades three, five, seven and eight with proficiency required in English Language Arts or mathematics.

In the United States, there are two identified spikes in retention rates by age. Students are statistically most likely to be retained at the age of six or at the age of twelve. Retention takes place at the high school level, too, precipitated by performance on high school exit exams. In this case, young people unable to pass an exam by the time they complete twelfth grade do not receive a diploma. This is a form of retention, too, in that students are not able to move to the next level, whether it is career or college entry. Currently, twenty-six states have high school exit exams.

Although high school exit exams vary from state to state regarding content tested and opportunities for retakes, most states administer exams that cover reading, writing, and mathematics at levels that should have been addressed by tenth grade. Some states allow students to retake these exams and some allow for alternative exams, alternative routes to graduation, and remediation programs for students who are unable to pass the initial administration of the exam. Minnesota, Oregon, and Texas have specific alternate routes to graduation for English Language Learners who have been in the United States for a limited number of years. All states provide for modified or alternate assessment for students with disabilities, as well as waivers.

How does your state compare to others in terms of retention? Do you agree with the current policy in place for your particular state?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics May 12, 2017

Pass or Fail: Retention and its Roots in Early American Public Education

Today’s practice of retaining students is a far cry from what took place in America’s earliest public school classrooms.

Before assessing the American education system, it is necessary to understand where our roots lie. We must consider how public education became enshrined in the United States, what the objectives of public education were, how the public education system in the United States was developed, and what efforts have been made to reform the system since its inception.

The United States should be viewed from an educational standpoint as an essentially European-derived enterprise. In particular, because of the religious make-up of the first European settlers, we have a strong Protestant lineage. The goal of America’s public education system has been relatively consistent: to produce satisfying outcomes in eight broad categories:

Basic academic knowledge and skills, including reading, writing, math skills, and knowledge of science and history.
Critical thinking and problem-solving abilities, including the ability to analyze information and apply knowledge to new situations.
Appreciation of the arts and literature, including participation in and appreciation of musical, visual, and performing arts as well as cultivation of a love of literature.
Preparation for skilled employment, including appropriate workplace qualifications.
Social skills and a strong work ethic, including communication skills, a feeling of personal responsibility, and the ability to work with and interact with others from varied backgrounds.
Citizenship and community responsibility, including public ethics and knowledge of how government works.
Physical health, including lifelong exercise and healthy eating habits.
Emotional health, including self-confidence and respect for self and others.

In 1749 Benjamin Franklin pioneered American thinking on education by proposing that Pennsylvania establish a public academy of education for adolescents. Franklin suggested that such an institution should also emphasize physical fitness, as well as academics. A man of many ideas and insights, Franklin also spoke up on the importance of studying history, because it taught students temperance, order, frugality, and perseverance. Franklin thought schools should require competence in reading, arithmetic, and science, and that they should be accountable for teaching these skills. However, Franklin and his contemporaries did not envision assessments of the quality of educational institutions based on how well students acquired the skills and knowledge.

The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, held yet a slightly different view on education, suggesting that universal education would assist in socializing citizens, helping them to accept the values of their rulers, but also preparing young people for a “law-abiding” adulthood.

Falling somewhere between the aforementioned two perspectives was George Washington, who contended in his first State of the Union address that Congress should promote schools that taught citizens how “to value their own rights.” Washington recognized that public opinion makes policy in a democracy and, as a result, “it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.” In none of these instances, though, does it appear that rigid standards for reading, writing, and arithmetic are the foundation for accountability. Schools were expected to go well beyond such basic provisions and, in effect, become responsible for the creation of productive, well-informed, and engaged citizens.

More than 70 years after Franklin’s comments on the components of an optimal public education, Jefferson clarified and elaborated. Jefferson believed a proper education should give all citizens the information they needed to undertake transactions at their businesses. He thought it should enable citizens to calculate for themselves, express their ideas, contracts, and accounts in writing; to improve their morals and faculties via reading, and to understand their duties to their neighbors and country.

The 1780 Massachusetts Constitution, drafted by John Adams, another of the founding fathers, laid out the first legal requirement for public education. This state constitution noted that the duty of the legislative and executive branches would be to maintain public schools. “Wisdom and knowledge,” the document declared, “as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, [is] necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties. In addition to teaching academic subjects, public schools should also be required to include lessons on the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality, sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments.”

There is clear evidence that the government took to heart much of what the founding fathers had to say on this topic. The 1787 Northwest Ordinance provided funds to new states that allowed them to establish public education systems, declaring that “religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary for good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”

Even in the earliest days of America, the notion that public education was a necessity was accepted. Of course, at that time the nation lacked the infrastructure to provide effective access to public education, so such support was mostly theoretical. Still, there were many who came forward in support of a public education system that embraced most, if not all, of the ideas and principles that the founding fathers had set forth.

