edreform

Is charter school fraud the next Enron?

Preston Green III, University of Connecticut

In 2001, Texas-based energy giant Enron shocked the world by declaring bankruptcy. Thousands of employees lost their jobs, and investors lost billions.

As a scholar who studies the legal and policy issues pertaining to school choice, I’ve observed that the same type of fraud that occurred at Enron has been cropping up in the charter school sector. A handful of school officials have been caught using the Enron playbook to divert funding slated for these schools into their own pockets.

As school choice champions like Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos push to make charter schools a larger part of the educational landscape, it’s important to understand the Enron scandal and how charter schools are vulnerable to similar schemes.

What is a related-party transaction?

Enron’s downfall was caused largely by something called “related-party transactions.” Understanding this concept is crucial for grasping how charter schools may also be in danger.

Related-party transactions are business arrangements between companies with close associations: It could be between two companies owned or managed by the same group or it could be between one large company and a smaller company that it owns. Although related-party transactions are legal, they can create severe conflicts of interest, allowing those in power to profit from employees, investors and even taxpayers.

This is what happened at Enron. Because Enron wanted to look good to investors, the company created thousands of “special purpose entities” to hide its debt. Because of these off-the-books partnerships, Enron was able to artificially boost its profits, thus tricking investors.

Enron’s Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow managed several of these special purpose entities, benefiting from his position of power at the expense of the company’s shareholders. For instance, these companies paid him US$30 million in management fees – far more than his Enron salary.

Fastow also conspired with other Enron employees to pocket another $30 million from one of these entities, and he moved $4.5 million from this scheme into his family foundation.

Enron’s collapse revealed the weaknesses of the gatekeepers – including boards of directors and the Securities and Exchange Commission – that are responsible for protecting the markets. Because of lax accountability and federal deregulation, these watchdogs failed to detect the dangers posed by Fastow’s conflict of interest until it was too late. Congress responded by passing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which tightened the requirements for oversight.

Enron employees lost their jobs and billions of dollars in pension benefits.
AP Photo/Pat Sullivan

How do related-party transactions occur in charter schools?

Forty-four states and the District of Columbia have legislation that allows for charter schools. Just like public schools, charter schools receive public funding. However, unlike public schools, charter schools are exempt from many laws governing financial transparency.

Without strict regulation, some bad actors have been able to take advantage of charter schools as an opportunity for private investment. In the worst cases, individuals have been able to use related-party transactions to fraudulently funnel public money intended for charter schools into other business ventures that they control.

Such was the case with Ivy Academia, a Los Angeles-area charter school. The co-founders, Yevgeny Selivanov and Tatayana Berkovich, also owned a private preschool that shared facilities with the charter school. The preschool entered into a sublease for the facilities at a monthly rent of $18,390 – the fair-market value. The preschool then assigned the sublease to the charter school at a monthly rent of $43,870.

The Los Angeles district attorney’s office charged the husband-and-wife team with multiple counts of fraud. Selivanov was sentenced to nearly five years in jail in 2013.

Fraudulent related-party transactions can also occur between education management organizations (EMOs) and their affiliates. EMOs are for-profit or nonprofit entities that sometimes manage charter schools, and might also own smaller companies that could provide services to those schools.

For example, Imagine Schools is a nonprofit EMO that runs 63 charter schools enrolling 33,000 students across the country. It also owns SchoolHouse Finance, a for-profit company that, among other things, handles real estate for many of Imagine’s charter schools. Though charter schools typically spend around 14 percent of their funding on rent, some of the Imagine Schools were paying SchoolHouse Finance up to 40 percent of their funding for rent.

One of the charter schools operated by Imagine Schools, Renaissance Academy in Kansas City, sued the company for charging it excessive rent. In 2015, a federal judge agreed, ordering Imagine Schools to pay almost $1 million in damages to Renaissance. The court’s ruling suggested that Imagine Schools was essentially taking advantage of the charter school: The EMO profited from the excessive rent and failed to tell the school’s board of directors how the cost might disrupt the school’s ability to pay for textbooks and teacher salaries.

Students at Renaissance Academy charter school work on a paper recycling project. Renaissance Academy shut down in 2012 and was later ordered to receive $1 million in damages from its EMO, Imagine Schools.
AP Photo/Orlin Wagner

The problem could get worse

Because of insufficient oversight, Fastow’s fraudulent use of related-party transactions at Enron was not stopped until it was too late. Similarly, the Ivy Academia and Renaissance Academy examples reveal insufficient checks and balances in the charter school sector. In both cases, the monitors responsible for protecting charter schools found nothing wrong with the rental agreements.

It might be tempting to conclude that Ivy Academia and Renaissance Academy stories are anecdotal – that fear of widespread abuse of related-party transactions is overblown. However, there have been dozens of allegations of similar transgressions, including against industry giants such as K12 Inc. and Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School. Though only a handful of these allegations have resulted in the removal of the charter school operators, related-party fraud in the charter school sector is an emerging issue.

