Uncategorized

In this 20-part series, I explore the root causes and effects of academic disengagement in K-12 learners and explore the factors driving American society ever closer to being a nation that lacks intellectualism, or the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake.

While the struggle between intellectualism and anti-intellectualism is longstanding, the 40 years leading up to the first election of President Barack Obama have been especially harsh for intellectuals.

In her bestselling book The Age of American Unreason, historian Susan Jacoby identifies some key factors in this harsh climate. A rise in religious fundamentalism, a decrease in Americans’ general knowledge of the sciences, and the public’s reliance on “infotainment” to deliver facts have all contributed to the dangerous ideological conditions that citizens face collectively. Jacoby talks about how legendary American ideas like the “self-made man” actually do more harm than good when it comes to progress, and how the celebrity status of both right- and left-wing pundits preys upon the vulnerabilities of everyday Americans.

Faith versus Fact

Religious fundamentalism, loosely defined as a set of beliefs that adhere strictly to a religious text despite new knowledge or changes in modern thought, tends to spike during times of intense or rapid change. If you look at Jacoby’s 40-year timeline, beginning in 1978 and ending as the first African-American President was awarded a spot in the White House, the reasons for a rise in fundamental thought systems is easy to surmise. In America’s nearly 250 years’ history, change has never stopped barreling forward and the momentum of the past four decades continues to gain steam.

Fundamentalists generally dislike change and view it as a departure from simpler times and therefore as a danger to their way of life. Fundamentalists tend to like absolutes and singular, straightforward answers to topics that others may consider more complex. If one passage in the Bible, for example, can be thrown out as a story or parable rather than a factual description, then who is to say that the rest of the scriptures are literally true? Though not always tangibly damaging to its adherents, fundamentalism generally bars progressive thought in science or in other realms of knowledge.

When a core population becomes increasingly fundamentalist, an argument can be made that the intellectual progress of the entire nation is hindered, at least in part; and yet it is the American way to encourage citizens to express religious beliefs of all varieties even if those beliefs run counter to scientific or other fact-based thought.

TV: Educational Help or Hindrance?

Jacoby also explores the educational value of television as a medium. She admits she was raised in a Midwestern household that put faith in the potential for television to educate a wider group and bring heightened awareness to world issues. She notes that the original teaching nature of television has given way to a culture which depends on what emanates from the airwaves instead of using that information as a supplement to other forms of self-discovery and education. The Internet has only compounded video culture, making it possible for amateurs with unfounded opinions to carry the same weight as well-learned experts on the same issues.

But with so many accessible opinions, shouldn’t the state of intellectualism actually be improving? Understanding other opinions, after all, is essential to truly having a well-rounded, and therefore well-grounded, view of the world. The problem here is that too much information has the tendency to overwhelm and saturate readers. Rather than take the time to read, compare and debate each position, people (Americans, especially) tend to choose the quickest, easiest answer that best fits their belief systems instead. The availability of so much information, and the tendency of perception to favor presentation over actual facts, has created a culture that has far too many ideas to process. The result is a blanket “live and let live” approach to dissenting opinions that may seem tolerant and even intellectual at first glance, but that reeks of indifference.

Lacking Basic Knowledge

Anti-intellectualism also manifests itself in Americans’ lack of general knowledge on topics outside their immediate needs. In her book, Jacoby talks about the juxtaposition between the record-high numbers of U.S. college graduates and the large percentage of Americans who seem to lack basic, foundational knowledge. A 2009 study conducted by Harris Interactive and commissioned by the California Academy of Sciences and Citizens discovered that most Americans fail when it comes to answering basic science questions correctly. Respondents could not accurately answer how long it takes for the Earth to revolve around the Sun, or what percentage of the Earth is covered with water.

Despite these dismal results, 80 percent of the Americans surveyed insisted that science education is “absolutely essential” to navigate issues like the U.S. economy, healthcare system and global reputation. This wacky divergence of idealized knowledge and actual knowledge is a classic example of anti-intellectualism in American culture. Citizens place high value on scientific aptitude but on the other hand, are not terribly concerned by the fact that they do not possess it.

Perhaps having too much access to knowledge has actually had the reverse intended effect. Could it be that the information is so easy to come by that Americans have just stopped trying?

In this 20-part series, I explore the root causes and effects of academic disengagement in K-12 learners and explore the factors driving American society ever closer to being a nation that lacks intellectualism, or the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake.

