put kids first

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, list, Matthew Lynch

5 Recent Developments That Have Changed the State of For-Profit Education

It’s really no secret that more people are seeking out alternative forms of higher education, and that non-traditional students are more commonplace as a result. For-profit colleges are among those other options students can select in pursuit of their education. The for-profit college industry boomed during the Great Recession as colleges targeted the increasing number of unemployed Americans.

But while I’m all for fair education for all, and providing plenty of opportunities for those who need more flexibility due to jobs, family or health issues, for-profit colleges may not be the best option. They have been accused of overpromising on career results later on while taking the money of vulnerable students. Students at for-profit schools default on federal loans at a higher rate than students at traditional public colleges: over 19% after three years, compared with less than 13% at public institutions.

Because of this, for-profit colleges have come under a lot of scrutiny lately. Let’s take a look at five recent developments that have changed the status of for-profit institutions.

  1. The U.S. Department of Education tightens their standards on for-profit education.

The U.S. Department of Education has bumped up its regulation of for-profit career colleges, introducing rules that would halt federal funding to institutions that leave students saddled with enormous debts that they are unable to repay.

The efforts by Obama’s administrations show that federal and state authorities are ramping up their examination of the for-profit college industry, which includes colleges such as the University of Phoenix and Everest College and ITT Technical Institute.

Opponents believe that many for-profit colleges charge a hefty price, yet target low-income consumers, resulting in students who have massive loans to repay and few job prospects.

U.S. Secretary Arne Duncan said, “Today too many of these programs fail to provide the training (students) need, while burying them in debt they cannot repay.”

The Education Department’s new rules intend to penalize schools that cost their students too much debt compared to their earnings post graduation. In order to be eligible for federal student loans and grants, schools must meet debt-to-income requirements for two out of three consecutive years.

The department estimated about 1,400 programs out of 5,500 covered by the regulations would fail the debt-to-income test.

  1. Many for-profit colleges are closing.

The Education Management Corporation and the Career Education Corporation will shutter the doors of more than 25 campuses across the country.

The Art Institute, Sanford-Brown College, Sanford-Brown Institute, and the Le Cordon Bleu culinary school, are all set to close soon.

According to the Chronicle.com, the Art Institute has almost 5,500 students enrolled and the shutdown process will likely take three years..

Earlier this year Corinthian shut its doors due to heavy fines and probes from the federal government. Everest College, maybe its most popular campus, is included under the Corinthian umbrella as well as Heald and WyoTech. Corinthian received nearly 90 percent of its revenue from federal student loans because tuition to attend these schools was astronomical.

The United Stated Department of Education is set to forgive the student loan debt of the Corinthian 100, a group of students who claimed to be financially defrauded by Corinthian Colleges.

The group is made-up of 100 former students who attended colleges under the Corinthian umbrella. Because Corinthian is now defunct and many students were forced to either transfer or just hold the debt, the coalition petitioned the education department to have their loans forgiven.

  1. The stock of for-profit colleges rises despite it all.

In 2014, for-profit colleges and universities saw a rise in stock worth, as well as revenue, according to a CNN Money report. Strayer Education was perhaps the biggest success, with its shares rising 75 percent in 2014 so far. Strayer provides a variety of accreditation, bachelor degree and master’s degree options through programs that are set up at 100 other colleges and universities across the country.  DeVry Education Group and Capella have also seen rising stocks, at 20 percent and 13 percent respectively.

  1. For-profit colleges sue Obama Administration for the new rules.

The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, a group that represents for-profit colleges, sued the U.S. Department of Education and Secretary Arne Duncan on behalf of for-profit colleges. For-profit colleges disagree with the rules released in late October of last year that penalize career training programs for charging high tuition that saddles students with massive debt while offering low-paying job prospects.

For-profit schools filed a lawsuit and asked a judge to reject the new regulation, claiming the Department of Education does not have the right to set debt-to-earning standards. The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities called the rule “unlawful, arbitrary, and irrational” and feels it will “needlessly harm millions of students who attend private sector colleges and universities.” They strong believe that the job a student lands and their earnings after graduation “depend heavily on factors beyond the schools control.”

The Education Department announced its “gainful employment” rules, which base a program’s ability to receive federal loans on whether the estimated annual loan payment of a typical graduate doesn’t exceed 8% of total earnings or 20% of the student’s discretionary income.