In September 2016, the Education Department’s inspector general released the findings of an audit of several dozen charter schools detailing significant problems with related-party transactions.

The report also made several recommendations for additional oversight. Such protection could come at the state level (e.g., providing guidance to states regarding charter school contractual agreements with EMOs) or at the federal level (e.g., improving the Department’s own monitoring of charter school-EMO relationships).

However, Trump has generally expressed a dislike of federal regulations, and DeVos, who played a major role in the development of Michigan’s charter school law, has successfully fought attempts to increase oversight of Michigan’s charter school sector. With such anti-regulatory stances, it seems unlikely that Trump or DeVos will support the kind of oversight that’s needed to protect charter schools.

The ConversationThis aversion to regulation at the federal level could cost taxpayers millions of dollars and could result in the closing or disruption of schools – potentially damaging the education of students they serve. Since charter schools are growing fastest in low-income and minority communities, these children stand to be hurt the most.

Preston Green III, John and Carla Klein Professor of Urban Education, Professor of Educational Leadership and Law, University of Connecticut

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

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.

  1. 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.
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
  7. Unimersiv – History comes alive with the apps developed by Unimersiv. Students can explore ancient Greece, the Titanic or the Egyptian Mysteries.
  8. InMind– Neurons and brain tissue have never looked more realistic. Travel into the brain and learn about anatomy with this great app.
  9. 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
  10. Earth AR – See the globe from new unseen angles. Motion detection and zooming capabilities will make geography more interactive.
  11. 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
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. King Tut VR – Explore the tomb of the legendary Egyptian king and get lost in the secret chambers full of hieroglyphics and treasures
  16. Flashcards- Animal Alphabet – Made for younger students, this immersive flashcard game teaches students words while bringing it all together with some colorful animal friends
  17. 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
  18. EON Experience – This collection of VR lessons encapsulates everything from physics to history. Students or teachers can create their VR lessons from preloaded content.
  19. 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.
  20. 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?

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 YearRound 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.

 

 

18 Reasons the U.S. Education System is Failing

Once upon a time, enthusiasts designed a formal education system to meet the economic demands of the industrial revolution. Fast forward to today and, with the current global economic climate, it seems apparent that the now established education system is unable to meet the needs of our hyper-connected society – a society that is in a constant state of evolution. Let’s examine 18 problems that prevent the US education system from regaining its former preeminence. Check out ExamSnap for all your exam needs.  

Parents are not involved enough. Of all the things out of the control of teachers, this one is perhaps the most frustrating. Time spent in the classroom is simply not enough for teachers to instruct every student, to teach them what they need to know. There must, inevitably, be some interaction outside school hours. Of course, students at a socio-economic disadvantage often struggle in school, particularly if parents lack higher levels of education. But students from middle and upper class families aren’t off the hook, either. The demands of careers and an over-dependence on schools put higher-class kids at risk too when it comes to the lack of parental involvement in academics.