Americans pride themselves on their high ideals. On national holidays Americans delight in quoting phrases like “all men are created equal” and “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The ideologies of freedom of religion, democratic government, and socio-economic mobility are ingrained in American children beginning in pre-K educational settings. While these ideologies are admired from a distance, real progress in reaching these goals is undercut by a growing national trend: anti-intellectualism.

The Why of Academic Disengagement

College students today are more academically disengaged than ever before, and this is a direct result of their K-12 classroom experiences. A UCLA survey found that college freshmen in 1997 had spent less time than any previous freshman class on homework and extracurricular activities when they were in high school. K-12 students are shaped by a media-frenzied society which promotes instant gratification and by an educational system that tries simultaneously to compete with attention-grabbing media and to keep all students on the same plane by watering lessons down. The outcome is a growing group of students who know much less than their ancestors did, and who care very little for educational pursuits that do not immediately affect their day-to-day lifestyles.

Academic disengagement does not discriminate. In his book Beyond the Classroom, researcher Laurence Steinberg finds that economic status, race and ethnicity do not have a much of an impact on K-12 student engagement. Steinberg concludes that anti-intellectualism and the accompanying disinterest in educational pursuits is a nationwide epidemic and that the number of students who simply do not care about what is being taught has never been higher. This is what might be expected from students who approach educational pursuits with a feeling of entitlement based on years of low expectations in education settings.  When students encounter a teacher who demands more than some of their previous instructors they become resentful and feel they should not be asked to do so much. A course with difficult requirements is written off by students as being “unfair.”

A Nation of Slackers?

Though the “slacker” mentality certainly affects students in other countries, American students are the poster children for this syndrome. More American children are attending college than ever before, but these students are less interested in what is being taught than their predecessors were. The push for equality in education, starting with the youngest pre-K students, has devalued educational content. Instead of raising the standards for all children, the US has lowered the educational bar under the guise of giving everyone a fair shot.  But in fact equality in educational opportunities and the demands placed on students are not necessarily correlated; difficulty and complexity of education need not suffer in order to promote equal opportunity. Dumbing down American students is not a formula for progress in future generations.

The U.S. has been affected by anti-rationalism and by self-contradiction from its earliest days. The founding fathers wrote movingly about inalienable rights and freedom from persecution, but they avoided outlawing slavery or giving women a share in the governance of the new country when they signed their names to formative documents. The liberties they outlined could be afforded only if they did not stand in the way of personal gain.

This is not to say that the signers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were completely devoid of intellectualism or that they were narrow-minded.  They poured over documents like the 13^th century Magna Carta and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s 1762 Of the Social Contract to seek guidance for setting up a fair government that blended the best of what was already in existence with fresh, all-American ideas.

There was really no way in which the elite group of men entrusted with writing the country’s blueprints could have addressed every political or social issue with surety, but thankfully they knew enough to include reasonable avenues for change in the future. That “open for interpretation” mentality, however, has handicapped intellectual pursuits since the dawning of this great nation.

Roots in Anti-Intellectualism

From America’s earliest days as a nation to the present day a war between intellectualism, defined by the Oxford Dictionary as the “theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason,” and its enemy anti-intellectualism, often entrenched with deep emotional and spiritual attachments, has raged.  Though less vehement during certain periods of time, particularly prosperous ones, the battle for the adaptation of rational thought in American society has always been present.

It would seem, however, that the nation in the first quarter of the 21^st century is in a particularly heightened state of polarization in the intellectualism spectrum. Despite attempts to broaden their world view, and expanding ability to communicate beyond the barriers of the past, Americans seem to be trending toward further division when it comes to the controversial issues of the day. Consider creationism versus evolutionary theory – one is based solely on faith and the other on science, yes the latter is still called into question when taught in certain areas of the country.

So how can the pursuit of intellectual knowledge be regained in our K-12 classrooms? Or is it past the point of no return?

It’s no secret that Black, and other non-white, students in the U.S. have always faced an uphill struggle when it comes to education. Even today, the achievement gap between white students and their peers of color is wide – with the latest National Assessment for Educational Progress report What are now called HBCUs were at one time the only route many young scholars could take to obtain a college degree and elevate their lifestyles. This is not to say that these HBCUs were second-rate; the education received at these establishments has always rivaled that of institutions without the same label, producing such graduates as Thurgood Marshall, Toni Morrison and Spike Lee. Traditionally, HBCUs have also had a strong alumni presence, with the great minds of the graduates giving back to the institutions that taught them so much.

