elearning

Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Policy & Reform

Are wealthy donors influencing the public school agenda?

This article was written by Rebecca Jacobsen,  Jeffrey Henig, and Sarah Reckhow

School boards have often been portrayed as old-fashioned and dysfunctional, so much so that some school reform leaders have advocated for eliminating school boards altogether.

It is no surprise then that school board elections have mostly been known as being sleepy affairs. Most candidates in the past have been known to spend less than US$1,000 toward campaign expenses such as campaign literature and name recognition efforts. In 2010, for example, less than 3 percent of candidates reported spending more than $25,000.

However, this reality, as we have known it, is changing. Of late, out-of-state donors are writing very large checks to support candidates and political action committees (PACs) in local school board elections. Yes, there are PACs now involved in local school board elections.

Recent school board elections in places such as Denver, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Minneapolis and New Orleans have seen candidates routinely raising at least 50 times as much money as the 2010 national average.

Why is this happening? And how might the involvement of these large wealthy donors change our local schools?

We are scholars of politics and education. Our research shows that such large donations have the potential to change who is elected to govern and, as a result, how our schools are reformed.

Why do school boards matter?

First, let’s look at the unique arrangement of power in the U.S. education system to understanding why this new infusion of funding is significant.

The U.S. education system is highly decentralized, with control of schools spread across over 13,000 independent, local school districts. Most boards, comprising five to eight members, enjoy considerable power over many areas, including whom to hire, what to teach, when to hold school and how to allocate budgets.

State of Maryland school board meeting. Maryland GovPics, CC BY

It is true that of late, the decision-making power of school boards has been curtailed by recent national (e.g., No Child Left Behind and Every Student Succeeds Act) and state (e.g., state takeover laws) policies. For example, when NCLB came up with its own guidelines for “highly qualified teachers,” school boards had to ensure that their definition for teachers’ qualifications aligned with federal standards and not only with local priorities and standards. Ignoring these federal guidelines was accompanied by the potential loss of federal funding.

Even with these recent limitations, however, school boards nonetheless remain important. They can modify, regulate, innovate and resist state and federal policy demands.

This ability to resist or modify policy guidelines was evident recently after the Obama administration released its “Letter on Transgender Students,” which advised school districts to treat transgender students based on their expressed gender identity rather than their sex assignment at birth.

School boards across the country were called upon by local citizens to resist this policy. In some cases, local school boards voted to not comply with the Obama administrations guidelines.

Thus despite their relatively low profile, school boards have the power to dramatically shape local educational experiences by modifying, or even at times ignoring, state and federal rules and regulations.

How widespread is outside money?

This ability to alter or resist state and national policy may be the motivating force behind the recent investment by wealthy, national donors.

To examine this rise in donations to local school board candidates, we investigated over 18,000 campaign contributions in local education elections between 2008 and 2013 in five cities (Bridgeport, Denver, Indianapolis, Los Angeles and New Orleans). We selected these five sites for examination because they were geographically and politically diverse and yet all five had school board elections where national donors became involved.

We found that donations from outside donors were widespread and significant. In the 2012-2013 elections, for example, we found that large outside donors gave over $2.8 million to school board candidates and committees, comprising 44 percent of all funds contributed by individuals. This represents a significant increase from 2009-2010, when large outside donors comprised only 4 percent of donations in the cities we examined.

The figure below shows the growth of out-of-state donations by individuals in each city.

In-state vs. out-of-state individual donations by city and by year. Data Source: Authors’ Data, CC BY

Who’s making the contributions?

By examining publicly available campaign finance disclosure reports, which are filed by all candidates, including school board candidates, and list each donor and the amount donated, we were able to track a list of wealthy donors who contributed at least $1,000 in one election cycle (see here for an example of how to access these data). In total, we found 96 large national donors involved in education philanthropy and education reform. These donors included, for example:

Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, who donated in Los Angeles in 2011 ($150,000) and 2013 ($100,000) and in New Orleans in 2013 ($2,500). The high-tech billionaire is active in supporting the development of new charter schools and founded educational organizations such as NewSchools.org and Aspire Public Schools.

Reed Hastings. re:publica, CC BY

Alan and Jennifer Fournier, who donated in Indianapolis in 2012 ($4,000), Los Angeles in 2013 ($2,000) and New Orleans in 2012 ($2,200). Alan Fournier is founder of Pennant Capital Management, which manages $6 billion in assets. Alan Fournier cofounded (with David Tepper, a hedge funds manager), Better Education for Kids, which advocates for tenure reform and greater teacher accountability.

Katherine Bradley, the president of CityBridge Foundation, which “finds, incubates and invests in the most promising practices in public education,” who donated in Denver in 2009 ($500) and 2013 ($6,500), New Orleans in 2012 ($2,500) and Los Angeles in 2013 ($2,000).

Laurene Powell Jobs, wife to the late Steve Jobs and founder of Emerson Collective, who donated to Los Angeles in 2009 ($1,000) and 2013 ($103,000), New Orleans in 2012 ($2,500) and Denver in 2009 ($2,525). She is active in school reform and is a board member for several education nonprofits including Teach for America, the New Schools Venture Fund, and Stand for Children.

Could the top 0.01 percent change local schools?

Outside money may not be a bad thing if the values and interests of donors align with residents in the communities. It might even be a good thing if outside donations raise the visibility of school board elections, so often plagued by disengagement.

Perhaps bigger campaign war chests and close election battles will fuel engagement in school board elections, increase voter turnout and increase awareness of education issues. But these presumed benefits rest on the assumption that these elite donors share the same values and interests of the local community.