  1. Schools are closing left and right. It’s been a rough year for public schools. Many have found themselves on the chopping block. Parents, students and communities as a whole feel targeted, even if school board members are quick to cite unbiased numbers. There is no concrete way to declare a winner in these cases, either. Sometimes, a school closing is simply inevitable but communities should first look for other solutions. Instead of shutting down underutilized public schools – icons of the community – districts should consider other neighborhood uses, such as a community center or adult education classes. Closing public schools should not be a short-sighted procedure. The decision should focus on the only investment that really matters: a quality public education for all our nation’s children.
  2. Our schools are overcrowded. The smaller the class, the better the individual student experience. A study by the National Center for Education Statistics found that 14 percent of U.S. schools exceed capacity. At a time where children need more attention than ever to succeed, overcrowded classrooms are making it even tougher to learn and tougher still for teachers to be effective.
  3. Technology comes with its downsides. I am an advocate for technology in the classroom. I think that ignoring the educational opportunities that technology has afforded us puts kids at a disadvantage. being said, screen culture overall has made the jobs of teachers much more difficult. Education has become synonymous with entertainment in many ways. Parents are quick to download educational games as soon as kids have the dexterity to operate a touch screen, and with the best of intentions. The quick-hit way that children are learning academics before and during their K-12 careers makes it even more difficult for teachers to keep up in the classroom setting, particularly since each student’s knowledge base and technological savvy varies.
  4. There is a lack of diversity in gifted education. The “talented and gifted” label is one bestowed upon the brightest and most advanced students. Beginning in early elementary grades, TAG programs separate student peers for the sake of individualized learning initiatives. Though the ideology is sound, the practice of it is often a monotone, unattractive look at contemporary American public schools. District schools need to find ways to better recognize different types of learning talent and look beyond the typical “gifted” student model. The national push to make talented and gifted programs better mirror the contemporary and ever-evolving student body is a step in the right direction. Real change happens on a smaller scale though – in individual districts, schools and TAG programs. That progress must start with understanding of the makeup of a particular student body and include innovative ways to include all students in TAG learning initiatives.
  5. School spending is stagnant, even in our improving economy. As the U.S. economy continues to improve, according to news headlines, one area is still feeling the squeeze from the recession years: K-12 public school spending. A report this month from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that 34 states are contributing less funding on a per student basis than they did prior to the recession years. Since states are responsible for 44 percent of total education funding in the U.S., these dismal numbers mean a continued crack down on school budgets despite an improving economy. If we cannot find the funding for our public schools, how can we expect things like the achievement gap to close or high school graduation rates to rise? It was understandable that budgets had to be slashed when the bottom dropped out of the economy. Now we are in a more stable place, though, it is time to get back to funding what matters most: the education of our K-12 students.
  6. We are still using the teacher training methods of yesterday. With respect to the students of the past, modern classrooms are full of sophisticated youngsters that show up with a detailed view of the world formed from more than home life experiences. Instant access to information from instant a child can press a touchscreen on a Smartphone and widespread socialization from as young as six weeks old in the form of childcare atmospheres – kids arrive at Kindergarten with less naivety than previous generations. Teachers don’t, in other words, get a clean slate. Instead, they get young minds cluttered with random information and ideas, all of which need fostering or remediating.
  7. There is a lack of teacher education innovation. It stands to reason that if students are changing, teachers must change too. More specifically, it is time to modify teacher education to reflect the demands of the modern K – 12 classrooms. There are policy and practice changes taking place all over the world – many driven by teachers – that address the cultural shifts in the classroom. Public education in America needs teachers who are better trained to meet the needs of specific student populations, understand the necessary role of distance learning, and are willing to speak up to facilitate classroom change. Without these teachers, effective reform to meet global demand is not possible.
  8. Some students are lost to the school-to-prison pipeline. Sadly, over half of black young men who attend urban high schools do not earn a diploma. Of these dropouts, too, nearly 60 percent will go to prison at some point. Perhaps there is no real connection between these two statistics, or the eerily similar ones associated with young Latino men. Are these young people bad apples, destined to fail academically and then to live a life of crime? If some of the theories of genetic predisposition are true, perhaps these young men never stood a chance at success and have simply accepted their lots in life. But what if those answers, all of them, are just cop-outs? What if scoffing at a connection between a strong education and a life lived on the straight and narrow is an easy way to bypass the real issues in K-12 learning? Students who are at risk of dropping out of high school or turning to crime need more than a good report card. They need alternative suggestions on living a life that rises above their current circumstances. For a young person to truly have a shot at an honest life, he or she has to believe in the value of an education and its impact on good citizenship. That belief system has to come from direct conversations about making smart choices with trusted adults and peers.
  9. There is a nationwide college-gender gap, and surprisingly, we are not focusing on it. If you have been following education hot button issues for any length of time, you’ve likely read about the nationwide push to better encourage girls in areas like science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The thought is that by showing young women that these topics are just as appropriate for them as their male peers, more women will find lasting careers in these traditionally male-dominated fields. I’m all for more women in the STEM workplace but with all this focus in one area, are educators neglecting an even larger gender gap issue? I wonder how much of this trend is based on practicality and how much is based on a lingering social convention that women need to “prove” themselves when it comes to the workforce. Do women simply need a degree to land a job in any field? If so, the opposite is certainly not true for men – at least not yet. Will the young men in our classrooms today have a worse quality of life if they do not attend college – or will it be about the same?