What was once a role built of necessity has slowly disappeared, however. The Civil Rights Movement, affirmative action initiatives and more recently, the popularity and legitimacy of online degree programs, have all chipped away at the core reason HBCUs were developed in the first place. Declining enrollment has unsurprisingly led to a domino effect, reducing the resources available to students on-campus, and making the HBCU experience less attractive to students choosing between a plethora of higher education options.

There are standouts, of course – HBCUs whose reputations have sustained them through the changing landscape of Black college education in the U.S. Atlanta liberal arts powerhouses Morehouse College, often referred to as the “Black Ivy League,” and Spelman College continues to attract the top talent in the country to their programs. Morehouse boasts an 83 percent freshman retention rate while Spelman is the largest producer of black graduates that go on to medical school (of ALL U.S. colleges).

For every Spelman or Morehouse, however, there is a Saint Paul’s College, forced to close its doors in 2013 after an unsuccessful merger attempt and unsustainably low enrollment figures. Atlanta’s Morris Brown College filed for federal bankruptcy protection after finding itself $35 million over its head.

Not surprisingly, these headline-grabbing instances and others like them have called HBCUs to the table. Are these colleges still a necessity in the growingly accepting and diverse American culture? Do these colleges help their students reach graduation effectively? Why, when considering all the other educational options available to students of color, should an HBCU be chosen? Are these schools still relevant?

Despite the struggles of some HBCUs, I think that these institutions are actually more relevant than ever – and for a larger pool of students than ever before. Instead of closing the door on these schools or questioning their relevance, the educational community should be encouraging them to remain open, and for more reasons than one.

Safe havens for students of color

Though traditionally “white” schools now accept students of color, they often do not do enough to ensure that those students, particularly first-generation college attendees, have the resources to make it to graduation. With some exceptions, retention, mentoring and cultural programs often do not exist on non-HBCU campuses. Though subtle, racism still exists on non-HBCU campuses too. HBCUs have always provided more than the curriculum in a textbook, or the expertise of the professor in the classroom. They have been safe havens for young adults, struggling with the demands of a college education and to rise above the insidious inferiority complex society places on them. HBCUs don’t just include students of color out of obligation; HBCUs encourage, strengthen and celebrate Black and other minority students. Even though “times have changed,” HBCUs still remain pillars of holistic creation of students who succeed not only academically, but in every aspect of their lives.

How HBCUs can stay relevant

For HBCUs to keep their doors open, and their educational offerings relevant in an increasingly competitive higher education market, they need to keep one foot grounded in tradition and the other pointing forward. By “tradition,” I do not mean that they need to hold on to the exact practices of the past, or foolishly cling to a culture of exclusion, but I believe the purpose of HBCUs should remain steadfast: providing student-centered experiences with strong academic backgrounds.

While it is certainly impressive to make “top” lists in academic areas, HBCUs have a secret weapon when it comes to student retention, graduation rates and lifelong success and it lies outside what is in the textbooks. Can HBCUs survive without strong academic performance, and a competitive staff of the leading scholars in the nation and world? Of course not. But I’d argue that even with those things, HBCUs cannot survive without remaining grounded in the student-focused, “under our wings” mentality that have always made them a different sort of college education – one that is fulfilling on many levels beyond what is printed on a transcript.

HBCUs should also continue to embrace a spirit of diversity, particularly outside its traditional student body demographic. Black students should not make up the entire student body – or even a majority of it. Students from all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds should be welcomed in. The first-generation college students looking to elevate their family status. The student immigrants who are still assimilating into U.S. culture. The underdogs from every race, creed and color who need that extra bit of encouragement in a close-knit environment to accomplish their educational aspirations. It is this pool of students who have the highest potential to be innovators and to step outside their comfort zones to build a better future for themselves and our country. HBCUs can play that pivotal role in getting these students to that point.

So while the historical part of HBCUs should stay in the past, the future of these institutions of higher learning depends on leading through a diverse example that puts student needs above all else.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

Note: The following guest post comes to us courtesy of Dr. Darla Shaw, Professor of Education, Western Connecticut State University.

Nothing is older in the culture of any society than drum circles. They were used for communication, for entertainment and as a centerpiece of all activities for the community.

Today drum circles are being revitalized and being used with students with special needs, with people who are ill, with senior citizens, and in classrooms where music is not the major subject.

Drums circles can cross any barrier. They all speak a language others can understand. They do not have to be costly as drums can be made out of “found materials” or objects found in a room. They can be played at any time and for any purpose and they are all inclusive. Drum circles are not for spectators. Drum circles are for performers. Drum circles build community.