Research suggests that this assumption is unlikely to hold because policy preferences among the very wealthy differ from most Americans. Research by prominent academics working on economic inequality, Benjamin I. Page, Larry M. Bartels and Jason Seawright, captures these differences. These scholars found that,

“[o]n many important issues, the preferences of the wealthy appear to differ markedly from those of the general public.”

These different preferences are borne out in our data as well. We found that national donors favored “reform” candidates, or, put simply, those who supported policies such as school choice, performance-based accountability and adoption of the Common Core of State Standards.

School choice offers parents the ability to choose a their child’s public school rather than being assigned one based on one’s home location. Performance-based accountability plans generally require that school or teacher performance evaluations be based upon student standardized test scores. Schools or teachers may face sanctions if these targets are not met. The Common Core of State Standards (CCSS), adopted voluntarily by states, outline what students should know and be able to do at the end of each grade.

We found that candidates who received union support received almost no support from large, national donors. This targeted funding ultimately shaped, at least in some cases, the focus of the election debate.

Here is why it matters

The concentration of funds on candidates with particular policy agendas can squeeze out other policy issues. For example, a candidate we interviewed who was very interested in restoring adult education programs for immigrant parents noted,

“It [money] changes the discourse…their [the reform candidates] message is the only message. Not just the dominant message anymore. It’s the only message that people are hearing.”

While this candidates wanted to focus on the importance of providing adult education programs for immigrant parents, he felt his message about the importance of this issue was unable to compete with the messages being put forth by the reform candidates because he lacked funding to promote his policy agenda.

What changes in public schools when wealthy donors get involved? woodleywonderworks, CC BY

In our interviews, candidates who received outside funds noted that additional funding enabled them to reach voters more often and through multiple strategies. One candidate supported by large, national donors explained that in addition to mailings and yard signs, more traditional forms of reaching voters, the additional funds enabled him to hire a professional videographer who filmed and edited three vignettes that were shown on TV: one at his home with his family, one in a local library in the community and one in a classroom.

Even traditional forms of contact were given an upgrade. For example, a candidate noted that her materials were “more polished” with “nice photos,” something other candidates were unable to do because of a lack of funds.

Some candidates we interviewed felt voters benefited from this, whereas others worried that voters were “inundated” with information from just a few candidates. One candidate described how a friend received seven mailers from a candidate supported by outside funding in a single day. Candidates without this level of funding repeatedly noted that their message couldn’t compete.

Increasing polarization

As with state and national elections, we heard from several candidates that outside donations were also leading to increased conflict during campaigns and less willingness to compromise once elected.

One candidate described the polarization of the local board as being “very much like our federal government” where board members were either “a charter school candidate or a union backed candidate” and when on the board, “nobody can cross the line.”

As a result, some expressed concern that voters were becoming more cynical and less confident in their local public schools.

One candidate shared that she heard from voters on several occasions to “please stop calling” because “I’ve already gotten 10 calls this week about the election.” This candidate was concerned that disengagement in the form of low voter turnout was a direct result of citizens being turned off by the election.

What does this mean for public schools?

We certainly support greater attention to improving our public education system. But reform takes time. It takes compromise. It takes understanding of the day-to-day realities of local schools.

The old fashioned school boards, with all of their faults, were often slow and pragmatic, a force that could shield school leaders, teachers and students from broader political forces that whip the local agenda back and forth.

It remains to be seen whether school boards are strengthened by the nationalization of local school board elections or whether the injection of national funds will hinder the ability of schools to improve.

The Conversation

Rebecca Jacobsen, Associate Professor of Teacher Education, Michigan State University; Jeffrey Henig, Professor of Political Science and Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, and Sarah Reckhow, Assistant Professor of Political Science , 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

The Absence of Internet at Home is a Problem for Some Students

While it may seem like almost everyone has internet access, a shocking number of families lack fast or reliable internet connections. There are roughly 5 million households with school-age children who don’t have broadband internet access at home. That means millions of students are being left behind.

There are many ways that a lack of internet access can affect a student’s academic performance. Students without internet can’t connect with teachers or classmates, do independent research, or get online homework help. For families, not having internet access can mean missing out on information or losing out on a direct line of communication with schools and teachers.

One of the biggest problems faced by students without internet access at home is their inability to complete homework. Homework has long been a source of hot debate within the education community. Should homework be assigned? Those who say yes argue that homework allows students to continue learning at home and prepares them for the rigors of college. Others claim that homework is unfair—home is not an even playing field, and some students have access to more resources and a better environment for completing homework.

The internet has only intensified this debate. Up to 70% of teachers assign homework that requires the use of the internet. About 65% of students use the internet to complete homework, which includes doing research, submitting assignments, emailing teachers, and collaborating online with classmates. But what does that mean for students who don’t have internet access at home? They may fall behind, or they might spend hours looking for free Wi-Fi access points.

Schools increasingly expect parents to be able to log on, too. Teachers use email lists to update parents on field trips, class activities, and more. School websites may be the only place for parents to find valuable information. Even grades are going online, with many schools using internet-based grade books. In theory, this allows parents easier access to their child’s grades. In practice, this can mean certain parents are left behind—namely, those without reliable internet access.

Who exactly are these students without internet access? In 2015, the Pew Research Center analyzed data from studies on internet access and found that the problem is mainly in low-income families. Among households with an annual income under $50,000, 31.4% don’t have broadband internet access. For households with an annual income over $50,000, the number is much smaller—only 8.4% lack access to broadband internet.

