Edtech

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Higher Education

How to keep more women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)

Merryn McKinnon, Australian National University

There have been myriad promises made by the major political parties over the years focused on funding programs aimed at increasing the number of women pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).

Although some of the policies do target disciplines where women are underrepresented, there seems to be very little acknowledgement of the bigger problem.

Attracting women to STEM careers is one issue, retaining them is another. And that does not seem to get the same level of attention.

Simply trying to get more women into STEM without addressing broader systemic issues will achieve nothing except more loss through a leaky pipeline.

Higher Education Research Data from 2014 shows more females than males were being awarded undergraduate degrees in STEM fields. Early career researchers, classified as level A and B academics, are equally represented in the genders.

Gender disparity in STEM fields at the higher academic levels (C-E) based on Higher Education Research Data, 2014. Science in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE)

At senior levels, though, the gender disparity plainly manifests – males comprise almost 80% of the most senior positions.

A biological and financial conundrum

Studies in the United States found that women having children within five to ten years of completing their PhD are less likely to have tenured or tenure-track positions, and are more likely to earn less than their male or childless female colleagues.

Angela (name changed) is a single parent and a PhD student in the sciences. She told me she is determined to forge a career for herself in academia, despite the bureaucratic and financial hurdles she has to overcome.

Finding ways to get enough money to afford childcare […] jumping through bureaucratic hoops […] It was ridiculous and at times I wondered if it was all worth it.

It may be just one reason for women leaving STEM, especially those with children, and doubly so for single parent women.

Women tend to be the primary caregivers for children, and are more likely to work part time, so perhaps this could explain the financial disparity. But according to the latest report from the Office of the Chief Scientist on Australia’s STEM workforce, men who also work part time consistently earn more, irrespective of their level of qualification.

Percentage of doctorate level STEM graduates working part time who earned more than $104 000 annually, by age group and gender.Australia’s STEM Workforce March 2016 report from the Office of the Australian Chief Scientist., CC BY-NC-SA

The same report also shows that women who do not have children tend to earn more than women who do, but both groups still earn less than men.

Perhaps children do play a part in earning capacity, but the pay disparities or part-time employment do not seem to fully explain why women leave STEM.

Visible role models

The absence of senior females in STEM removes a source of visible role models for existing and aspiring women scientists. This is a problem for attracting and retaining female scientists.

Having female role models in STEM helps younger women envision STEM careers as potential pathways they can take, and mentors can provide vital support.

Yet even with mentoring, women in STEM still have higher attrition rates than their male colleagues.

So what else can we do?

There are many programs and initiatives that are already in place to attract and support women in STEM, including the Science in Australia Gender Equity (SAGE) pilot, based on the United Kingdom’s Athena SWAN charter.

But women’s voices are still absent from leadership tables to our detriment.

Homeward Bound

This absence is especially noticeable in STEM and policy making arenas, and was the impetus for Australian leadership expert, Fabian Dattner, in collaboration with Dr Jess Melbourne-Thomas from the Australian Antarctic Division, to create Homeward Bound.

Dattner says she believes the absence of women from leadership “possibly, if not probably, places us at greatest peril”.

To address this, Homeward Bound is aimed at developing the leadership, strategic and scientific capabilities of female scientists to enhance their impact in influencing policy and decisions affecting the sustainability of the planet.

Initially, it will involve 77 women scientists from around the world. But this is only the first year of the program, and it heralds the beginning of a global collaboration of 1,000 women over ten years.

These women are investing heavily – financially, emotionally and professionally – and it is clearly not an option for everyone.

Flexible approaches

There are other simple ways to support women in STEM, which anyone can do.

Simply introducing genuinely flexible work arrangements could do a lot towards alleviating the pressure as Angela shows:

My supervisor made sure that we never had meetings outside of childcare hours […] or I could Skype her from home once my child was in bed. They really went above and beyond to make sure that I was not disadvantaged.

We have already attracted some of the best and brightest female minds to STEM.

If keeping them there means providing support, publicly celebrating high-achieving women, and being flexible in how meetings are held, surely that’s an investment we can all make.

The Conversation

Merryn McKinnon, Lecturer, Australian National University

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

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

Want to inspire kids to learn STEM? Get them to build a robot

Heather Handley

The music is pumping, the crowd is cheering and people are dancing. This is science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM), but not as you know it.

I’m at the Sydney Olympic Park Sports Centre as an invited judge for the 2016 Australia Regional FIRST (For the Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology) Robotics Competition.

The competition is for students aged around 14-18 who, with the help of mentors and teachers, have six weeks (or significantly less in several cases) to design, build and program a robot for a designated challenge. This would be a difficult task even for seasoned engineers.

Forty-three teams from all around Australia, China, India, Singapore, Taiwan and the USA are here to take part, and the atmosphere is electric.