This basic support was founded on the fact that people believed in access to education as a right — a belief that would be dissected over time to bring us to the retention-social promotion context of today.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Trending Topics May 9, 2017

Pass or Fail: Horace Mann – An American Public School Pioneer

Horace Mann brought the ideal of public education for ALL children, regardless of income or ability, to the forefront in the 19th century and ushered in new philosophy on what public school should entail.

There were many early supporters of equal education for all, but there was still considerable controversy about access to education. Questions arose about whether poor children were being restricted to instruction in basic skills while the middle classes received broad education meant to maintain and improve their quality of life. It was in this period of transition from theoretical public education to an implemented system that worked for all citizens, that Horace Mann emerged as one of the principal champions of education.

Horace Mann, who many education experts and historians consider to be the father of the common school concept. With his craggy features and passionate speeches, he embodied the spirit of educational idealism during the first half of the 1800s.

Mann was born into an impoverished Massachusetts family and was largely self-taught. He managed to secure a place at Brown University, where his oratorical prowess first became evident. He was to use this rhetorical ability to further his careers in law and politics. As secretary of the first board of education in the United States, he gave lectures and started the influential Common School Journal.

Picking up on many of the ideas of the founding fathers, Mann went on to envisage how a system of universal education would best serve the social, economic, and political needs of society. He centered his lofty hopes for the nation on the solo successes of children because he believed that a common experience in school could mold them into successful individuals.

Mann developed six educational principles that would come to define his involvement, and would influence the American education system for decades:

(1) Citizens cannot maintain both ignorance and freedom;

(2) This education should be paid for, controlled, and maintained by the public;

(3) This education should be provided in schools that embrace children from varying backgrounds;

(4) This education must be nonsectarian;

(5) This education must be taught using tenets of a free society; and

(6) This education must be provided by well-trained, professional teachers.

Ever expansive in his ideas, Mann also believed that common schooling would reduce hostilities among citizens. As children grew into adults sharing a common educational experience, Mann posited that different socioeconomic, religious, and ethnic backgrounds would become less significant. Mann’s vision for schools included a common moral and political foundation, as well as the provision of opportunities for children from disadvantaged backgrounds to achieve self-sufficiency and use education to lift themselves from poverty.

By 1837, Horace Mann was busy working to mobilize support for public schools and argued that they were the training ground for youth and for individuals to be able to participate effectively as citizens of a democratic nation. Mann clearly valued a balanced and broad curriculum and supported the development of one in public schools.

Indeed, Mann’s ideal school system brought children from all backgrounds to learn together in an ungraded school. Mann advocated for the education of heterogeneous groups of students to achieve unifying goals and believed specifically in the connection between freedom, self-government, and universal education. He believed in the value of a common learning environment and the development of self-discipline. These, he maintained, could be transferred into the types of skills and behaviors needed for a free society where citizens were not only educated, but had the ability to make intelligent decisions needed for moral judgment and government participation. For Mann, the purpose of education went beyond intellectual and utilitarian goals.

Accepting that children differ regarding ability, interests, and temperament, Mann laid the groundwork for lessons to be adapted to meet the individual needs of children. The one-room school, now a nostalgic icon of American history, embodied Mann’s idyllic vision of the common school. There was little consistency in the curriculums used by one-room schools, though, and teachers had difficulty grouping children for instructional purposes.

Students studied in groups based on what they knew and what they needed to know. Students of multiple ages received instruction at the same level. Given the number of children and the different ages of children in the classroom, children principally learned via memorization. Teachers had little time to target individual needs in the classroom. Even with these drawbacks, however, the non-graded one-room school was an invaluable institution for providing free and public education for children during the 18th and 19th centuries.

Many children excelled in learning reading, writing, and arithmetic, even when the time at school was disrupted by the need to work on the family farm. The ungraded structure of the one-room school allowed for the return to school after an extended absence. It also allowed children to take a break and then return to learning, based on the knowledge they had retained.

Though the standardized assessments that are part of the educational system today did not exist, children did have oral exams at the end of the school year. These were formal quizzes on what they had learned over the course of the year. The purpose of these exams was to provide teachers with information about where to start children at the beginning of the next school year.

Passing and failing were not descriptors used to classify children’s learning behaviors in the one-room school, as progress was allowed to occur at different rates. Only when students took the exams needed to enter high schools outside of their rural communities would they experience their first taste of scholastic success or failure.

Was the one-room school on to something?

Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Policy & Reform, Trending Topics, Year-Round Schooling April 13, 2017

How to Implement a Year Round Schooling System

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

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

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

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

Choosing an implementation team

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Implementing a year-round schooling system

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

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

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

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

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

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

Implementation steps

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

Track assignment considerations

General axioms

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

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

Do not:

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

Operational strategies for special services

Special day classes

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

Evaluation of a year-round schooling system

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Trending Topics April 9, 2017

A Digital Future: What Will EdTech Look Like By 2117

Rapidly changing technology continues to make its mark on K-12 learning. Let’s take a look at the future and see how technology will improve education in the next 100 years. What will be the new innovations in EdTech? What will future classrooms look like? Will the need to study medicine, law, and science disappear when robots start working in these professions? What about art? Sure, no robot can be better than David Bowie, Leonardo Da Vinci, or Shakespeare (not yet), but with the number of innovations we see every day, we can’t be sure it won’t happen. While these innovations could have some detrimental side effects (such as job loss, impacts to the economy, etc.), they also have their advantages. It is up to us to use these innovations with caution and maximize their benefits. Here are the technologies that I believe will transform education by 2117.

Horizon #1: In the next year, or less.

Widespread use of makerspaces: Imagine the hands-on fun and learning that happens at play stations throughout a preschool room, then add some really cool edtech tools like an earthquake table, cutting laser, high-tech microscopes, or 3-D printer. Then give the students real-life research to complete. Now you have imagined a makerspace, a blended workspace growing in popularity.

A makerspace is a shared learning experience long used in the Maker Culture, but now being honed for classrooms. They combine DIY crafts, manufacturing, engineering, and technology. Makerspaces are not limited to K12; Colleges are developing maker spaces to prepare students to solve real life problems. These stations can be mobile and shared, to decrease the cost.

Makerspaces fit well into the growing trends of Project Based Learning and Deeper Learning. Project-based Learning is learning which happens as students complete authentic projects. Deeper Learning is the process in which students meet and work with other students from around the world (Global Collaboration) as well as with experts in the field, through the use of technology.

Blended Education is another technique that will grow in significance. Classrooms will see an increase in the use of technology blended with traditional student-teacher interaction. Driven by algorithms; students will be placed in groups and given assignments. Students will often work collaboratively, broken into groups through a calculation of strengths, weaknesses, and interests.

Horizon #2: Within two to five years.

Widespread use of personalized learning: A tech-created schedule will move students through the day according to progress, focus, and interest while integrating each person’s needs with the needs of the class as a whole. Teachers will float from group to group as the face-to-face tutor and coach and periodically teach a lesson. NPR reviews this type of classroom this report, Meet the Classroom of the Future. Do you see it?

Adaptive learning will personalize learning in our classrooms. Adaptive education, at its best, is using technology to measure a student’s strengths and weaknesses and then adapting their education accordingly. When the goal of adaptive education is to develop the student, not meet pre-established standards, then real education can take place.

Horizon #3: Within ten years.

Interactive surfaces while working in groups will become a reality. The trend in education is to have collaborative group learning. We are currently at the point where every child has his or her own electronic device. As the group learning model improves, it will be harder for children to follow courses separately on their personal devices. What would happen if the desk they sat at was itself a computer? That way, the group can use a multi-touch interface and collaborate better, with less time comparing what is on each device.

Interactive surfaces are already a reality, but the costs are still big. Just a few decades ago, computers were expensive and considered a luxury item, so it’s safe to predict that these interactive surfaces will become more affordable as time passes and will be used in schools for everyday basics.

Horizon #4: Within twenty years.

Tracking every student’s move will become a reality. Student tracking is already a reality in some schools. In the future, it’s entirely plausible that all schools will track students and teachers using Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). There is currently one obstacle: costs. Once there is a cheaper way to replace lost or stolen RFIDs, it will become more common to track when students attend school and their trips around the open classroom. This way, by knowing where and when students are, more time can be spent giving instructions and explanations.

Many parents would argue that it is not fair to track their child’s every move all the time. On the other hand, this can greatly improve safety in schools. In modern schools with more than 1,000 students in a classroom, it could be very hard to locate missing child without tracking.

Horizon #5: Within fifty years.

Students will become teachers. Teachers will become facilitators and children will teach each other based on their own interests. While this concept seems strange now, it has a significant probability of becoming a reality one day. Even younger children are capable of finding their own path, and by allowing them to follow their individual interests while they are growing up, we will have more satisfied people in the future.

Horizon #6: Within 100 years.

There will be many new tools. Educational tools are evolving, and it will be interesting to see what happens in the future. We can predict that instead of using pens and pencils to write on paper or keyboards to write on computers and tablets, one day, children will use Google glasses (or its successor) to transfer their thoughts and notes on a computer. Other futuristic thoughts include new tools to protect devices from viruses, Cloud Learning (which would eliminate paper), increased use of e-communities, hologram lessons, and international collaboration.

Conclusion

Imagining the edtech reformation of education we will see by 2117; you may feel like you are falling through the rabbit hole. But don’t be frightened, just buckle-up and enjoy the fall into the brilliant future of edtech and education. In coming posts, I will take a closer look at each of these technologies and their implications on K-12 learners. Which do you think will have the greatest impact?

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Are you sure you want to delete post?