There is also a racial gap when it comes to internet access. Eighty-eight percent of White households and 92% of Asian households with school-age children have high-speed internet access. On the other hand, only 72% of Black and Hispanic households with school-age children have high-speed internet access.

Students from low-income families and minority students are often already at a disadvantage. Black and Hispanic students score lower on standardized tests and are less likely to earn a college degree. Students from wealthier families consistently make better SAT scores than those from lower income families.

A lack of reliable, high-speed internet will only make the so-called achievement gap wider. Now low-income and minority students may also have to fight against the gap between students with internet access and those without. This new inequality is often called the digital divide, and it is a growing problem in education.

There are many proposed solutions. Some school districts now provide free Wi-Fi on school buses, allowing students to complete homework during their commute. Programs sponsored by the government and other organizations help provide low-income families with internet access. But nothing has yet completely eliminated the digital divide, and there are still millions of students who don’t have internet access.

How can school districts and other stakeholders help students who lack high-speed internet access? Tell us what you think!

1
Share
Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation

Is EdTech Really Transforming Education?

It’s no surprise that technology has changed the way we live in the world. It’s transformed everything from the way we form relationships, shop, do business and think about education. Whether we like it or not, technology and EdTech are altering the way teachers teach, and students learn. Whether it be the implementation of the latest devices into a classroom or the use of the internet for valuable learning tools, EdTech is here to stay.

Many students today may not see this transformation because they have grown up with rapidly evolving technology and the ability to have access to information at their fingertips. Teachers and parents, on the other hand, have gotten the chance to see the evolution of technology and education first hand. In just the past decade alone, the use of technology and mobile devices in the classroom has rapidly increased. No longer are the days of highlighting passages in textbooks and taking notes with a pencil. Read below for ways that EdTech is transforming education for the better.

Communication

It’s now easier than ever for teachers to communicate with parents and students, and vice versa. With the mobility of email and text messaging on smartphones, teachers can remind students and parents about homework, progress reports, and upcoming assignments in a matter of seconds. Parents can now stay more informed about their children’s progress in school and what they are learning. They don’t have to make the hike up to school for parent-teacher conferences that only happen once a quarter anymore. Technology has even transformed the way students can communicate with each other. It’s easier for them to collaborate and discuss assignments outside of the classroom.

Inclusion

Through the power of technology, more and more students with disabilities are now able to be included into the mainstream classroom. Technology like videos and games specifically designed with these students’ needs in mind can incorporate students into lessons and allow them to feel included with the rest of their peers. If a student has trouble writing on their own, technology can help them easily take notes or record lessons. Both teachers and students benefit from technology’s inclusive features that make learning accessible to everyone.

Interactive Lessons

Students these days get bored easily, they crave the immediate gratification that social media and video games give them. This is why outdated teaching tools like textbooks and lectures aren’t enough to keep students engaged anymore. With the help of technology, teachers are able to create interactive and engaging lessons for a wide variety of subjects. Technology like tablets, laptops, and computers are being incorporated into classrooms to make learning fun and creative. Some higher education classrooms are even beginning to use technology like robotics, 3D printing, and virtual reality to engage students and prepare them for the future.

Digital Media

Going back to the idea that students are easily bored in the classroom, digital media is bringing exciting new tools for teachers to engage them with. Things like videos, pictures, slideshows and gifs use a variety of media to capture students’ attention and make learning fun again. Any teacher can easily tell a student about a historic event, but having them watch it happen on video brings a sense of immersion to the learning process. With free tools like Youtube and TED Talks, along with countless other online resources, teachers have access to an infinite wealth of information and digital media to enhance students’ understanding of topics.

Resources for All

Textbooks and database subscriptions can be expensive, and many public-school districts do not have the funding to purchase these tools for students. With the internet, learning has become accessible and free to every student. With the introduction of electronic textbooks, mobile applications and other electronic resources, schools are able to purchase valuable tools at lower costs. They can also afford to purchase the latest tools and updates, as it’s much more cost-efficient to download the new version of a book than to order hundreds of new physical textbooks. Thanks to technology, students of all economic backgrounds now have access to the same information and opportunities.

Collaboration

Just like with communication, technology has changed the way both students and teachers can collaborate. With helpful applications and online tools, teachers can work together from the comfort of their own homes to share lesson plans, worksheets, and ideas with one another. This lightens the loads for teachers who are constantly having to come up new ideas and content for lesson plans, especially with the plethora of resources available on the internet and from teachers across the globe.

Bottom Line

There’s no doubt that EdTech is transforming education before our eyes. From the way teachers communicate with parents, to the way students are engaged in the classroom, EdTech has a large impact on the modern world of education.

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Adult Education, Higher Education

It’s time to reduce the number of PhD students, or rethink how doctoral programs work

This article was written by Gwilym Croucher

There are not enough academic jobs vacant in Australia each year to employ all our PhD graduates.

This imbalance risks training an increasing numbers of doctoral students on a promise that cannot be fulfilled: that is future academic employment.

We need to accept a hard truth that Australia needs to rethink the design of the PhD and the expectations around it, or radically reduce intake to doctoral programs.

In 2015, Australia graduated over 10,000 postgraduate research students – the vast majority of these were doctoral students. There were over 65,000 research higher degree students enrolled at Australian universities last year with most full or part time PhD students.

The number of PhDs in Australia will continue to grow. Enrolments in higher degrees have increased by almost half since 2001, and although much of this has been through more international doctoral students, domestic student numbers continue to grow year on year.

Most of these PhD graduates do not end up in a career of teaching or research at a university, or even teaching or research somewhere else.