This year’s challenge is a medieval quest, with the arena designed as a castle and the challenge is to break through their opponent’s defences, weaken their tower with boulders (sponge balls) and try to capture it.

The teams have to work in an alliance with two other teams and develop a strategy together to beat the opposite alliance. Things can go wrong, and when something fails it’s back to the pit to problem solve and fix things under intense time pressure, all with the additional stress of the judges pestering them with questions.

The task for the robots is to knock down a castle wall. Paul Wright, Author provided

Robots across the nation

Every team I spoke to had an incredible story to tell. The perseverance and dedication of the students in both building their robots and getting here is overwhelming, and for some teams both have been a major struggle.

A Chinese team from Lanzhou travelled here on their own without their mentor and had to ask companies and universities in China if they could borrow equipment and space in their laboratories to build their robot.

The Narooma High School team, from New South Wales, raised funds by selling 300 cupcakes and ran a RoboCamp to help 8-11 year olds learn the basics of robotics and computing to also generate money.

Another team is Thunder Down Under, which was established at Macquarie University and brings together mentors with students from schools across Sydney. It’s the first Australian FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) team, and helped bring the competition to Australia.

One of the members of Thunder Down Under working on the team’s robot. Chris Stacey, Author provided

Since starting up in 2009, Thunder Down Under has brought robotics to rural and remote communities in Australia. It has provided no-interest loans to teams for robotics kits so that teams can run RoboCamps and become self-sustaining. It’s partnered with another team to create FIRST ladies, a network for girls in FIRST globally. It has helped start up teams in China and also helped develop an underwater robot and lego-robotics-style water safety game to utilise technology to help save lives.

At the inspiring FIRST ladies’ breakfast on Friday morning, I spoke to Louise from the Kan-Bot Crew, a rookie team from Kaniva, a small Victorian farming town located about half way between Adelaide and Melbourne.

Kaniva College has around 100 students of secondary age and about 17% of the students are taking part in the team, an accomplishment in itself. The team was supported though Robots in the Outback, a Macquarie University and Google initiative.

The Kan-Bot Crew had just two and a half weeks to put their robot together and just one day with a mentor. They had difficulty finding local sponsorship due to a major drought last year, which placed financial stress on the small farming town.

They were unable to bring their two programmers to Sydney and so three other teams from Wollongong, Narooma and Ulladulla, have been lending them their programmers and other technical assistance in order to keep them up and running. For the Kaniva students this has been an extremely valuable opportunity to mix with like minded peers.

The winning alliance and their machines: Barker Redbacks (red shirts); House of Ulladulla, Game of Drones (green shirts); and Thunder Down Under (yellow shirts). Author provided

Education first

What really surprised me is that FIRST Robotics is not just about STEM. The students learn lifelong skills in leadership, entrepreneurship and communication as well as gaining confidence and meeting like minded peers from around the world.

There is a real emphasis on teamwork and assisting those around you, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen such generosity of time and resources in the heat of intense competition. Teams go out of their way to assist each other through “gracious professionalism”, part of the ethos of FIRST.

The Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop stopped by to see the action. Chris Stacey, Author provided

Judging the competition was tough. We spent hours behind closed doors trying to narrow teams down to worthy award winners. All decisions needed to be unanimous and eventually we reached consensus, wrote the award scripts and headed out to the arena just in time to catch the semifinal and finals.

It is heart breaking that some teams – especially the rookie teams – do not know how close they came to getting an award and how long we agonised over the decisions. All teams were deserving of awards and should be proud of their efforts at the competition. But in the end, the winning alliance was made up of the Barker Redbacks, House of Ulladulla, Game of Drones and Thunder Down Under.

As a judge, I’m also an ambassador for FIRST Robotics with a hope to inspire students by communicating my love of science, especially my passion for volcanoes, to show them what is possible through STEM.

However, at the end of the tournament, I am the one feeling truly inspired and uplifted after meeting such an ambitious, motivated, and brilliant set of young people.

The Conversation

Heather Handley, Senior Lecturer in Geochemistry and Volcanology

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

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

Beyond the shine : Finding the technology in the standard

**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 by Mike Gorman

I remember when I first started using digital  technology in the classroom. I was in awe of the amazing Apple Classic and programs such as Claris Works and Hyper Card. In fact, I tried to find anyway I could to make this new technology fit the curriculum. Students were so engaged with programs such as Oregon Trail and Lemonade Stand that teachers found ways to make them fit, regardless of the standards. It was 1980 something and computers had finally entered the classroom. Many times it was one computer and thirty-five students, and everyone was being mesmerized by the shine of new technology. I may have forgotten a standard or two, possible even over taught the technology at the expense of some content. It may have even been science class, but somehow we were all on the Oregon Trail… after all there must have been some wildflowers along the way!  The lure and brightness of the Apple Classic  Computer was just to captivating. I was caught in the shine of an amazing new device.