  10. We still do not know how to handle high school dropouts. It seems that every time the issue of high school dropouts is discussed, it all centers on money. U.S. Census Statistics tell us that 38 percent of high school dropouts fall below the poverty line, compared with 18 percent of total households in every demographic. Dropouts are also 40 percent more likely to rent their residences and spend $450 less per month on housing costs than the overall population. Only around 60 percent of dropouts own vehicles and they spend over $300 less on entertainment annually than average Americans. It’s clear that a high school diploma is in fact the ticket to higher earnings, at least on a collective level. The negative financial ramifications of dropping out of high school cannot be denied, but the way they are over-emphasized seems like a worn-out tactic to me. Instead of focusing on students as earners, we really need to value them as learners so that we can encourage them to finish their high school education.
  11. We have not achieved education equity. Equity in education has long been an ideal. It’s an ideal celebrated in a variety of contexts, too. Even the Founding Fathers celebrated education as an ideal – something to which every citizen ought to be entitled. Unfortunately, though, the practice of equity in education has been less than effective. Equity, in the end, is a difficult ideal to maintain and many strategies attempting to maintain it have fallen far short in the implementation. To achieve equity, school systems need to have an approach for analyzing findings about recommended shifts in learning approaches and objectives. These approaches should also help teachers and administrators understand not what they have to avoid but what it is that they can do to achieve optimal equity moving forward.
  12. Technology brings a whole new dimension to cheating. Academic dishonesty is nothing new. As long as there have been homework assignments and tests, there have been cheaters. The way that cheating looks has changed over time, though. Technology has made it easier than ever. Perhaps the most interesting caveat of modern-day cheating in U.S. classrooms is that students often do not think they have done anything wrong. Schools must develop anti-cheating policies that include technology and those policies must be updated consistently. Teachers must stay vigilant, too, when it comes to what their students are doing in classrooms and how technology could be playing a negative role in the learning process. Parents must also talk to their kids about the appropriate ways to find academic answers and alert them to unethical behaviors that may seem innocent in their own eyes.
  13. We still struggle with making teacher tenure benefit both students and teachers. One of the most contested points of teacher contracts is the issue of tenure. Hardline education reformers argue that tenure protects underperforming teachers, which ends up punishing the students. Teachers unions challenge (among other reasons) that with the ever-changing landscape of K-12 education, including evaluation systems, tenure is necessary to protect the jobs of excellent teachers who could otherwise be ousted unfairly. It can often be a sticking point – and one that can lead to costly time out of classrooms, as recently seen in large school systems like New York City and Chicago. Now, I’m not suggesting that teachers just “give up” but I would support adjusting the expectations for tenure. It seems an appropriate step in the right direction for teachers in all types of schools. That energy then can be redirected towards realistic and helpful stipulations in teachers’ contracts that benefit the entire industry.
  14. More of our schools need to consider year-round schooling. Does it work? The traditional school year, with roughly three months of vacation days every summer, was first implemented when America was an agricultural society. The time off was not implemented to accommodate contemporary concerns, like children needing “down time” to decompress and “be kids.” The system was born out of economic necessity. In fact, the first schools that went against the summers-off version of the academic calendar were in urban areas that did not revolve around the agricultural calendar, like Chicago and New York, as early as the mid-1800s. It was much later, however, that the idea as a whole gained momentum. Overall, year-round schooling seems to show a slight advantage academically to students enrolled, but the numbers of students are not high enough to really get a good read on it at this point. What does seem clear, however, is that at-risk students do far better without a long summer break, and other students are not harmed by the year-round schedule.
  15. We are still wrestling the achievement gap. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Education released student performance data in its National Assessment for Educational Progress report. The data is compiled every two years and it assesses reading and math achievements for fourth and eighth graders. This particular report also outlines differences between students based on racial and socioeconomic demographics. The data points to the places in the U.S. that still struggle with inequality in student opportunity and performance, otherwise known as the achievement gap. The achievement gap will likely always exist in some capacity, in much the same way that the U.S. high school dropout rate will likely never make it down to zero. This doesn’t mean it is a lost cause, of course. Every student who succeeds, from any demographic, is another victory in K-12 education and it benefits society as a whole. Better recognition by every educator, parent and citizen of the true problem that exists is a start; actionable programs are the next step.
  16. We need to consider how school security measures affect students. In theory, parents and educators would do anything to keep students safe, whether those students are pre-Kindergartners or wrapping up a college career. Nothing is too outlandish or over-the-top when it comes to protecting our kids and young adults. Metal detectors, security cameras, more police presence in school hallways, gated campuses – they all work toward the end goal of sheltering students and their educators, protecting some of the most vulnerable of our citizens. Emotions aside, though, how much does school security really increase actual safety? Do school security efforts actually hinder the learning experience? It sounds good to taut the virtues of tighter policies on school campuses but is it all just empty rhetoric? Given the fact that state spending per student is lower than at the start of the recession, how much should schools shell out on security costs? Perhaps the best investment we can make to safeguard our students and educators is in personal vigilance. Perhaps less reliance on so-called safety measures would lead to higher alertness.
  17. We need to make assistive technology more available for students with disabilities. A key to improving the educational experience for students with disabilities is better accommodations in schools and continued improvements in assistive technology. Assistive technology in K-12 classrooms, by definition, is designed to “improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disability.” While the word “technology” automatically conjures up images of cutting-edge electronics, some assistive technology is possible with just simple accommodations. Whether high-tech or simple in design, assistive technology has the ability to transform the learning experiences for the children who benefit. Assistive technology is important for providing a sound education for K-12 students with disabilities but benefits the greater good of the country, too. Nearly one-fourth of a specific student population is not being properly served and with so many technological advances, that is a number I believe can drop. Assistive technology in simple and complex platforms has the ability to lift the entire educational experience and provide a better life foundation for K-12 students with disabilities.