For-profit colleges will be allotted time to make changes, but if they fail to meet the standards, they will become ineligible for federal student aid, which makes up nearly 90% of the revenue at for-profit schools. The DOE estimated about 1,400 programs would not meet the standards.

  1. For-profit schools shift their priorities.

Many online higher ed schools were focused solely on gathering funding for new programs.

Now, however, according to a new survey by the Education Advisory Board, nearly 100% of executives at online higher education programs and schools want to shift their focus to “track career outcomes” for students once they leave school.

The EAB survey found that executives have concern over how employers view graduates and would like to “improve messaging to prospective students.”

One of the chief concerns of many potential students, and those who have graduated from an online college, is that their degrees are seen as worthless. While all online colleges aren’t seen in the same light, many are grouped together because the accreditation may differ from traditional colleges and universities. Standards for online schools and for-profit institutions with online programs also vary and give many employers pause before hiring a graduate from an online university, specifically that from a for-profit.

It’s clear that the roller coaster of events specifically concerning for-profit schools have led to an increased focus on improving the quality of education and the amount of positive recognition given to for-profit schools. Hopefully the executives of these institutions will see that being proactive in ensuring that the quality of the education that students receive will have a lasting impact on how employers view them once they enter the workforce.

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Math Learning – A Universal Language?

Fifth-grade students at Woodward Elementary School had an interesting math assignment this fall: watching college football games. Though seemingly fun on the surface, the assignment had an ulterior motive. Students were asked not simply to watch the college football games, but to score the plays and keep track of yards, points and time. The raw data they collected was then translated into fractions and percentages and used as mathematics learning tools. What is most remarkable about this assignment, first reported by Fox News, is that the point of the exercise was not simply to make math “fun” or practical. Teacher Scarlett Childers was also looking for a way to reach across the socio-economic and language barriers of her students.

At Woodward, 98 percent of the student body is on the subsidized lunch program and 95 percent learned English as a second language. Math, it seems, became a universal language in her classroom, better understood through a real-world assignment. The statistics at Woodward represent a larger cultural trend, too. Over 60 million people, or one-fifth of people, in the U.S. do not speak English at home which presents a problem in English-speaking K-12 classrooms. Dual-language programs have long been the trendy tactic for bringing down language-learning barriers but is math the real answer?

Urban improvement

President Obama’s Race to the Top initiative emphasizes STEM learning, particularly in mathematics, in order for more students to make it to high school graduation and the college degree beyond it. That push is founded on facts. Take Rhode Island, for example. In the state, poor math performance in high school is linked to lower enrollment in college and failure to complete college. Under 42 percent of 11th grade Rhode Island students who were considered “below proficient” on NECAP math ended up enrolling in college. Rhode Island is not exactly known as a diverse area, so that statistic presumably means that most of those students are native English speakers and from mid- to high-income households.

Imagine then the ramifications of that statistic on more diverse, urban K-12 classrooms? The good news is that urban school districts, though still often underperforming in math, are showing the greatest positive improvement in math achievement. Large cities are making progress more quickly than the nation as a whole. Fourth and eighth graders in U.S. cities with at least 250,000 people have improved more quickly in math learning than the national average, according to a report by National Assessment of Educational Progress. The students who speak English as a second language in these urban settings are improving at a faster rate in math than their native English-speaking peers around the country – and that speaks volumes to the power of math as a universal subject and equalizer.

There are certainly programs that target urban students when it comes to math, and other STEM, learning but I’d like to think that much of that progress is a direct result of the teachers in the classroom, like Scarlett Childers. There is no way that one math-learning or ESL initiative drawn up by a district or the state can adequately address the students that need the extra boost. Individualized plans, like the college football scoring assignment, are what really get through to students and bring them to a place of better long-term comprehension. Instead of being a learning complexity, I believe innovative math learning initiatives are the key to overall K-12 academic improvement. Math is a universal language and one that needs practical applications to really have an impact. That starts with the teachers but needs support from the decision-makers to truly make a difference. How do you reach your students when it comes to math learning? What innovative ways help you?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Year-Round Schooling: How it Affects the Economy

In this series I have been writing about different facets of the year-round schooling debate. First I looked at the effects on students and then moved to the impact on teachers. As I researched both groups, I found no distinct disadvantages to either (and some advantages) when placed on a year-round academic calendar.