Fast forward to 2015 and one will find many schools replacing their analog tools of the past with a new digital device. Many times this takes on the focus of a “one to one” program. Visions are acquired and missions are written describing how this amazing new device will change the classroom. There is always a great deal of focus on the programs and applications that will change learning. An image is created of students learning and engaging with this new technology throughout the school day. The excitement grows and the shine becomes brighter until it is soon discovered that this amazing new tool is really only… a device. What comes next? Perhaps the most exciting stage, exploring the real possibilities that technology can bring to learning. Let’s call it the pedagogy, or process that allows classrooms to go beyond the shine.

In this post I would like to investigate how examining the curricular standards helps teachers investigate ways to integrate technology in order to facilitate student understanding of curricular content. It all really begins with something that has been around for quite awhile. You probably know them as the curriculum standards.

A portion or foundation of a curriculum is the standards. Standards make up the general knowledge of what educators want students to know. Standards are a great starting point and through careful examination, exact content and skills can be aligned with technology integration. Simply stated, examining or unpacking a standard allows a teacher to see what a child will know and be able to do. It can also help educators determine what digital resources may work best to help support learning. Now, the phrase “unpacking the standards’ may not bring out the smile you want from teachers. For this reason I will refer to it as finding the technology in the standard. Let’s take a look!

Finding the Technology in the Standard

I have actually broken it down into five tasks or steps. You may even wish to practice by applying each step below  using a standard from your curriculum.  As you go through the process it is important to keep focused on the task of “finding the technology and examining” … there will be ample opportunity later to think about specific lessons, activities, and resources.

Five Tasks (steps)… 

  1. Identify the standard (sometimes referred to as a Power Standard which would be broken down to specific grade level)
  2. Reflect on the standard… if possible collaborate with others (What does the standards mean, why are we teaching this, what should students know, what should students be able to do, how does it apply to students at my grade level, where might it stand on a Depth of Knowledge Chart or Bloom’s Taxonomy)
  3. Determine the content by reviewing the standard and circling the appropriate nouns.(This will help you determine content and allow you to determine what is appropriate for your level of students. Later we will examine digital resources that will align with these nouns or content.)
  4. Investigate the skills by reviewing the standard and circling the appropriate verbs. (This will allow you to determine the appropriate skills  to be practiced by students. This can be aligned to Depth of Knowledge, Blooms, and/or 21st century 4 C’s. Later we will be able to explore interactive technology that will help students learn and also demonstrate knowledge as seen in these verbs.)
  5. Create Learning Targets demonstrating what students will be able to do. (This is done through reflection and listing of verbs and nouns. The nouns allow us to state what students will know, and the verbs allow us to see what students will be able to perform or do. Digital applications and resources will blend together wonderful classroom opportunities that use these nouns and verbs to reveal the standards.)

Let me provide an example below…. note the standards

  • Students will be able to research and record key facts involving the planets of the solar system.
  • Students will explain orbit, gravity, and gravitational pull.
  • Students will be able to collaborate on a presentation that provides what they have learned in their own words

Relevant Nouns –  research,  planets, solar system. orbit, gravity, and gravitational pull

Relevant Verbs – explain , collaborate , presentation

Learning Targets for students:

  • I can research and explain my findings on planets and their relationship to the solar system
  • I can collaborate with others to create a presentation
  • I can present with others to demonstrate our our learning and understanding

At this stage it is important to look at the nouns, verbs, and learning targets in order to determine where the technology aligns. The nouns could point to numerous OER (Open Educational Resource) sites available on the internet. The verbs may point to numerous Web 2.0 tools and apps. Looking at the standards and applying this “find the tech” filter allows technology to integrate with the expected learning, rather than possibly just shine right through the learning. In the upcoming articles in this series I will focus on wonderful internet content resource sites that you should to get to know as you identify and apply the nouns. I will also  point out collections of apps and Web 2.0 tools that help support the verbs. You will also discover great lesson plans collections that can be used to accomplish some of those learning targets. I do hope this provides you a reason to return and be part of the 21centuryedtech Learning Community.  Please remember that the best way to avoid the technology shine is to focus on standards while you put students, not devices, at the center of learning. As you emphasize standards and students you will find there are so many amazing opportunities for learning….  beyond the Oregon Trail!

This post originally appeared on 21st Century Educational Technology and Learning and was republished with permission.