Because of so many positive factors linked to drum circles, this innovative practice is now being brought into regular classrooms at every level. Each teacher has a different type of circle, made up of different materials, but they all seem to bring many positive factors to the classroom environment.

Classroom Climate and Management

Many classroom teachers are using drumming to get students’ attention and ready to focus. These teachers also like to use drumming as a motivational tool. When students have been working for a long period of time on a tough task, bringing out the drums and following patterns is a good way to relax and reenergize. When a teacher says we are going to next go to drumming, the class will begin to perk up and eagerly await the activity. It is extremely rare to find a student that does not like drumming as it is inherit skill that everyone can perform at some level.

Just before an important test, it also helps to bring out the drums and let the students get rid of their tensions. Teachers are finding that three minutes of drumming just prior to an exam, can help to focus the brain and keep the student on track.

Reading Skills and Patterning

In the early grades, drumming is used to help with the auditory segmentation of words. When students say cat, c – a – t , they say the letter and beat it out on a drum. This helps to internalize the number of sounds in a word. This helps students to build their auditory skills along with their perceptual skills. Phonological awareness to the beat of a drum is highly regarded in the world of phonics.

This same segmentation technique is also used with number of syllables. or long and short vowel sounds. When students hear a short vowel sound, they make a certain beat on the drum. When the students hears a long vowel sound, they make another sound. When teaching children to read fluently with phrasing, drumming is a very useful tool.

Students can also learn the alphabet through beats on the drum. The drum beat with certain letters “sticks to the brain” and can then be retrieved when the student is reading or writing. We have all heard people saying, “I can’t get that song out of my head,” that is what happens when drum circle sounds are applied to any particular skill.

Reading is all about seeing and hearing patterns. When students are in a drum circles, they need to be able to duplicate patterns through careful listening and trial and error. They must also be able to create a new pattern of their own. These two drumming skills involve critical thinking and are important to a student’s developmental level.

Today we talk a great deal about engagement of students. There is no better way to engage students then through the use of a drum linked to a particular skill.

Content Area Classes

Students love to read their poetry, stories, or reader’s theater presentations to the beat of a drum. Working in teams to put the words and beats together through various drumming techniques, can help not only the students with special needs, but all students.
Drumming helps students to become creative, to become critical thinkers, and to integrate their learning senses. Students begin to take risks that they never took before when you give them a drum.

If students are trying to memorize a phrase, a definition, an equation or something difficult, they can pattern the message to a drum beat and the information will be there when they need it. This technique is more effective than just rereading the information a second time.

As a final project, students can also take their research and use a drum circle to help them share the information. For example, if students were talking about a plant going through different life stages, they might not only use power points, but along with the power point have a particular style of drum beats portraying a particular action. Drum beats and how they are performed are a form of speaking and communication, the same way words and pictures give us insight into a situation.

In math and science, students are looking to discover information on number of beats, tone, fluency, vibrations, modulation, strength and length of vibrations, and patterns that can be transferred to technological devices. These STEM type projects and music are becoming more common place and even showing up in many science fairs. Music motivates students and helps them get into areas that before have never been of any interest to them.

As a teacher of teachers, I tell my students at the beginning of each new year. “ Don’t be afraid to try something new this year. By taking risks and tracking the results, you uncover what it takes to be a good teacher. However, if you are only going to do one new activity this year, make it drum circles in some form. You will thank me for this suggestion as I have never seen a situation where drum circles have not helped with relieving stress, helping classroom management, building integration skills, and bringing fun and enjoyment to the rigors of the Common Core classroom of today.”

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

Note: The following guest post comes to us courtesy of Shaul Kuper, president and CEO of Destiny Solutions, a company that creates software for leading higher education institutions. Destiny Solutions helps clients successfully attract, manage and maintain their non-traditional students. Some of these institutions include Penn State World Campus, Stanford Center for Professional Development and eCornell.

Our education system was designed centuries ago. The first degree-granting institution was founded in 1088, but its roots go back millennia.

The modern university is based on the same economic model that powered the rest of the pre-industrial world. Expert craftsmen — in this case, professors — spent years apprenticing in order to master their trade. They then handcrafted products — courses and seminars — to sell locally, without much competition. Each village had one blacksmith, one baker, one university.

Then, the industrial revolution came along. Suddenly, goods could be produced en masse by workers with little specialized skill. The goods could be distributed across a vast geographic area. Instead of having a blacksmith in every village, there was now one giant factory that served numerous villages, towns and cities—and it produced goods faster and cheaper.