Some of these reasons are well-known and long-standing issues. However, others—such as the emergence of a screen culture—are new and even somewhat unexpected challenges. However, the nature of each issue does not matter. All of them are standing in the way of our becoming globally competitive.

Can you think of any reasons the U.S. educational systems are failing?

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

Year-Round Schooling: How it Affects Students

The traditional school year, with roughly three months of vacation days every summer was first implemented when America was an agricultural society. The time off was not implemented to accommodate contemporary concerns, like children needing “downtime” to decompress and “be kids,” but was born out of economic necessity. In fact, the first schools that went against the summers-off version of the academic calendar were in urban areas that did not revolve around the agricultural calendar, like Chicago and New York, as early as the mid-1800s. It was much later, however, that the idea as a whole gained momentum.

A survey of school decision-makers in 1971 found that 84 percent of respondents felt that year-round schooling would be in all U.S. schools within the next 15 years. As we know now, those respondents were wrong, but it makes sense that they would feel that way. Two districts in San Diego were the first to implement year-round academic calendars in 1971, and by 1974, there were another 13 in the state that followed suit. Even today, California and its neighbors lead the year-round trend, with four-fifths of all of these school schedules in the nation happening in Western states. Over half of them are implemented in California. In total, over 2 million U.S. students attend school on year-round schedules every year in around 3,000 schools in 46 states.

So what impact does this non-traditional school schedule have on the people it most affects – the students?

Academic strides

A long-time thorn in the side of K-12 educators has been the “summer slide,” or the theory that knowledge is lost when students get so much time off (like in the summer months) from academic pursuits. The National Summer Learning Association often cites decades of research that support the claim that students do forget or unlearn things they have learned when too much time off is given between classroom sessions. A study released in 2007 by The Ohio State University, however, found that there are no differences in learning between students who attend school year-round, and those who are on a traditional schedule.

While the overall student numbers show no significant differences in learning for better or worse, at-risk students tend to do better in year-round setups. Studies have found that disadvantaged students lose about 27 percent more of their learning gains in the summer months than their peers. By being in school the same number of days, but with shorter breaks, these students can keep their minds on a learning track that may not otherwise be fostered at home in the off-months.

Socialization

In districts that use year-round schedules, there are two models: single track and multi-track. In the latter, students are in groups that place them on different schedules and different vacation times. The main benefit of dividing students in this way is that those who need extra or remedial help can attend school on the off days since there are still teachers on campus. It is similar to the concept of summer school, but takes place throughout the year and may only require one or two weeks here and there, instead of an entire summer’s time.

Parents are split into two groups when it comes to the way students’ socialization is impacted by year-round schooling. Some say that kids seem more interested in school without the stop-and-go routine of traditional academic calendars. Others complain that students on year-round schedules, particularly multi-track ones, miss out on time with their friends and come to resent school as a result. Overall, the social growth of students is thought not to change much since they are still in session the same number of days each year and have shorter gaps in time apart from their peers.

Overall, year-round schooling seems to show a slight advantage academically to students enrolled, but the numbers of students are not high enough to get a good read on it at this point. What does seem clear, however, is that at-risk students do fare better without a long summer break, and the year-round schedule does not harm other students.

Next, I will look at the way year-round schooling impacts the teaching profession.

Do you think year-round schooling benefits or harms students?

There’s more than practice to becoming a world-class expert

D. Zachary Hambrick, Michigan State University and Fredrik Ullén, Karolinska Institute

Some people are dramatically better at activities like sports, music and chess than other people. Take the basketball great Stephen Curry. This past season, breaking the record he set last year by over 40 percent, Curry made an astonishing 402 three-point shots – 126 more than his closest challenger.

What explains this sort of exceptional performance? Are experts “born,“ endowed with a genetic advantage? Are they entirely “made” through training? Or is there some of both?

What earlier studies show

This question is the subject of a long-running debate in psychology, and is the focus of the new book “Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise” by Florida State University psychologist Anders Ericsson and science writer Robert Pool.

In a 1993 study, Ericsson and his colleagues recruited violinists from an elite Berlin music academy and asked them to estimate the amount of time they had spent engaging in “deliberate practice” across their musical careers.

Deliberate practice, as Ericsson and his colleagues have defined it, includes training activities that are specifically designed to improve a person’s performance in an endeavor like playing an instrument. These activities require a high level of concentration and aren’t inherently enjoyable. Consequently, the amount of deliberate practice even experts can engage in is limited to a few hours a day.

Researchers found that skill level correlated with deliberate practice. Elliot Margolies, CC BY-NC-ND

Ericsson and his colleagues’ major discovery was that there was a positive correlation between the skill level of the violinists and the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated. As deliberate practice increased, skill level increased.

For example, by age 20, the most accomplished group of violinists had accumulated an average of about 10,000 hours of deliberate practice – or about 5,000 hours more than the average for the least accomplished group. In a second study, Ericsson and colleagues replicated the finding in pianists.