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

____

This is one of a series of posts that are dedicated to going beyond the shine of technology by examining ways to use digital tools to engage students in real learning. You can read the rest on Mike’s website, https://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com. You can also follow him on Twitter: @mjgormans. Please give this post a retweet and pass it on. Have a great week – Michael Gorman (21centuryedtech)

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education

Public universities are under threat – not just by outside reformers

Brendan Cantwell, Michigan State University

A new documentary, “Starving the Beast,” recently examined the state of public higher education. Directed by Austin-based award-winning documentarian Steve Mims, the film argues that a network of right-wing think tanks and educational reformers are undermining public universities. It suggests that America’s great public universities may die from a thousand cuts unless policymakers change course.

My experience as a higher education policy researcher leads me to share many of Mims’ concerns. There are many serious challenges facing public universities.

However, my research also shows more than a right wing conspiracy is to blame for the condition of public higher education today.

Let’s first look at what the film tells us

This film’s story has many villains and few heroes. It describes how conservative politicians, think tank wonks, education reformers and wealthy political donors work together to transform public universities. According to Mims, they have two goals. The first is to run public universities like businesses. The second is to stop universities from teaching and research that contradict conservative values.

Have universities really been idyllic bastions of academic freedom?
Kimberly Vardeman, CC BY

The film shows how many recent reforms are ideologically motivated. For example, one idea that motivates reform today is economist Arthur Laffer’s “trickle-down economics.” Laffer theorizes that all government spending slows economic growth and innovation.

Laffer’s ideas lead reformers to believe reducing state support for higher education will boost the economy and prompt universities to become more efficient.

The other concept that has gained much traction is Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen’s idea of “disruptive innovation,” which holds that established organizations innovate only when upstart competitors upend their business model. For the reformers this means promoting for-profit colleges to compete with public universities.

Anti-tax lobby groups like Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) are also implicated in the film. Since 1986 many elected Republicans have pledged to ATR never to raise taxes, making it hard to adequately fund higher education.

The results of all of this, according to Mims, are devastating budget cuts, program closures, and the erosion of academic freedom.

But here’s the problem: In focusing on contemporary developments, the film implies that public universities were, until recently, well-supported, idyllic bastions of intellectual freedom.

In creating this impression, Mims indulges in what I describe as higher education critics’ tendency “to reject the present by pointing to a more perfect past.” Idealizing the past may tell a good story but it ignores the long history of political struggle that has led to the present crisis.

Why there’s another side to the story

Let’s consider the recent history of some of the challenges facing public universities.

Declining funding for higher education has been a serious problem in recent years. After the Great Recession in 2008 public universities in most states experienced dramatic funding cuts. But these cuts followed decades of decline.

A 2015 report of the American Academies of Arts and Sciences (AAAS) shows that in 1990 14.6 percent of state budgets went to higher education, but by 2014, this share had dropped to 9.4 percent.

I share the assessment that the states invest too little in higher education. Decline in state funding has led to increased tuition. But, as the AAAS report shows, other demands on state budgets, including increased health care spending, partly explain declines in higher education funding.

Research does show that Republican governors and Republican-controlled legislatures fund higher education less generously than Democratic governments. Nevertheless, some of the policies that weaken public universities have enjoyed bipartisan support. For example, policies allowing more public funding to go to for-profit colleges have had backing from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

Let’s look within

Another claim made in the film is that reforms are designed to undermine academic freedom.

I disagree that threats to academic freedom come only from outside forces. This portrayal is too generous to universities, which often make decisions for nonacademic reasons.

Mims shows that intellectual activities that disagree with conservative ideology sometimes attract the ire of conservative politicians. One troubling example from the film is the closure of a poverty research center in North Carolina.

But as public policy expert from University of California, Berkeley David Kirp demonstrates in his book, “Shakespeare, Einstein, and the Bottom Line,” financial interests often trump academics at America’s universities. Although painful for those involved, many program closures are motivated by cost and efficiency concerns rather than political ideology.

A large number of faculty are now hired on a part-time or contingent basis.
Roger W, CC BY-SA

“Starving the Beast” also identifies anti-tenure policies as a major threat to academic freedom. Sure enough, recent developments, such as policies in Wisconsin and Texas, weaken tenure and academic freedom. These are threats that come from outside of higher education. And, indeed, these policies concern me.

But more than one-half of all faculty are now “contingent” – that is, they teach on a semester-to-semester basis. This “new faculty majority” has little protection for academic freedom. In my assessment, widespread use of contingent faculty by colleges and universes poses the greatest threat to the academic profession.

Who is responsible?

Mims suggests that most people don’t know what is happening to public universities. That may be true. But in my assessment, social values might also contribute to the problem.

Results of a study by University of Michigan economists Brian Jacob, Brian McCall and Kevin Stange indicate that most students make enrollment decisions based on campus amenities such as state-of-the-art gyms rather than academics. Campus officials seem to be responding to what students want: Campus amenities are among the fastest-growing categories of expenditures at public universities.