Today I want to move away from the individual groups impacted and take a closer look at the overall economic effect of year-round schooling. Does this academic setup help or hurt taxpayers’ pockets?

On-campus costs and savings

Year-round school programs are based on one of two different concepts: single-track, which releases all students for breaks throughout the year together, and multi-track, which staggers student breaks and effectively keeps the school building occupied year round. Obviously on a multi-track schedule, school maintenance costs rise because the building is in full use year-round. The cost does not increase by as much as a quarter, though, because most traditional schedule school buildings do have some employees there in the summer months and most offer summer school classes for some of that time too. Still, in cold-weather climates, the cost of not having to pay for air conditioning alone can be a deal-breaker when the topic of year-round schooling is broached. There is also the added cost of transportation on more days of school, custodial staff and additional administrative staff.

There are some areas where year-round schools can be long-term money saving options, though. If a particular district has more students than traditional schedules can accommodate, the capital cost of new buildings can be avoided with a multi-track schedule that allows more students to use the same building. Beyond the capital cost of a building, money can be saved through a higher amount of students using the same resources, like library books or physical education equipment. Some schools have even listed a decrease in vandalism as a financial plus of year-round occupancy.

Community cost and savings

Each individual community will feel a different economic impact when it comes to year-round schooling. A tourist community with summer attractions, for example, may feel more of a squeeze if its low-cost employee pool of high school students is suddenly in class instead. The same could be said for ski communities though that could benefit from multi-track scheduling of high school students during its busiest seasons. The summer months tend to be when most high school students earn the most money, however, because there is a significant duration of time with no school responsibilities. Without those months of a steady paycheck, students (and parents) stand to lose potential college money. Trying to work and maintain a job alongside classes can have a negative impact on grades according to most research and most employers cannot accommodate students who are only available two or three week spans at a time.

So the potential economic cost of year-round schooling is two-fold: the individual student may suffer financially, and the local businesses may have to pay out more for jobs that are better-suited for high school students who do not have the time off to work them.

Savings to the community are a little less tangible, but can be reflected in some research that says year-round schooling reduces teen crime, thus saving money for the community. At-risk students tend to perform better in year-round setups, making them more successful in their academic career which could feasibly mean a stronger economy down the road if those students avoid dropping out of high school. While the savings associated with year-round school schedules may not show up on something as straightforward as a utility bill, they still exist.

Like the impact on students and teachers, the financial ramifications for year-round schooling do not seem significantly negative. But for cash-strapped districts, any upfront costs can be a deal-breaker.

What other potential costs or savings do you associate with year-round schooling?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

Academic Plateau: The Worse-Off Generation?

The great dream of all parents is that their children will grow up to have even better life circumstances than they do. Parents want their little ones to have more materially and academically – to, in essence, face more opportunities in their lives and continue to progress. In America, this desire has translated to a reality in general terms. Robert J. Gordon of the New York Times reports that a typical American was four times as “well off” in 2007 as in 1937, and eight times better off compared to 1902. He points out that these numbers of improvement have traditionally had a direct correlation with the level of education achieved. As the American public has become better educated, its quality of life has risen.

But just how far up can improvement numbers rise? At what point do Americans become so comfortable with their ways of life that they simply stop trying to achieve more?

If you look at the education system, beginning with the K-12 years and extending into the college years, it looks as if current generations of Americans may end up worse off than their parents, and potentially their grandparents too. In 1970, 80 percent of Americans graduated with an official high school diploma. That number was only at 74 percent in 2000. The numbers are climbing back up, with the Department of Education reporting that the dropout rate was only 7 percent in 2011 but the way those numbers are calculated needs consideration. Those who group G.E.D. earners in with other high school diploma recipients when it comes to graduation rates present a skewed view because long term, G.E.D. students earn around the same amount as high school dropouts.

Initiatives to democratize education, like No Child Left Behind, have actually hurt schools by placing too much emphasis on teacher performance and ignoring the learning needs of the students. Increasingly K-12 teachers have to prove themselves to onlookers and at the demise of the young people who are there to learn. Certainly factors outside the school environment can affect the likelihood that a student will earn a high school diploma. In 2011, 14 percent of Hispanic students dropped out of high school, compared to 7 percent of Black students and 5 percent of White students, proving that minority groups are still at a disadvantage when it comes to the American education system. Poverty, hunger, family dysfunction and just a general lack of educated role models play into the way these numbers add up.