Almost all goods and services transitioned to this model by the early 1900’s—except for higher ed. The first real change for higher ed in over 1000 years came as a result of the Internet boom. For the first time, content could be instantly distributed to mass audiences in disparate geographic locations. Further, the institution no longer controlled the content as students could freely find information through a variety of sources including MOOCs, online journals, blogs, YouTube and search engines.

The Internet changed higher ed because it removed the institution’s monopoly on content, and it broke down the geographic barrier to competition.

We did a survey of higher ed administrators to see how they view changes in higher ed, and what they think has been the most substantial. Here’s what we found:

The number 1 change is technology. The number 2 change is an increase in responsiveness to non-traditional students. Finally, the number 3 change is declining budgets.

It’s an eclectic mix of factors that are at play. And although each of these factors are making waves, have any of them really caused a complete overhaul of the system?

It seems to me that instead of rethinking and reconstructing the tuition-revenue model from the 1600s, we simply keep repaving the surface while ignoring the underpinning foundations.

Perhaps it is time to reimagine our educational system altogether? What if we were a start up nation, without any outdated infrastructure or preconceived ideas on how an educational system is “supposed” to work. Suppose we simply started again from scratch. What would higher education look like then?

For the most part, we’ve gone through this minor repaving process so many times already that we have now hit definite cross roads, presenting two options. For those who believe everything is business as usual, they had better grab the steering wheel tightly, as the road is only going to get bumpier. For those who choose to evolve, it’s an opportunity to get on the freeway and pursue a whole new vision. This is no trivial matter and requires complete alignment in concept, in funding and in execution, all the way from the highest offices down to today’s learner.

Note: The following guest post comes to us courtesy of Keir McDonald, Chairman of EduCare, a company that provides bespoke training solutions for schools. Their courses are available both online and on paper, and cover child protection and duty of care issues.

Media horror stories bombard us daily when it comes to students and esafety, but is going online really as dangerous for children as some journalists would have us believe? A new report from the London School of Economics has found that children might be better at self-regulating their internet usage than we usually give them credit for.

The influence of news stories on children is particularly strong when it comes to stranger danger and bullying, but do media representations of the internet empower children, or destabilise their development of effective online risk-management skills?

After speaking with 378 children about esafety, academics from LSE found that many children actively seek out ways to stay safe online by “planning” and “reflecting.” For example, when using social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, older children take precautions such as changing their privacy settings to protect themselves online.

Even younger children, between the ages of 9 – 11, are competent at avoiding problematic websites or applications by simply clicking away. This is an obvious but “effective tactic” when it comes to staying safe on the internet. Most children were able to recognise both the risks and the symptoms of internet addiction, including health problems, losing interest in other things and losing friends.

Though girls are “more likely to seek social support […] than boys,” both sexes are generally reluctant to approach an adult for help when an incident of cyberbullying occurs. Children are commonly able to react proactively to abusive messages by blocking the send or disabling their own account, but sometimes this isn’t enough and internet conflicts escalate rapidly.

Why are children reluctant to seek support when faced with bullying?

Children are often reluctant to seek support, preferring instead to minimise or downplay the significance of cyberbullying. However, this is an inefficient tactic and schools can do more by harnessing the power of the peer-group for their anti-bullying and esafety lessons.

As adults, we can encourage children to feel comfortable sharing their online problems with us by being more reasonable, and less sensational, when it comes to the internet. For one thing, when we talk to children about the internet, we should acknowledge the many good points as well as cautioning against the dangers. Monitoring our children’s online activity is fine for very young children, but as they get older, we can earn their trust by respecting their need for a certain amount of privacy.

Parents and teachers can try to ban Facebook and other websites, or limit their children and student’s internet usage, but they should be aware of the potential consequences. Using social networking sites, among other online skills, has become almost mandatory both in the wider world and in the modern workplace. Banning children from social networking instead of teaching them how to network safely is doing them no favours in the long run.

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

Standardized testing in K-12 education is a perennial hot button issue. Proponents feel that measuring knowledge in these rigid ways helps lift the entire educational system. Critics say the measurements do nothing but encourage “teach to the test” methods and narrow the scope of what instructors are able to teach if they want to have acceptable test results. These arguments are nothing new, but they are now seeing a new audience.

What if the same principles of K-12 standardized testing were applied to colleges and universities? Americans spend over $460 billion on higher educational pursuits every year, yet there is no official worldwide system in place to determine whether students are learning what they should, compared to other schools. In June, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development unveiled research on whether a global testing system for college students is possible. The group will continue to review its findings and decide later this year if it wants to push for implementation of the Assessment of Higher Education Learning Outcomes test, abbreviated as AHELO.