There are currently over 50,000 staff employed in full-time or fixed-term academic roles in Australian universities. The number of positions vacant each year is nowhere near enough to accommodate even a small proportion of new Australia PhD graduates, let alone those who completed in prior years.

If the majority of PhD students, then, do not end up in ongoing academic employment, are designs for doctoral program right? Are student expectations realistic if they enter the degree with aspirations for a teaching and research career as many, perhaps most, do?

The Australian government recently accepted the excellent report from ACOLA on doctoral training. This looks at many of these challenges. There are broad issues related to research training and the academic workforce that the sector must now face.

Rethinking the PhD

There is a real need to think about the prospect of academic employment for PhD graduates. Much of the teaching in Australian higher education is delivered by sessional staff at universities.

Australian universities now depend on sessional teachers, short-contract researchers and other casualised and fixed-term staff to operate.

Many universities wouldn’t be viable without these staff. But for most academics, sessional employment is not a replacement for an ongoing position, offering little in the way of development of career progression.

Sessional work itself is not a problem unless it shows that many doctoral graduates find this as their only option. Or if it shows that students are being set up with unrealistic expectations of their future prospects for permanent academic employment.

We risk an unsustainable academic Ponzi scheme. This is not just an Australian trend, the US faces a similar challenge for large numbers of sessional staff.

But thinking through doctoral programs is more than just about managing PhD candidate expectations.

It is about doctoral training in a mode which combines the apprenticeship model, learning how to research, with more formal components of the other areas of learning that work in non-academic environments.

They need to be able to leverage the broad range of skills acquired through doctoral training, such as project management and strong writing skills.

Many students contribute as junior researchers to projects. This is critical to student research training and the overall research effort. However, to ensure they finish their degree with the right skills set will likely require a more diverse set of experiences and training. We need to avoid at worst viewing PhD students as a cheap research workforce.

Redesigning the PhD in Australia is a big task. It requires an ongoing discussion about enrolling such a large cohort of doctoral students who will not work in academia.

In an age of the innovation economy and government focus on thinking past the mining boom, there is much to be said for doctoral trained workers.

They are a great national resource to be celebrated, where time spent in PhD research is recognised for the skills developed beyond an area of deep expertise.

But the decisions we make now about how we train PhDs will be with Australia for a long time. If we don’t change, we need to consider training fewer of them.

The Conversation

Gwilym Croucher, Senior Lecturer, Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne

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

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

Reframing the Debate About Screen Time

Screen time has become the enemy of parents and educators alike. We’ve heard countless experts tell us that too much screen time is bad for children. It makes them less smart, less creative—the list goes on and on. But is this really true? Is screen time always a bad thing, or are there different types of screen time?

Experts who preach about the evils of screen time have a point. Especially for young children, screen time has been linked to sleep problems, behavior issues, and obesity. When screen time replaces time that could be spent participating in sports, creative endeavors, or family time, it can be extremely harmful. It has become far too easy for parents to sit their children in front of a television or iPad instead of finding meaningful activities for them to participate in.

The content on the screen matters

Not all screen time is created equal. There’s a big difference between watching cartoons on an iPad and reading a book on a Kindle. Even though both involve looking at a screen, one is a mindless activity that requires no critical thinking and the other can help with reading comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, and more.

There are tons of educational apps available for children, too. Kids can practice math skills, learn a new language, create music, and more—all while looking at a screen. It would be naïve to suggest that time spend on one of these educational apps is just as bad as any other kind of screen time. Therefore, when analyzing the effects of screen time, it’s important to consider the content on the screen.

Guidelines are important

Instead of simply advising that parents dramatically reduce or completely eliminate screen time, it may be wiser to suggest guidelines. The American Academy of Pediatrics suggests limiting screen time for young children. They now recommend no screen time for children under 18 months and one hour a day for children ages two to five.

For children over six and teenagers, however, the guidelines are looser. Instead of focusing on the amount of time spent (or not spent) in front of a screen, the AAP guidelines recommend focusing on how much time is spent on other activities. Kids between six and eighteen should be spending seven or eight hours a day at school. They should also be completing homework, enjoying some social time, getting an hour a day of physical activity, and getting enough sleep. As long as screen time doesn’t take away from these other activities, there’s no reason to cut it out.

This new approach to screen time is more flexible. For modern families, this is also more realistic. Given that screens are used for so many purposes now, it’s hard to cut them out or reduce screen time to just an hour or two.

It can also be helpful to set aside time where kids put the screens away. Using screens for any purpose right before bed, for example, can interrupt sleep. So creating a no technology before bed rule can be healthy and help limit unnecessary screen time.

Some screen time has benefits

New studies suggest that certain types of screen time can even have benefits. And those studies showing that there are downsides to screen time? Some of those show only minor differences between children who spend more time looking at screens and those who spend less time looking at screens.

The debate over screen time and its possible effects is ongoing. While too much of the wrong kind of screen time can be bad, not all screen time is a bad thing.

How much screen time do you let your children have? Do you think some types of screen time are better than others?

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

Can Coding Improve Your Child’s Writing Skills?

There’s a big push in education right now to teach kids how to code. Coding is undoubtedly an important skill that will help students in the job marketplace. It’s an in-demand skill and a useful one. But can coding help students in other areas? Some are now suggesting that coding can help improve students’ writing skills.

Telling a story through code

In many ways, coding is like writing a story. Programmers must go in a sequential order, just like storytellers. Just like writers, programmers first sit down and plan out the story they will tell. What will happen in the beginning, middle, and end?  This is just as important for programmers to know as it is for writers.