It’s also the case that many students go to college for job training rather than the intrinsic value of learning. A study by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA shows that 70 percent of college freshman believe earning a college degree is “very important” in order “to be able to make more money.”

Often student enrollment decisions are based on campus amenities.
Penn State, CC BY-NC-ND

What is more, policies and politics destructive to public universities appear to be popular. Tax increases would be necessary to maintain high-quality education at low costs. Yet a majority of Americans believe their taxes are too high.

And several of the politicians featured in “Starving the Beast” as being harmful to universities, including Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, were elected to two terms by the people of their states.

Asking some tough questions

What does this all mean?

If, like me, you are anxious about the condition of public universities, “Starving the Beast” will only heighten your concerns. The film is a compelling account of how special interests collude to weaken public universities.

However, it tells only part of the story.

In addition to holding educational reformers and ideologues to account, it is my view as an educational researcher that we should also ask tough questions of ourselves, our neighbors and to university officials:

Are we willing to pay higher taxes for better higher education? How do we make educational choices for ourselves and for our families? Should university leaders rely on contingent professors while investing in football stadiums and gyms?

By asking these questions, I am not providing excuses for policies that Mims correctly identifies as harmful to public universities. I agree that state policies have been harmful to public universities. But what I am suggesting is that those concerned with the condition of public higher education consider the problem in a broader context with research-based evidence.

Excellent, accessible and affordable public universities are not possible without a broad public support.

The Conversation

Brendan Cantwell, Assistant Professor of Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education, Michigan State University

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

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

Is course customization the future of teaching technology?

In an ever-changing online environment, course customization may soon reign supreme. As education online continues to grow and evolve, so will demands on the industry and one area that this is especially true is course design — or specifically, creating courses that fit each classroom just right and move away from the “one size fits all” approach to curriculum.

It’s why Blackboard Inc, the once-popular company that provides software solutions and tools for learning for higher education, high school, and k-12 classrooms, is up for sale,

According to Reuters.com, the company’s growth and revenue have slowed due to upstarts and changes in higher education.

Those “changes” are coming mainly in the way of customization options. Recently Odysseyware, an up and coming software company that provides curriculum for online institutions, announced alterations to its system that will make teaching and learning much more personal.

The company’s software will now allow educators to completely customize standard courses, “rearrange, add and delete content including assignments…and search curriculum by topic and standard.”

There are more changes, like the creation of search engines that give educators the unique ability to search and save content, as well. More than anything, this shows how nimble and proactive Odysseyware is being to a rapidly evolving education environment. For students to reach their full academic potentials, teachers must tap resources that best fit each individual class structure and customization options facilitate this.

I believe the way teachers create lesson plans will look much different in 5 years than it does today, thanks in part to the upsurge of customization technology.

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Current Ed News, EdTech & Innovation, Education Leadership, Education News,

Instead of textbooks, why not pay teachers for content?

By Brandon Wilmarth

As an English teacher in Oklahoma’s Moore Public Schools, I was recruited by some textbook providers to help them create content. It was a lot of fun, and I was happy to make some extra money doing it. But there are so many teachers in our district who are much more talented than I am. If I was developing curriculum materials that school systems across the nation were purchasing, they certainly could be doing this, too.

So when I became a technology integration specialist for the district, one of my long-term goals was to leverage the expertise of our teachers in creating high-quality digital content.

Teachers are already scouring the web for videos, articles, and other free instructional resources, then pulling these together into coherent lessons and adding their own valuable context to help students understand the material or promote deeper lines of inquiry.

My thought was, why don’t we take some of the money we’re hemorrhaging on expensive, print-based textbooks that aren’t interactive and don’t effectively capture students’ imagination—and use it to pay our teachers more money for their efforts instead?

Our vision is to create a central repository of exemplary digital content that is developed and curated by teachers, for teachers in our district. All teachers would have access to these shared instructional materials. Not all teachers would be required to contribute, but those who do could receive a stipend for their work if it’s approved as a district-vetted lesson or unit.

This would allow us to use our most powerful assets—our teachers—to their fullest potential, while also recognizing and giving value to teachers for the lesson planning and content creation they already do so well.

That’s important, because in Oklahoma, our teachers are among the lowest paid in the nation—and many leave the profession after only a few years. Honoring their talents and contributions could help stop this mass exodus of young teachers as well as veteran content experts and keep them in our schools.

To realize this vision, we needed to have a technology platform that would support teachers in creating and sharing digital lessons. We found this platform in Ogment, which helped us create curriculum by making it easier to grab digital content, including what we found on the web, and turn that into useable lessons for our classrooms.

Part of the problem is not the lack of resources, but rather the overabundance of resources. Every teacher knows how much great content exists online—but managing it all can be a nightmare. Ogment has let our teachers clip videos, articles, games, and other internet resources and put them into lessons or presentations with a simple drag-and-drop process. Then, they can embed questions within a lesson to check for students’ understanding or prompt further discussion—and they can easily share their lessons with other teachers.