Right now the comparison system for colleges and universities lies in the many rankings that are released each year by sources like U.S. News & World Report and hundreds of bloggers who weigh in on the topic. The AHELO would be a “direct evaluation of student performance at the global level…across diverse cultures, languages and different types of institutions.” It would provide institutions feedback meant to help them “foster improvement in student learning outcomes.” In a nutshell, the test would not actually measure student achievements as much as shine the light on instructors that need some improvement.

To K-12 students, this sounds familiar. To college faculty, the idea is fraught with landmines. How can one test take into account so many variables in higher education across the globe? Would instructors be punished by the institution, or even worse held to some misguided accountability scale by peers, if students did not rank highly enough on an AHELO, or some other test? If college is a time for fostering critical thinking skills, would a standardized test take away some of that freedom?

College instructors and administrators are right to have doubts, and particularly before any testing mandates go into effect. Take the classic college entrance exams – the SAT and the ACT. Though research has found little correlation between results on these tests and actual knowledge or intelligence, they are a standard part of college admissions. It is more difficult to reverse a testing mandate than to fight it off at the outset.

It is easy to see why colleges and universities are leery of standardized testing, but K-12 instructors should be too. Presently, K-12 instructors guide students through the formative education years, dealing with standardized tests and other demands of contemporary teaching. Success with those students is ultimately determined by two other numbers: graduation rate and college placement. At that point, a K-12 teacher’s job is done, at least in theory. Adding another layer of teacher testing (cleverly disguised as core knowledge testing) at the college level could have an impact on K-12 instructors too.
ideological

If the AHELO is designed to “foster improvement” in the higher education schools that are tested, who is to say that those ideals of improvement will not then be extended to the K-12 schools that came beforehand? A student who demonstrates below-college-level proficiency in language or math would in theory not be the product of college that failed him or her – that student’s incompetency would be a result of a previous school, or schools. Could a global test for college actually negatively impact the K-12 schools that preceded it?

As with any measurement of teaching and learning, the AHELO and other similar initiatives need close scrutiny before becoming global law. I am not sure of the necessity of such a system and it will take some hard arguing by the other side to convince me otherwise.

Are you in favor of standardized testing in colleges and universities?

By Matthew Lynch

Several weeks ago, I discussed President Obama’s education record in my introduction to education class. In particular, we talked about P-20 education, which begins in preschool and ends with graduate school. Predictably, the debate became quite contentious. Most of us had to agree to disagree on the most central points of educational politics. Partly in response to this debate, though, I decided to write an assessment of Obama’s education record in several areas of P-20 education issuing a letter grade (A-F) to make my position on his record abundantly clear.

To start things off, let’s take a look at the president’s major postsecondary education initiatives.

Expansion of Community Colleges. In July, 2012, President Obama proposed the American Graduation Initiative, intended to put more money and planning into community colleges, helping to promote more affordable options and high levels of training for all prospective college students. As part of this initiative, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act will pour $2 billion over the course of four years into an expansion of career training at community colleges, focusing on the high-demand health care field.

According to the White House website, the goals of the Obama community college program include:

• Teaching basic skills through remedial and adult education.
• Further developing online courses for more student flexibility and accelerated programs.
• Creating educational partnerships to give students more course options.
• Building partnerships with businesses that would allow worksite education that has current labor market emphasis.

Enforcement of the DREAM Act. The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors, or DREAM, Act will an estimated 2.1 million young people in the U.S. with access to an education and amnesty from deportation. While Obama’s administration has stressed the ethical points of this act, rightfully so, it offers may economic benefits for America as well.

The Center for American Progress estimates that the DREAM Act will create 1.4 million new jobs by the year 2030 and that it will infuse some $329 billion into the U.S. economy.

Pell Grant Increases. The President has also pledged to double the amount of funding available in the form of Pell Grants over the next three years. Unlike student loans, Pell Grants do not need to be repaid. For the 2011–2012 school year, the maximum award amount was $5,550.
While a Pell Grant cannot cover all of the college costs, it goes a long way towards covering in-state tuition or community college courses. All students can apply for the program, too, and students receive aid awards based on financial need andcost of attendance.

By 2017, the maximum amount awarded to students is expected to rise to $5,975. By 2021, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 820,000 more Pell Grant awards will also be available. The money will come, in part, from restructuring to the distribution of federal student loans. By implementing a direct student loan program, instead of a bank-subsidized one, $68 billion will also be saved by the year 2020.