Kids can also use coding to create stories. While we may not think of coding as a creative pursuit, it certainly can be. Some of the best video games tell stories. Through coding, students can create their own stories. The best part? These stories are interactive. Just like an old “choose your own adventure” book, the reader (or player) can decide what the character will do next and change the outcome of the story.

Programmers and writers must use words wisely

Good writers use their words wisely. They know how to say something in as few words as possible. This helps keep writing concise, readable, and to the point.

When writing code, good programmers know how to do a lot with just a few lines of code. Excess code can make a program confusing if other programmers need to make changes. Too much unnecessary code can also confuse the computer and lead to unexpected and unwanted outcomes.

When kids practice coding, they get into the habit of eliminating excess. This will make them better communicators and writers. They’ll know how to say a lot in just a few words—an increasingly important skill in a world where attention spans are shrinking.

Coding forces kids to plan ahead

Both writers and programmers have to learn to plan ahead. Most teachers are familiar with the struggle of trying to get students to complete graphic organizers and plan ahead before they start writing. This kind of big-picture organizational thinking is a challenge for kids.

When writing code, students have to know where they’re going. Otherwise, their code will end up a garbled mess that’s hard to make sense of. Programming allows students to practice planning ahead and thinking about the big picture, a skill they’ll definitely need in writing.

In writing and code, there are rules

Another similarity between writing and coding? Both have rules that must be followed. If kids ignore the rules when coding, they’ll end up with a program that doesn’t work. Certain functions must go in a particular order, and programmers have to understand the proper use of each bit of code.

In writing, there are rules, too. While you won’t get an error message if you break the rules of grammar, writers who eschew conventions may find that their work is hard to read. Knowing the parts of speech and understanding sentence structure is a lot like knowing how to write code.

By practicing their coding skills, students can get a sense of how to piece these different parts together. This skill will translate into their writing, making them better writers.

Coding and writing aren’t that different

In many ways, coding and writing and alike. Both require an understanding of the basics as well as the ability to plan ahead and see the big picture. And both coding and writing allow kids to get creative and tell a story in their own unique way.

Have your kids learned to code? If so, what changes have you seen in their writing?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education

Starting college? Here’s why you should think about a gap year

Joe O’Shea, Florida State University and Nina Hoe, Temple University

Malia Obama recently announced that she will take a gap year before attending Harvard University. Historically, American high school graduates have been less likely to take a gap year as compared to their European and Australian counterparts.

A study of “The American Freshman,” for example, indicates that only up to three percent of U.S. students are taking a gap year before starting college. By contrast, as far back as 2004, over 11 percent of Australian students were doing so.

As researchers at Florida State and Temple universities, we have individually and collaboratively researched the impact of gap year experiences for several years. Gap years are now growing in popularity in the U.S.

Should we encourage more students to take gap years? What’s the evidence?

Student distress on campus

First consider this distressing – and relevant – trend on mental health of college students.

Studies have shown that there is a “mental health crisis” on college campuses in the U.S. Students are flooding college counseling centers at record numbers.

At any given time, approximately one third of college-aged students across all campuses are suffering from a diagnosable mental illness, such as anxiety or depression.

College itself can add new emotional, financial and personal stresses, leading to increases in psychological distress among students. This is evidenced by a growing number of students seeking counseling services on college campuses.

The implications of these mental issues cannot be overstated. According to the Center for Collegiate Mental Health in a 2014 report, of the students seeking counseling services, more than 30 percent reported that they “seriously considered attempting suicide” at some point in their lives. This number is up from nearly 24 percent in 2010.

College can increase psychological distress. Jeremy Wilburn, CC BY-NC-ND

At the same time, faculty and staff are reporting that today’s students lack coping skills such as resilience and the ability to succeed independently despite adversity.

These observations are not just anecdotal. Evidence of students’ difficulty in finding independent success can be found in a recent study conducted by the National Student Clearing House Research Center. The study shows that only 52.9 percent of students who start a four-year degree program graduate within six years.

What does research say about gap years?

So, how can students take steps in order to better prepare themselves mentally and emotionally for starting college?

Research shows that a gap year – a year between high school and college – can
provide students the opportunity to gain personal skills such as independence, resilience, confidence and focus. A combination of activities during this year that involve volunteering, interning or working, either domestically or internationally, can provide meaningful experiences that challenge students outside their comfort zones. These experience can help students reevaluate how they understand themselves and the world.

Several peer-reviewed studies focusing on students in the U.K. and Australia have shown that students who took a gap year experienced a host of personal benefits, such as higher levels of motivation and higher academic performance in college.

A 2015 survey of over 700 former gap year participants found overwhelming personal, academic, career and civic engagement benefits associated with taking a gap year.

Over 90 percent of all respondents indicated that their gap year provided important time for personal reflection, aided in personal development, increased maturity and self-confidence, and fostered the development of interpersonal communication skills.

Specifically related to college, 73 percent of respondents reported that their gap year helped them increase their readiness for college, 59 percent said it increased their interest in attending college and 57 percent said it helped them figure out what they wanted to study in college.

Students need more than cognitive ability

Gap year experiences have been shown to equip students to approach college from a place of increased mental stability. Research by one of us (Joe O’Shea) shows that gap years promote qualities such as resilience, tenacity and grit.

Gap year experiences can build multiple skills. Global Citizen Year., CC BY

Another 2014 research conducted by the co-author here (Nina Hoe) that analyzed in-depth interviews with gap year participants also came up with similar findings. Thirty-seven of the 42 study participants reported gaining noncognitive skills such as sense of self, adaptability, confidence, gratefulness, patience, open-mindedness, maturity and grit.