Our teachers have used the service to “flip” their classrooms and even personalize instruction. For instance, Tiffany Truesdell, a math teacher at Westmoore High School, says she has used Ogment to make customized lessons for her students.

“I can assign a lesson that presents all the material, and as students go through the lesson, I can have questions that check for their understanding just as if I were presenting the material in class. I can pull videos from any website to enhance the lesson, and if I only want a small section of the video, Ogment lets me assign just that portion of the video in my lesson,” she says.

“Ogment also allows me to differentiate a lesson. For example, if I have a student on an IEP who needs multiple choice, but I want the other students to have a free response question, I can create the lesson once but with differentiated questions. When the questions come up, it will give the IEP student the multiple choice question instead.”

Mrs. Truesdell’s example shows that with the right technology, our district can build a shared repository of lessons that is truly usable. More importantly, a system like this allows our teachers to apply their talents and reignite their passion for creating great content.

We are working toward a model in which we pay teachers extra for the content they create and share through this tool. We’re not there yet; we’re still trying to free up the funding to be able to do this.

But when we come up with the funding to realize our vision, we’ll be able to pay our teachers extra for creating and sharing top-notch lessons—rewarding teachers for their work and restoring professionalism to the field.

Brandon Wilmarth is a technology integration specialist for Moore Public Schools in Oklahoma.

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

Why Teachers Should Embrace Technology in Their Classrooms

By Matthew Lynch

Teachers have a lot on their plate when it comes to measuring achievement. Student success is determined by assessments, graded materials and even technological savvy. The consensus seems to be that to give K-12 students a fighting chance in the real world, teachers and administrators must stay on top of any and all technology trends. While it’s impossible to use every piece of technology to the students’ advantage, there are some legitimate reasons (aside from the cool factor) that teachers should embrace technology in their classrooms.

At-risk students

Technology has made it possible for students who fall off the traditional path to jump back on and finish what they spent most of their childhood working towards. This may be in the form of taking remote classes from home, remedial classes in on-campus computer labs or even by enrolling in full-time online schools, public or private. The technology available for these options benefits students who face difficulties with a normal school schedule including teenage parents, students with short-term or long-term illnesses, teens with substance abuse struggles, or those who had poor academic performance due to learning disabilities or bullying.

Equality through Technology

Technology is also a great equalizer in K-12 classrooms. Students have the same access as their peers to whatever technology is available in their district and specific classroom. While there is certainly some technology discrepancies between one district and another, often based on the socioeconomic status of the families within that district, within each one, students have fair access to technology. In a way, things like computers and mobile devices in classrooms usher in the technology of the outside world and give students who may not otherwise have access a chance to use it for learning purposes.

Having in-classroom technology more directly impacts the graduation rate by providing customized learning experiences. A student who needs extra help on a particular topic need not hold up the entire class, or feel embarrassed asking for that help when there are computer modules and tablet apps available for individual learning experiences. Teachers who spot a trouble area with a particular student can gear that teen towards more exercises to master the topic. Of course, technology is not the magic wand to fix all problems, but it does allow for more flexibility of the learning process which in turn makes it easier for a wider group of students to stay in classrooms until the end of the K-12 journey.

College Prep

K-12 educators used to have the goal of helping their students reach high school graduation, but now the pressure is on to create students who go on to achieve college goals too. No matter how advanced the technology options in a particular school district, they are dwarfed by the reliance on and widespread use of technology on college campuses. High school students who become acquainted with technology for things like course selection, class management and actual learning modules are better.

Other Technology Perks

There are so many ways that academics are enhanced by technology that simply did not exist ten years ago. Today, students can benefit from online learning modules if a major illness or suspension keeps them at home. For students who are struggling under the academic and social pressures of traditional schooling, online learning provides a way to stay on track from the comforts of home. Online learning is just a brushstroke on the contemporary portrait of learning technology. Within classrooms, teachers can encourage students to work individually on a computer or mobile devices, freeing up some time to work in-person with those who might need the extra attention.

Teachers can also communicate more effectively with parents and students regarding upcoming assignments, supplementary lesson plans, and areas where students could benefit from extra practice. With browser-based technology, and cloud-based options, teachers can provide easy access to information and parents and students can log in at their convenience.

Technology is transforming the teaching process into one that is more interactive as well. Instead of waiting to see how much a student knows at the end of a term, progress can be measured in real-time – and adjustments can be made. Teaching is becoming less instructor-centric and more of a collective process.

What do you think? Did I leave any benefits of classroom technology out?

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

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

Science achievement gaps start early – in kindergarten

F. Chris Curran, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

The annual back-to-school season is filled with high hopes for making new friends, meeting new teachers – and, from the view of many policymakers – promoting gains in science achievement. Scientific learning and research carry substantial economic benefits.