Higher College Tax Credits. The Obama-Biden administration plans to triple the current tax credits available to students and parents of students paying college expenses, too. The American Opportunity Tax Credit gives a $2,500 tax credit maximum per student and students can claim it for four years.

According to the IRS, up to 40 percent of the credit is refundable, up to $1,000, to people that file even if no taxes are owed. In addition to courses and fees, the new tax credit also covers related costs like books, supplies and required class materials.

Income-Based Loan Repayment. President Obama has often said that he believes that paying for college should not overwhelm graduates. As a reflection of this, he has pledged to expand income-based repayment options to keep the bills from college from becoming unmanageable. Around two-thirds of college students have debt of over $23,000 upon graduation. This can be especially difficult for students that want to enter public service jobs and those who face unexpected financial hardships like unemployment or serious illness.

Beginning in 2014, students can limit payments to 10 percent of income – a reduction from 15 percent in the previous law – which means a reduction of $110 per month for unmarried borrowers that owe $20,000 and make $30,000 per year. An estimated 1 million borrowers will be positively impacted by this change in repayment options. In addition, borrowers that make monthly payments will be allowed debt forgiveness after 20 years. Public service workers like nurses, teachers, and military employees will receive debt forgiveness after just 10 years.

This concludes Part I of “Grading Obama on Higher Education.” In Part II, I will continue to assesses President Obama’s performance in the area of higher education..

By Matthew Lynch

Several weeks ago, I discussed President Obama’s education record in my introduction to education class. In particular, we talked about P-20 education, which begins in preschool and ends with graduate school. Predictably, the debate became quite contentious. Most of us had to agree to disagree on the most central points of educational politics. Partly in response to this debate, though, I decided to write an assessment of Obama’s education record in several areas of P-20 education issuing a letter grade (A-F) to make my position on his record abundantly clear.

Here is part II of my assessment of the president’s major initiatives in postsecondary education.

Plans to Make College More Affordable. While not a direct K-12 initiative, the President’s desire to make college education affordable for all Americans will impact future K-12 classrooms. In August, 2013, the President announced plans to assign a ratings systems to colleges by the 2015 school year, factoring tuition, graduation rate, debt and earnings ratios of graduates, and percentage of low-income students.

The grand plan? To base the amount of federal financial aid colleges receive on the rankings system by 2018. The overall principle is not to call out colleges but rather to make them more accountable to students, to ensure that every American is able to attend college if they want to. Long term, this initiative aims to enhance teacher quality in the classrooms, particularly in urban settings. Having more lower-income college graduates should enhance the entire education system and the college scorecard initiative is a step in that direction based on research, including evidence suggesting that the most effective teachers are generally those who come from the same background

Recently, President Obama also made waves when he visited three college campuses and talked about the possibility of implementing a rating system to provide the public with greater details about the total cost, graduation rates, and alumni earnings of individual colleges and universities. Students choosing schools with higher ratings would have more access to Pell Grants and affordable loan programs. The plan is twofold. First it aims to put more useful information into the hands of consumers. Second, it aims to provide better affordability for young people who seek out higher education.

The rising cost of a college degree has been a concern of the Obama administration throughout both terms in the White House. College graduates in 2010 left their schools with an average of $26,000 in debt, leading to higher student loan debt in America than credit card debt.

College Scorecard Proposal. Obama’s “college scorecard” proposal is just one more step in the right direction. The system aims to make colleges more accountable to the federal government. Right now federal student aid is doled out mainly on college enrollment numbers, to the tune of $150 billion annually, and there is no accountability for that money.

Numerous publications claim to have the perfect formula for ranking the “best colleges and universities” but none are officially sanctioned by the government. The President’s ranking plan would avoid the fluff of other rating systems and address the core of educational matters: cost, graduation rates, and employment rates for graduates.

The college ranking plan aims to benefit minority students in particular as well. Though minority college student numbers are rising, 61 percent of college students in 2010 were considered Caucasian compared to just 14 percent Black students, 13 percent Hispanic students and 6 percent Asian or Pacific Islander students. Based on these statistics alone, minority students are at a disadvantage when it comes to attending and graduating from college.

A rankings system providing more grant money and more affordable loan options to students aims to make the dream of a college a reality to more minorities. As more first-generation minorities attend colleges, choosing schools with high graduation rates (many of which likely have strong guidance policies in place) and good job placement will mean more career successes. Not only does the plan aim to drive down individual costs of college attendance, but it aims to ensure that those same students complete their college training and find work. A ranking system with federal oversight will aim to put pressure on institutions of higher learning to perform well, benefitting attendees.