Rigorous academic research has proven that qualities such as grit, self-control, growth mindset, gratitude, emotional intelligence, social belonging, curiosity and openmindedness are associated with all forms of success including academic, personal, financial and physical.

These qualities can help students weather the storms of higher education and make it less likely that they will encounter mental health issues.

In a study measuring the same personal and noncognitive qualities listed above, such as grit and self-control, researchers Angela Duckworth at the University of Pennsylvania and Charles Yeager at the University of Texas at Austin concluded that, “there is a scientific consensus in the behavioral sciences that success in school and beyond depends critically on many attributes other than cognitive ability.”

Not any gap year

However, one thing to remember is that not all types of delay or gap year experiences yield the same impact.

Gap years need to be properly designed so they can challenge students with new roles and perspectives that accelerate their growth as thinkers and citizens. Experiences that push students out of their comfort zones and allow them to explore new cultures and people from different backgrounds can create an impactful experience. They provide students an opportunity to reflect on a number of challenges and also allow for critical self-reflection that can root part of their identity in contributions to others.

Gap years need to challenge students and bring new perspectives. Global Citizen Year.

For example, as gap year students shared in O’Shea’s research, they get an opportunity to ask questions such as,

“Why didn’t I know my neighbors growing up, but the sense of community here is so much more intimate?” “Teachers here are using corporal punishment in classes; should I?” “Why are many girls not going to school here?”

In an ideal gap year experience, students get to develop actual relationships with people who are different from them. And when that happens, students can begin to see the world from different perspectives and learn about the complexity of social challenges.

What’s also clear is that a gap year can help better prepare students, emotionally and mentally, for both personal and academic success in college. Analysis of nationally representative data from the National Center for Education Statistics, for example, shows that overall, students who delayed college had overall higher GPAs in college as compared to those who did not delay.

With new understandings of the transformative power of gap years, we need to take steps to ensure all students can benefit from them. Expanding gap year education will help more high school graduates arrive at college equipped with skills they need to achieve both personal and academic success.

Gary Robinson, director of counseling services at Hartwich College, contributed to the piece.

The Conversation

Joe O’Shea, Director of Undergraduate Research and Academic Engagement, Florida State University and Nina Hoe, Study Director at the Institute for Survey Research, Temple University

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

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

10 Podcasts That Promote Reading

Just like listening to audiobooks through electronic devices, podcasts are becoming more and more popular. These iPod-based audio broadcasts encompass a wide variety of subjects, such as entrepreneurship, politics, history, to entertaining series on serial killers. These downloadable series can be subscribed to, so you automatically get the next installment. However, podcasts can be utilized in the classroom, especially to promote literacy.

Not all students enjoy reading, nor are all students visual learners. Using audiobooks in conjunction with hard copies has long been a practice in classrooms to engage all students. However, podcasts offer something more. For example, English teacher Michael Godsey used the popular podcast Serial in his classroom because “he was impressed by the critical thinking and engagement he saw from students. He also liked that students were having deep discussions about the stories with other adults who were listening to the same podcasts” (source).

By using podcasts in conjunction with their transcripts, or by finding engaging podcasts that discuss books benefit students’ different learning styles. Podcasts bring together reading, writing, analysis, listening, language and many other ELA Common Core Standards (source). Here is a list of 10 podcasts that promote reading.

  1. Serial

This very popular two-season podcast is about real murder mysteries. The podcast unfolds the story week by week and makes it suspenseful. You can purchase Michael Godsey’s unit plan he created specifically to teach Serial in English classes. According to Godsey, “What’s terrific about studying Serial is that it engages students in a contemporary story which is actually more conducive to teaching the standards than a classic novel. Students get to practice their reading, listening and problem-solving skills by seeking out primary sources (such as maps, voice recordings, letters and other multimedia resources). This is a great unit for project-based learning (PBL).” He has also aligned his unit plan with ELA Common Core Standards.

  1. Reading Without Walls

American Born Chinese author, Gene Luen Yang, is a National Ambassador for Young People’s Literature. Yang’s mission is to get children to read books with someone on the cover that doesn’t look like them, topics that children find intimidating, and formats that they’ve never tried. In his video podcasts, he interviews authors of children’s and young adult books to get students interested in reading them.

  1. Children’s Fun Storytime

This audio podcast does dramatic readings of children classic stories, such as The Little Engine that Could, Alice in Wonderland, and different fairy tales written by the Grimm brothers. This is the perfect broadcast for elementary school children to listen to while following along with their own copy of the book.

  1. Poem of the Day

When you are teaching poetry to your students, Poem of the Day is the perfect audio podcast. It has professional readings of classical poems.

  1. Bookwink

To get students grades 3-8 interested in new books, use this video podcast. Former librarian Sonja Cole discusses books that she likes as well as read-alouds for that specific book.

  1. ESL

If you are an English as Second Language teacher, the ESL website has a weekly podcast that includes everyday topics to help those learning English.

  1. Classic Poetry Aloud Index

This poetry podcast has over 300 poems by 80 poets. You can use the website to search by poet or theme for the perfect poem to teach your class. Print out the poem for students to follow along while they listen to the podcast.

  1. Book Club for Kids

Book Club for Kids is a unique podcast because not only does it discuss a different young adult book every week, but the discussions are done by children. These children also interview the book’s author and allow a celebrity reader to read portions of the book. This podcast is geared towards children 9-14. It’ll help students get interested in reading because they will see children their own age being excited about books.