Historically, however, not all groups have excelled in science equally. Black and Hispanic individuals as well as women have been less likely to enter or persist in science-related studies or occupations.

These gaps have been well-studied at the level of high school and higher education. These gaps, however, actually start much earlier.

My recent research found that these gaps exist at the level of kindergarten. However, these gaps can also change significantly in the first two years of schooling.

Large gaps in science

In a recent study, my research assistant, Ann Kellogg, and I examined the science performance of over 10,000 kindergarten students who began school in 2010. We analyzed data from a national study called the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS-K) conducted by the federal government.

The data included science achievement tests that assessed concepts in physical, life and environmental science as well as scientific inquiry. Examples of science instruction in kindergarten includes studying how plants grow, experimenting with erosion on a water table or constructing a picture of the solar system.

Previous research had examined science gaps in early grades. Our study, however, looked at science gaps as early as kindergarten with newer data and better science achievement tests.

Our study revealed large gaps in science achievement in kindergarten between white students and racial or ethnic minorities. And, where science gaps existed, we found that they were generally larger than the gaps in reading or mathematics achievement. However, we did not find significant gaps by gender.

Achievement gaps are not stagnant

On average, black students and Hispanic students performed significantly lower than white students on the science achievement tests in kindergarten. Approximately 41 percent of black students and 49 percent of Hispanic students scored in the bottom 25 percent. In comparison, only 12 percent of white students were in this category.

The difference in science achievement between black or Hispanic students and white students is roughly equivalent to what an average elementary student learns over a period of nine months between kindergarten and the end of first grade. The gaps between black, Hispanic and white students might be expected given similar gaps in mathematics and reading.

Asian students performed lower on science. Jennifer Smith, CC BY-NC-ND

What surprised us was that Asian students in our study performed significantly lower than white students in kindergarten on the science achievement test. Approximately 31 percent of Asian students scored in the bottom 25 percent on the science test. In contrast, only 12 percent of white students did so. This gap was present even though Asian students performed as well as or better than white students in mathematics and reading.

Interestingly, unlike the black-white gap, the science gap between Asian and white students closed rapidly between kindergarten and the end of first grade. In fact, by the end of first grade, the gap had reduced by almost 50 percent.

It’s unclear what causes this rapid decrease in the Asian-white science gap. However, what it does show is that achievement gaps are not stagnant.

Prior research conducted by scholars David Quinn and North Cooc showed similar findings. By eighth grade, Asian student performance in science was equivalent to or higher than that of white students. Other researchers have also found Asian students’ performance in science increases rapidly relative to white students throughout elementary and middle school.

No gender gap

Additionally, we found no difference in science achievement between boys and girls in kindergarten. A small male advantage was evident only in first grade. This too is an important finding given the documented gender gaps in the later grades of elementary school.

Prior work has found that boys outperform girls in science at third grade. Similarly, results from the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) show a male advantage in science in the fourth grade.

Study found no gender gaps in science during kindergarten years. Ars Electronica, CC BY-NC-ND

Our work shows, however, that these gaps in later grades do not extend back to kindergarten. Instead, boys and girls appear to begin schooling on relatively equal footing when it comes to science achievement. It is only as they progress through school that the gender gap emerges.

Science gaps larger

Finally, we found that the kindergarten gaps by race or ethnicity tend to be larger in science than in mathematics or reading.

For example, on the kindergarten achievement tests, the Hispanic-white gap was about twice as large for science as mathematics or reading. Similarly, the black-white gap was slightly larger in science than in mathematics and was about twice as large as the gap in reading.

It is possible that students lagging behind in math and reading struggle even more in science as it requires the application of language and mathematics to scientific content.

In sum, our findings point to the importance of the early elementary grades for equity in science achievement. We show that many gaps, such as the black-white gap, already exist when students start school. We also show, however, that these gaps can change significantly in the first two years of schooling as evidenced by the Asian-white gap and the emergence of a gender gap.

What’s happening in classrooms?

All this means that the early elementary years may be an appropriate point for addressing inequities in science achievement. However, science instruction has not been a high priority in the early elementary grades.

Recent research comparing kindergarten in 1998 to that in 2010 found that teachers cover fewer science topics than before and students spend less time using science equipment.

Is science instruction the problem? woodleywonderworks, CC BY

Furthermore, kindergarten classrooms today are much less likely to have science or nature areas. Indeed, in kindergarten classrooms, teachers spend only about a fourth of the amount of time on science that they do on mathematics or language arts.

What can we do?

Our findings point to the need for increased emphasis on science in kindergarten and first grade. I believe, for example, that teachers and school leaders should look for opportunities to incorporate science concepts into reading and math lessons.