Solely on higher education record, I will have to give President Obama an A. The Obama administration’s education agenda began in the midst of one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression. Since his inauguration, President Obama and Arne Duncan have aggressively tackled the tough problems in higher education, and have made genuine progress. He has certainly earned his A in my opinion.

Several weeks ago, I discussed President Obama’s education record in my introduction to education class. In particular, we talked about P-20 education, which begins in preschool and ends with graduate school. Predictably, the debate became quite contentious. Most of us had to agree to disagree on the most central points of educational politics. Partly in response to this debate, though, I decided to write an assessment of Obama’s education record in several areas of P-20 education issuing a letter grade (A-F) to make my position on his record abundantly clear.

Of course, Obama has preached the importance of investing in education throughout his professional career. “Countries that out-educate us today,” he once said, “will out-compete us tomorrow.” The core of his plans for education is to provide all students with the same opportunity to reach high levels of proficiency. Whereas students have not had access to the same educational pathway across the board, lower achievement outcomes readily accepted among disadvantaged students, Obama has promoted education equity and held all children to the same high standards.

In a bid to achieve educational equality, Obama has implemented a number of education reform initiatives as follows:

Race to the Top. In education reform, Obama started his presidency with a proverbial bang. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) allocated $5 billion for early childhood programs, and $77 billion for reforms to support elementary and secondary education. ARRA also funds Obama’s education reform magnum opus, Race to the Top, which aims to sustain successful teachers and principals in school districts across the nation. Race to the Top, funded by ARRA, is also responsible for the adoption of common K-12 teaching standards. Per the competitive component of this ‘race’, states receive points for fulfilling certain criteria, such as performance-based standards for teachers and principals, showing fidelity to nationwide standards, encouraging charter schools, and the like. At least, this is how it works in theory. Critics of Race to the Top argue that its emphasis on high-stakes testing is untrustworthy – and I am inclined to agree. Generally speaking, though, the

Race to the Top initiative has raised standards for learning and emphasized college and career readiness. Each year, the program gives even more in federal funding to states that prepare plans for reforming their student offerings. The program has allocated more than $4 billion among 19 states for developing plans to improve learning standards, teacher effectiveness, and struggling schools. The states granted the funds represent 42 percent of all low-income students in the nation, too, making the initiative an effective way to close the achievement gap and equalize funding in areas where schools may struggle based on their geographical location.

Promise Neighborhoods. In 2010, President Obama another important educational initiative known as the Promise Neighborhood Grants The Promise Neighborhoods Grants supported cradle-to-career services intended to improve the educational attainment and healthy development of children. The program aims to provide students in Promise Neighborhoods with access to effective schools and well-built networks of parental and community support, preparing them to receive an exceptional education and effectively transition to college and a career. Patterned after Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children’s Zone, Promise Neighborhoods are a “promising” reinvention of an existing educational innovation.

80% High School Graduation Rate. The latest data on high school graduation shows that the U.S. Education system has an 80% graduation rate.(for the 2010–2011 school year). Collectively, though, America is far from a plateau when it comes to graduation rates. When it comes to our knowledge and potential to learn more, too, we have plenty of room for growth. As the K-12 landscape continues to evolve to meet the needs of a growingly diverse group of learners, educators must be ready to adjust and help students reach their full potentials, starting with the basic right of an earned high school diploma.

STEM Education Reform. The President was not only vocal about the need for stronger programs in science, technology, engineering and math but he actually put some money behind his words. His 2014 budget includes $3.1 billion in investments in federal STEM programs – an increase of nearly 7 percent over the budget from two years ago. Of that $3.1 billion, too, Obama has designated some $80 million to recruit 100,000 qualified educators. He has also earmarked another $35 million to launch a pilot STEM Master Teacher Corps. The rest of the money will go to supporting undergraduate STEM education programs and investment in breakthrough research on best teaching practices for STEM subjects, helping to prepare today’s students for the worldwide workforce.

When Obama assumed the presidency, a nasty set of problems confronted him in K-12 education. Given the nature and sheer number of challenges, his administration has done a great deal to foster positive change and progress with education reforms like Race to the Top and Promise Neighborhoods. Overall, therefore, I think the president deserves an A, which reflects his solid education reform record as Commander-in-Chief. I am sure many will disagree with this assessment, but it is my opinion in light of the above mentioned policies. I am looking forward to reading your comments and I encourage you to use this article as a springboard for discussion.

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