On the basis of the studies, these researchers concluded that deliberate practice, rather than talent, is the determining factor for expert performance. They wrote,

We reject any important role for innate ability.

In a recent interview, Ericsson further explained that

we can’t find any sort of limiting factors that people really can’t surpass with the right kind of training. With the exception of body size: You can’t train to be taller.

Is it all about training?

Based on this evidence, the writer Malcolm Gladwell came up with his “10,000-hour rule” – the maxim that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert in a field. In the scientific literature, however, Ericsson’s views have been highly controversial from the start.

In an early critique, Harvard psychologist and multiple intelligence theorist Howard Gardner commented that Ericsson’s view required a “blindness” to earlier research on skill acquisition. Developmental psychologist Ellen Winner added that “Ericsson’s research demonstrated the importance of hard work but did not rule out the role of innate ability.” Renowned giftedness researcher Françoys Gagné noted that Ericsson’s view “misses many significant variables.” Cognitive neuroscientist Gary Marcus observed,

Practice does indeed matter – a lot and in surprising ways. But it would be a logical error to infer from the importance of practice that talent is somehow irrelevant, as if the two were in mutual opposition.

How important is training?

For our part, working with colleagues around the world, we have focused on empirically testing Ericsson and colleagues’ theory to find out more about the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in various domains.

A 2014 study led by Case Western Reserve University psychologist Brooke Macnamara used a statistical tool called “meta-analysis” to aggregate the results of 88 earlier studies involving over 11,000 participants, including studies that Ericsson and colleagues had used to argue for the importance of deliberate practice.

Each study included a measure of some activity that could be interpreted as deliberate practice, as well as a measure of skill level in a domain such as music, chess or sports.

It isn’t all about practice.Ahd Photography, CC BY-NC

The study revealed that deliberate practice and skill level correlated positively with each other. In other words, the higher the skill level, the greater the amount of deliberate practice. However, the correlation wasn’t so strong as to warrant the claim that differences in skill level are largely due to deliberate practice.

In concrete terms, a key implication of this discovery is that people may require vastly different amounts of deliberate practice to reach the same level of skill.

A more recent study synthesized the results of 33 studies to understand the relationship between deliberate practice and performance in sports at a more detailed level.

One important finding was that deliberate practice lost its predictive power at the highest levels of skill. That is, on average, there was almost no difference in accumulated amount of deliberate practice between elite-level athletes, such as Olympians, and subelite athletes, such as contestants in national championships.

Training isn’t the only factor

As we discuss in a recent review article with behavioral geneticist Miriam Mosing, this evidence tells us that expertise – like virtually all phenomena that psychologists study – is determined by multiple factors.

Training history is certainly an important factor in explaining why some people are more successful than others. No one becomes a world-class performer without practice. People aren’t literally born with the sort of specialized knowledge that underpins skill in domains like music and chess. However, it now seems clear that training isn’t the only important factor in acquiring expertise. Other factors must matter, too.

What might these other factors be? There are likely many, including basic abilities and capacities that are known to be influenced by genes.

In a 2010 study with psychologist Elizabeth Meinz, 57 pianists ranging in skill from beginner to professional estimated the amount of deliberate practice they had accumulated across their musical careers, and took tests of “working memory capacity.” Working memory capacity is the ability to focus one’s attention on information critical to performing a task by filtering out distractions.

Working memory capacity made a difference while sight-reading. woodleywonderworks, CC BY

The pianists then attempted to sight-read pieces of music (that is, to play the pieces without preparation) on a piano in the lab. The major finding was that working memory capacity was a factor in the pianists’ success in the sight-reading task, even among those with thousands of hours of deliberate practice.

Our research on twins further reveals that the propensity to practice music is influenced by genetic factors. This research compares identical twins, who share 100 percent of their genes, to fraternal twins, who on average share only 50 percent of their genes. A key finding of this work is that identical twins are typically more similar to each other in their practice histories, as well as their scores on tests of basic music aptitude, than fraternal twins are to each other. For example, it’s more likely to find a pair of identical twins who have both accumulated over 10,000 hours of practice than a pair of fraternal twins who have both accumulated this amount of practice.

This discovery indicates that, while extensive practice is necessary to become a highly skilled musician, genetic factors influence our willingness to put in that practice. More generally, this research suggests that we gravitate toward and persist at those activities that we have an aptitude for from the outset.

Research by other scientists is beginning to link expert performance to specific genes. In a groundbreaking series of molecular genetic studies, the University of Sydney geneticist Kathryn North and her colleagues found that the ACTN3 gene, which is expressed in fast-twitch muscle fibers, correlates with high-level success in sprinting events. Based on these findings, North and her colleagues have called ACTN3 a possible “gene for speed.”

How can people excel?

In view of this evidence, we have argued that the richness and complexity of expertise can never be fully understood by focusing on “nature” or “nurture.”