  1. The Guardian Children’s Books

According to their website, The Guardian Children’s Books visual podcast’s purpose is to be “the place for bibliophiles to meet and quiz their literary heroes. It’s a fun listen full of passionate young readers asking their favorite author’s brilliantly insightful questions.”

  1. MuggleCast

And, of course, what list on literary podcasts would be complete without having at least one Harry Potter based podcast? This podcast really allows Harry Potter fans to dive deeper into the book series by discussing the books, theories, imagery, themes, and character development.

Conclusion

By giving students another format to introduce books or read books to them, they will become more engaged with the literature. Podcasts will open their minds to different ways of analyzing what they read.

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

How to Manage Cell Phone Use in Your Classroom

In today’s technological world, there is no escaping the smartphone phenomenon. The average person uses their smartphone anywhere from 8 to 10 hours a day. Most people are even checking their phones every 15 to 20 minutes while they’re awake. The ways in which smartphones have become such an essential part of modern life is staggering, and something to be aware of when teaching in a classroom.

Smartphones can be both a great educational tool and a great distraction in the classroom. It should come as no surprise that almost every child in the US owns or has access to a smartphone. Statistics show that 56 percent of children age 8 to 12 have a smartphone. That number jumps up to 88 percent of teenagers ages 13 to 17 have or have access to a smartphone. And a whopping 91 percent of middle and high school aged students primarily access the internet via their smartphones.

This change in the way we interact with technology and integrate it into our lives has come dramatically and fast. It’s sometimes hard for teachers, many of whom grew up in an era with no mobile phones or even the internet, to adapt to this fast-paced technological generation. While smartphones can easily be the downfall of your students’ attention spans and performance, they don’t have to be. More and more educators these days are incorporating modern technology and students’ own smartphones into their classroom to engage and excite students about learning. Below you will find useful tips on how to manage cell phone use in your classroom, and use it for your teaching benefit.

Establish Expectations

At the beginning of the school year or semester, it’s a good idea to be blunt with your students about what you expect of them when it comes to using their smartphones in class. This is also the time to tell them about any plans to incorporate technology into the classroom. The best way to create a set of rules when it comes to cell phone usage is to do it together with the students.

Set aside a class period at the beginning of the year where you and your students talk about the best way to keep their attention focused on classwork.

Include a clear list of times that it is and isn’t appropriate to be using your phone in class. It’s also important to agree on and clearly lay out the consequences of breaking the rules. You can even write up a contract or agreement laying out all of the expectations and effects you agreed upon as a class, and have them read it over and sign it. This way students know what to expect, and there are no surprises when they’re caught using their smartphones.

Engage Your Students with the Technology

The best way to manage cell phones and other technology isn’t to ignore it, but to use it as an educational tool. There are several different apps such as Socrative and many others that you can easily incorporate into your classroom and use for fun activities. These apps engage students by allowing them to use their own smartphones or mobile devices in an educational setting. Using these apps for activities like exit tickets—activities students have to do before leaving the class, or bell ringers—activities that students do at the beginning of each class period, can bring diversity to your curriculum and keep the interest of even your most distraction-prone students.

Take the Time to Walk Around the Classroom

It’s hard to tell whether or not your students are staying on task when you can’t see their screens. You can easily fix this by re-arranging the desks into a semi-circle or small group design, making their screens more visible to you. Another solution is to increase the time you dedicate to walking around the classroom. If students know that you’re likely to come their way with little to no warning, they’re more likely to stay on task. You can also tell who is busy with other distractions on their phone or mobile devices, by those that exit out of tabs quickly or double tap their home screen when they realize you’re walking by.

Don’t Be Afraid to Take Them Away

It’s just as important to engage your students with technology as it is to give them a break from it. They’re on their phone all day every day, at school and at home. While they may not be fans of the idea, it may be beneficial to both their attention spans and mental health to designate a technology-free period of time. A sure-fire way to enforce this technology-free time in the classroom and rid your students of any temptation to check their phone while you’re not looking is to have students put their phones in a basket or on your desk. By eliminating all temptation and ability to check their phone for a portion of the class, the can focus better on the task at hand. This strategy works great for group discussions, tests, and quizzes when students have the hardest time focusing.

Give Your Students a Tech Break

Every 20 to 30 or so minutes, give your students a chance to check their phones and have some free time. Most students claim to experience anxiety when they’re unable to check their phone for more than 20 minutes. Giving your students three minutes to respond to text messages, look at their notifications, and check social media gives them a chance to get some anxiety out so it’s not distracting them when they should be focusing on learning.

Can you think of any additional ways that teachers can manage cell phone use in their classrooms?

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education

Is a tuition-free policy enough to ensure college success?

Lindsay Page, University of Pittsburgh and Stacy S. Kehoe, University of Pittsburgh

Across the U.S., many soon-to-be high school graduates are excited to begin college. Over the past decades, rates of college enrollment have increased. In 1950, only 16 percent of young people had at least some college exposure. By 2012, this figure rose to 63 percent.

Such trends should be seen as a positive but for the fact that too many students who begin college don’t finish. Among a recent cohort of students enrolled in four-year degree programs, only three in five completed their bachelor’s degree within six years.

Further, socioeconomic gaps in college completion are large. Among students from high-income backgrounds who recently started college, three-quarters earned a degree. In contrast, under half of low-income students who matriculated earned any kind of postsecondary credential. Of particular concern is the fact that gaps in degree attainment have widened over time.

To address some of these concerns, Democratic presidential candidates have proposed improving college access and success for the most disadvantaged students including making public colleges and universities debt-free or tuition-free.