Looking beyond the classroom setting, the findings of our work and that of others suggest the need to provide support to informal science learning opportunities. Visiting museums, interacting with nature and exploring novel tools all represent ways in which parents and caregivers can support early science inquiry.

Science achievement gaps begin early. It is important that our policies and interventions take steps in those early years to ensure increased science achievement for all.

The Conversation

F. Chris Curran, Assistant Professor of Public Policy, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

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

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

Educational Tech: What’s Next?

There is a lot of money tied up in educational technology. In 2012, $600 million was invested by venture firms into ed-tech startups. To put that in perspective, that is 400 percent more than what was invested in the same industry in 2002. It seems that a lot of faith is being placed in the technology that will soon arrive in K-12 and college classrooms and on campuses – but what is actually being created?

Not a whole lot, according to ed-tech industry insiders. Speaking to CNN, a senior financial advisor said that there are not many fresh ideas floating around ed-tech startups. He said:

“Do they have a product that’s actually a solution for someone’s needs, and will the decision makers recognize that it’s a problem? There are lots of gradebooks out there. Don’t tell me you’ve got the first digital gradebook, and also nobody is viewing that as a problem.”

To his point, it seems that most of the ed-tech “advancements” of the past decade have had more to do with utility than the actual learning process. Course management, online communication portals between educators and parents, and even continuing training for teachers have all seen some streamlining as a result of technology. Students can take courses online and that in and of itself is a major stride in individualized learning. Still, the concept of online learning is certainly not considered cutting edge anymore. What strides have been made in the actual process since it was first introduced?

For K-12, major course providers like K12 now offer more scheduled learning experiences where students are expected to be logged in to their courses at a certain time, and possibly even visible on a web cam, in order to get attendance credit. There are also many more course options than when online learning for K-12 students first emerged. K12 boasts 105 courses for high school students alone. But for $600 million – shouldn’t there be more?

Freemium models

Following the successful mobile gaming application business model, ed-tech companies are starting to offer free services with paid upcharges. Consider Candy Crush Saga way of doing business. Anyone with a smartphone, tablet or desktop Facebook access can download the game at no cost. As users progress through the addictive, sugar-laden levels, they are prompted to make small purchases (usually between 99 cents and $3) to gain access to higher levels, add more lives or buy level “boosters” to help their luck. But giving away a product for free? What sort of business sense does that make? In the case of Candy Crush, it has proven to be savvy indeed. The game’s owner King brought in $1.9 billion in revenue in 2013 and its initial public offering earlier this year was valued at $7 billion.

Ed-tech companies are taking notice. Online learning giant Coursera (with $85 million in venture financial support) is experimenting with free courses but a small fee for the certification at the end of the course. Udacity (backed by $20 million from investor Andreessen Horowitz) is looking into monetizing courses through sponsorship opportunities and programs that match employers with promising students. In both cases, the ed-tech companies are not asking for money upfront but instead getting students “hooked” on the offerings first. From a strictly knowledge standpoint, students are the beneficiaries because certificate or not, once learning has been attained it can’t be taken back. From a practical standpoint though, without proof of completed coursework, all the free education in the world won’t translate into better job opportunities or college admittance. So time will tell if the freemium approach to ed-tech offerings will prove as lucrative as other industries but it certainly has potential.

What would you like to see the $600 million in ed-tech investments create?

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

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

More states moving towards virtual classes for K-12 students

According to KPK12.com, more states are implementing measures that require students to take virtual classes.

In 2014, “state virtual schools exist in 26 states as of fall 2014-one more than last year.”

Many states are moving towards mandating virtual education because students will likely be required to take a virtual course or two should they decide to attend college.

For instance, take Florida. KPK12.com notes that as of 2014, “Florida is the first state in the country to legislate that all K-12 students will have full- and part time virtual options, and that funding will follow each student down to the course level.”

Florida’s virtual school had over 400,000 enrollments in 2014, a number that is likely to at least maintain.

Another state in the south that’s primed to join the virtual party is Alabama. Lawmakers recently passed a bill “that requires each of its districts to provide virtual courses for high school students by the 2010-2017 school year.”

An issue that some states face when choosing whether to require virtual courses is the provider. What, if any, providers are available for local school districts to use?

For Alabama, the choice was easy as the state has selected Odysseyware, “an innovative, multimedia-enriched online curriculum.”

Jeff McClure, Director of Alternative Learning at Pike County Schools, took special note of Odyseeyware’s flexibility.

“Odysseyware provides flexibility outside the structure of a school master schedule,” McClure said.

In operation since the early aughts, Odysseyware continues to grow and expand its efforts to “meet the needs of 21st Century Learners…”

For more information on Odysseyware and services the company offers, please visit www.odysseyware.com.

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

  • no reactions
0
Share