For us, the days of the “experts are born versus made” debate are over. The task before us is to understand the myriad ways that experts are born and made by developing and testing models of expertise that take into account all relevant factors, including not only training but also genetic influences.

From a practical perspective, we believe that this research will provide a scientific foundation for developing sound principles and procedures for helping people develop skills. As sports science research is already starting to demonstrate, it may one day be possible to give people accurate information about the activities in which they are likely to excel, and develop highly individualized training regimens to maximize people’s potential.

Far from discouraging people from following their dreams, this research promises to bring expert performance within the reach of a greater number of people than is currently the case.

The Conversation

D. Zachary Hambrick, Professor of Psychology, Michigan State University and Fredrik Ullén, Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute

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

4 Ways to Improve Parent Involvement in K-12 Learning

By Matthew Lynch

Students benefit when there are parent-school partnerships surrounding their school work. However, it is not always easy to promote such a culture of shared responsibility, especially given the great time demands placed on parents and teachers today. Schools may face difficulty in attaining an efficient collaborative framework among stakeholders, which include teachers, parents, students, the community, and the administration.  Trust between schools and parents, in particular, is vital for creating a healthy learning environment.

So what can be done to foster stronger relationships between parents and teachers, administrators and whole schools?

1. Encourage collaboration. In general, parents who are supported by regular interactive meetings with teachers often show greater trust levels in teacher-parent relationships. Schools can create an environment favorable for the development of teacher-parent relationships by sharing the responsibility of improving learning processes and the academic performance of children. Many schools that claim to support collaborative decision-making patterns hold complete decision-making authority in their own hands, which can reduce the positive influence of collaborative decision-making pattern. Let parents feel empowered in the learning paths of their kids by allowing them certain input and choices.

2.  Work toward creating a friendly school environment. A healthy and congenial school environment, with an enabling and flexible structure, can help develop trust between school administrators and parents.  Generally, education and school leaders try to generate a social framework that will help teachers, administrators, and parents resolve differences in a peaceful and supportive manner. Overall improvement of student performance can be the outcome of improved relationships between teachers and parents.

3.  Reduce bureaucratic barriers.  Many times, barriers are created that prevent teachers from developing effective student-teacher relationships and discourage parents from taking part in helping students develop their learning skills. A parent who feels that his or her input is not wanted may give up on trying to be an influential part of his or her child’s life. The bureaucratic system of schools should allow plenty of room for parent and student input – and then take that feedback seriously. The centralized or hierarchical authority of schools can be used to implement these supportive regulations and policies to enhance parental involvement. Both can work together for a better outcome for the students.

4. Respect the deep-rooted importance of family.  Parental involvement in education and its effect on the academic performance of a child requires recognizing the fact that parents are children’s first teachers. Home is the first school, and as such, it is the place where children learn an abundance of skills, knowledge, and attitudes, some of which supports what is taught in schools. It’s true that some parents are more involved in the academic strides of their children than others – but with the right encouragement, teachers and schools can give parents the tools and encouragement needed to help their children succeed to the next level.

When parents get involved with their children’s educations, the children tend to succeed academically, and tend to perform better on exams (which, as we all know, is certainly helpful to teachers). They miss fewer school days and tend to be more conscientious about completing school-related work outside of school.

Conversely, children whose families are not as involved in their school experiences are often unable to compete academically with peers, their attendance is less regular, and they are less likely to graduate from high school.  Clearly, any movement toward building a stronger relationship between schools and parents will have a positive impact on student performance. Involved parents are the key to success when it comes to the improvement of K-12 students inside classrooms – and teachers, administrators and schools should encourage parents to play that pivotal role.

 

 

 

Are liberal arts more valuable than STEM learning?

A liberal arts education that focuses on a broad range of topics, and is not vocationally-centric, is a bigger asset to today’s students than other trending tracks like STEM learning. That’s according to author Fareed Zakaria in his new book “In Defense of a Liberal Education.” Zakaria argues that the central focus of a liberal arts education is writing, and that “writing makes you think.”

In an interview with Forbes, Zakaria had this to say about his stance:

What a liberal education at its best does…is to allow people to range widely, to read widely, to explore their passions…I think that kind of breadth and the ability to feed your curiosity and indulge is incredibly important. It’s what, now in the corporate world, one would call synergy, or out of the box thinking, or the intersection of disciplines. This has always been a central part of what a liberal education has meant.

By having a liberal arts foundation, workers can then build on in other areas. Zakaria says that scientific thinking certainly has a place in American education but that there should be a “logical clarity and coherence to it.”

With all of the talk of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math learning as the wave of the future, Zakaria’s view and book are a refreshing reminder that writing and logic are still valuable. It goes back to the age-old concept that we must teach our students HOW to learn, and not just WHAT to learn. That’s the real way to ensure innovative and skilled future workers.