In our own research, we have investigated the many barriers students can face in accessing and succeeding in college. So, what does rigorous evidence tell us about potential solutions? Is a free college tuition policy sufficient for improving college access and success in the U.S.?

College costs and financial aid

Public college costs have risen substantially over time and faster than the rate of inflation, as state and local budget allocations have failed to keep pace with rising enrollments.

Over the two-decade period from 1995 to 2015, the average net cost of college attendance, inclusive of room and board, at public four-year institutions has risen from US$8,450 to just over $14,000. For families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution, this implies that sending a child to a public four-year institution would require over 40 percent of the annual household budget.

Financial aid helps. But is that enough? Dollar image via www.shutterstock.com

Providing financial assistance to low-income students does improve college success. Studies that have rigorously examined the impact of lowering college costs have indicated benefits. For example, the Florida Student Assistance Grant, which provides low-income students with an additional $1,300 grant on top of Pell Grant funds, increased six-year bachelor’s degree attainment rates from 21 to 26 percent. The Wisconsin Scholars program, which provides a $3,500 annual grant for low-income students to attend a Wisconsin public university, similarly increased on-time graduation for recipients from 16 to 21 percent.

However, at least one recent analysis should give policymakers and advocates pause about turning to universal free tuition as a strategy for improving college success. Matthew Chingos of the Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, found that such a plan could yield disproportionate benefits to higher-income rather than lower-income students and families across the country.

Therefore, while such a policy may improve outcomes for low-income students, it would also be providing a substantial benefit to students who already have a high likelihood of accessing and succeeding in college.

Understanding challenges to college success

An important point to recognize from the Florida and Wisconsin studies is that, even among students who received additional grant funds, college completion rates remained low. How, then, can we improve rates of college success, particularly for those students at greatest risk of attrition?

To answer this question, we must understand the nuanced challenges that students can face, beyond issues directly related to college affordability.

Consider the challenges faced by one student, let’s call her Veronika, in starting her college career. We learned about her experience through ongoing research investigating the factors that contribute to college success. A very strong high school student, Veronika was a mother of two when she was admitted to her state’s prestigious public flagship university.

Although thrilled at the prospect of college, Veronika struggled to identify affordable childcare in the vicinity of the university. She wasn’t sure if she would be able to attend school while also caring for her children. She needed financial aid but also additional guidance.

Fortunately, Veronika received this support through a college success program with which she was affiliated. The program not only helped her locate affordable childcare near campus, but also counseled her to petition for an increase of financial aid to cover the cost. Her initial aid package had not considered child care expenses.

Another student, Marcus, transitioned successfully to college but retained responsibility for supporting his family financially. The dual demands of being a full-time student and working to provide for his family became too much. Marcus stumbled academically, was placed on probation, and lost his financial aid.

The same college success organization stepped in to provide just-in-time financial assistance in addition to guiding him to develop a plan that struck a manageable balance between school and work.

Low-income students need more than free college

How much of a difference does it make when students are provided more comprehensive support, including personalized counseling, and not just financial aid?

To inform this question, we collaborated with Ben Castleman at the University of Virginia and Gumilang Sahadewo at the University of Pittsburgh to rigorously examine the impact of one such progam – the Dell Scholars Program.

The Dell Scholars program aims to support low-income and first-generation college students by providing a combination of scholarship aid and “…ongoing support and assistance to address all of the emotional, lifestyle, and financial challenges that may prevent scholars from completing college.”

Students need other support services as well. Girl image via www.shutterstock.com

This support includes prematriculation counseling sessions as well as regular tracking of student progress and follow up, as needed, to guide and support students throughout their post-secondary career. We studied 1,800 Dell Scholars selected from nearly 40,000 applicants over six cohorts and attending hundreds of colleges and universities throughout the U.S.

We found the program led to substantial improvements in bachelor’s degree attainment. For example, for the cohort we could track for a full six years, the program increased bachelor’s degree attainment from 61 to 75 percent.

Experience from other scholarship programs

Other studies also point to evidence of college success through comprehensive college supports.

Researchers Charles Clotfelter, Steven Hemelt and Helen Ladd investigated the impact of the Carolina Covenant, which supports students from low-income backgrounds to attend University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

The program began in 2004 exclusively to provide need-based financial aid. By 2007, however, the program also provided students with additional counseling and support services.

The researchers found that the program improved the four-year degree completion rate for qualifying students by eight percentage points but only for those cohorts who were provided not just financial, but also non-financial support.

Similarly, at the City University of New York, the Accelerated Study in Associates Program (ASAP) which works with low-income community college students, provides support that includes financial aid, special classes, additional advising and career services, free public transportation and free use of textbooks.

Researchers Susan Scrivener and Michael Weiss found that the program increased associates degree attainment from 18 percent to 33 percent within 2.5 years of students beginning the program.

Critics may argue that ASAP is too expensive, given that it results in substantially higher per student investment. Researchers Henry Levin and Emma Garcia have shown, however, that because the program so effectively improved degree attainment, it led to lower costs on a per-graduate basis.

Taken together, this work points to looking beyond blanket solutions such as free college tuition for all. Many students, and particularly those from low-income backgrounds, face challenges that go beyond simply meeting tuition.

Awarding such students with packages that include financial aid bundled with counseling and other support is likely to yield more success in improving overall degree attainment rates. In contrast, universal free tuition would invest fewer resources where they are needed and more where they are not.

The Conversation

Lindsay Page, Assistant Professor of Research Methodology, University of Pittsburgh and Stacy S. Kehoe, PhD Student, University of Pittsburgh

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

  • no reactions
0
Share