What do you think? Are liberal arts as important, less important or more important that STEM tactics?

 

More children are reading for pleasure than ever, National Literacy Trust finds

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

A guest post from VoicED

The National Literacy Trust’s annual survey has revealed that more children are reading for pleasure that ever before, with a notable increase in the number of children reading every day.

The survey revealed that the enjoyment and frequency of children reading is at its highest level for nine years.

Of the children surveyed, 54.4 per cent said that they enjoy reading either ‘very much’ or ‘quite a lot’. A further 35.5 per cent said that they only enjoyed reading a little bit. Only 10 per cent of the children said that they do not enjoy reading at all.

When looking at how often children read, the figures have increased noticeably, with a 28.6 per cent increase in the number of children who read every day, outside of the classroom, during the periods studied. The figure climbed from 32.2 per cent in 2013, to 41.1 per cent in 2014.

In recent years, a number of major campaigns have been launched to encourage children to spend more time reading. These campaigns include: Bookstart, the Summer Reading Challenge, the Young Readers Programme and National Literacy Trust Hubs.

It has been found that reading outside of school can have a positive effect on a child’s attainment at school, with children who read for pleasure being five times more likely to have an above average reading age, as opposed to those who do not read.

The survey discovered that there is a notable gap in the frequency of reading between genders, with approximately half (46.5 per cent) of girls claiming to read outside of school every day. Just 35.8 per cent of boys said the same.

As well as this, a higher proportion of girls (61.6 per cent) read for pleasure ‘very much’ or ‘a lot’, as opposed to just 47.2 per cent of the boys surveyed.

The survey also indicated that children perceived there to be a lack of interest amongst parents when it came to their child’s reading, with 1 in 4 (24.3 per cent) children agreeing with the statement “my parents don’t care if I spend any time reading”.

Of the children on free school meals, 31.5 per cent agreed with the statement, as opposed to 23 per cent of children not on free school meals.

Jonathan Douglas, Director of the National Literacy Trust, said of the survey:

“More must be done to help parents realise what a difference reading with their children from a young age can make to their future. Initiatives including Read On. Get On and our Words for Life campaign are raising awareness and helping parents understand their role in supporting their child’s literacy.”

_________

The VoicED Community is a place for education professionals to share their opinions about topics spanning the entirety of the education sphere – from the curriculum to new resources, and from remuneration to SEN support. This piece originally published on VoicED.org.uk and is republished here with permission.

 

Social Constructivism in Education

According to the theory of social constructivism, social worlds develop out of individuals’ interactions with their culture and society. Knowledge evolves through the process of social negotiation and evaluation of the viability of individual understanding. Basically, every conversation or encounter between two or more people presents an opportunity for new knowledge to be obtained, or present knowledge expanded. The exchange of ideas that goes along with human contact is at play here.

In order to apply social constructivism theories in the education arena, teachers and school leaders need to shift and reshape their perspectives. Both must move from being “people who teach” to being “facilitators of learning.” A good constructivist teacher is one who questions students’ answers, without regard to whether they are right or wrong, to make sure the student has a good grasp of the concept. Additionally, instructors should have their students explain the answers they give and not allow students to use words or equations without explanations. They should also encourage students to reflect on their answers.

Social constructivism teaches that all knowledge develops as a result of social interaction and language use, and is therefore a shared, rather than an individual, experience. Knowledge is additionally not a result of observing the world, it results from many social processes and interactions. We therefore find that constructivist learning attaches as much meaning to the process of learning as it does to the acquisition of new knowledge. In other words, the journey is just as important as the destination.

The process of learning requires that the learner actively participate in creative activities and self-organization. Teachers should allow their students to come up with their own questions, make their own theories, and test them for viability. Moreover, those who practice constructivist theory find that imbalance facilitates learning, in the sense that contradictions between the learner’s current understanding and experiences create an imbalance, which leads the learner to inquire into his or her own beliefs and then try out new ideas. Instructors should therefore encourage errors resulting from the learners’ ideas, instead of minimizing or avoiding them.

Students should also be challenged by their instructors to perform open-ended investigations, working to solve problems with realistic and meaningful contexts. This activity enables the learner to explore, and come up with either supporting or conflicting possibilities. Contradictions need to be investigated, clarified, and discussed.

Through the process of reflecting on the collected data,, learning is given a push. A good example of allowing reflection is through journal writing, which usually facilitates reflective thoughts.

Dialogue within a community stimulates new ideas. All school stakeholders should view the classroom as a community for discussion and exchange of ideas. Students in the classroom are responsible for the defense, proof, justification, and communication of their ideas to the community. These ideas can only be accepted as truth if they can make sense to the community. If they do, they become shared knowledge. In summary, learning occurs not through hearing or seeing, but primarily through interpretation. Interpretation is shaped by what’s already known, and is further develop through discussion.