But if the high school dropout rate is higher than it has been in past generations, one of the first places to look for answers is in the classroom. What can educators do to ensure the students sitting at their desks are equipped to outperform their ancestors academically and in their careers? Is there really any way to battle environmental factors and stringent teacher accountability metrics and come out on the winning side of educating America’s youth?

For the graduates of 2020 and beyond to live up to their parents dreams of a better life, a better foundation is needed in K-12 years. The flame of desire when it comes to academic achievement must be fanned in the foundational learning years. A future that is “better” than the present is one that not only has material gains, but academic ones too. At some point, having things will simply not be enough anymore. American students will need a renewed love of learning to come out ahead of past generations and that passion will need to be born in K-12 classrooms.

In what ways do you think this generation of students will be worse or better off from its parents’ generation?

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

5 Quick Facts You Should Know About Poverty and School Funding

The current U.S. economy continues to improve, but there is one area that is still feeling the squeeze from the recession years: K-12 public school funding. Recently, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that 34 states are contributing less funding on a per student basis than they did prior to the recession years. Since states are responsible for 44 percent of total education funding in the U.S., these dismal numbers mean a continued crack down on school budgets despite an improving economy.  In extreme cases, like in Philadelphia and Chicago, individual districts have had to tap into other money and reserves to cover the basics of public education in their areas.

These budget cuts have hit low-income schools the hardest. Here are five facts you should know about how the decrease in funding has affected low-income schools.

  1. 1. Funding to low-income Title I schools has decreased since 2010. A number of states have cut pre-K educational per student funding in recent years and many have even had to reduce enrollment numbers.
  2. Overall, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that districts collected just over 2 percent lower on property taxes ending in March than in the year before.

As we know, property taxes pay much of public education costs. While states have been cut throat in reducing spending, they have not been as vigilant in raising revenue sources through taxes and fees. This makes a dire problem even worse.

  1. In 23 states, state and local governments together spend less per student in the poorest districts than those that are more affluent, according to 2012 federal data and reported in The Washington Post.

The differences in funding are severe in some states. Pennsylvania spends 33 percent less on the poorest school districts per-pupil than on the wealthiest. In Missouri, the differential is 17 percent.

Across the United States, states and localities spend 15 percent less on average per pupil in the poorest districts than in the most affluent, according to the Washington Post.

  1. Poverty makes it more difficult for children to succeed in school. These students tend to have more needs than their middle-class and well-off peers.

Consider that children from poor families also are behind their counterparts on nearly every measure of academic achievement. Then look even deeper and note that children living in poverty often come to school without having had enough sleep, and without having had breakfast.  They often experience family violence, abuse, secondhand smoke, neglect, poor clothing and shoes.  Even though they have limited experiences in the world, they may not be able to pay for field trips and cannot pay for extracurricular activities of any kind, which could actually expand their experience base.  This is the frightening reality for millions of children, and teachers are very likely to have impoverished students in their class.

  1. Less state spending on education certainly affects the learning experience but it also impacts other areas of the economy. Unemployed teachers and administrators have less to pump back into the economy and the viscous cycle of K-12 underfunding is furthered.  While unemployment is a factor in poverty for some, there are many who are employed and still live below the poverty line. A higher level of education is needed for high paying jobs that can support a family.  It is difficult to support a family with a minimum wage job, even when working full-time.  The conundrum is furthered when school funding is diminishing—removing one more source of hope for ending the cycle.

If we cannot fully fund our public schools how can we expect things like the achievement gap to close or high school graduation rates to rise? It was understandable that budgets had to be slashed when the bottom dropped out of the economy but now that we are in a more stable place, it is time to get back to funding what matters most: the education of our K-12 students.

How do you think we can address the intersecting issues of poverty and school funding in our public school system?

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

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, list, Matthew Lynch

Bilingual Education: 5 Reasons Why Starting Early is Important

This generation of K-12 students is growing up in a society that is increasingly bilingual. Foreign language requirements have long been a core requirement for high school graduation and are also part of most arts-based college degree programs. Along with Spanish, languages like French and German are common options for students. But is high school early enough to learn another language? There are actually more benefits to learning a second language much earlier, even as early as kindergarten. Here are 5 reasons it is important to start bilingual education early:

  1. Simply put—fluency is easier to come by when you learn earlier.

It generally takes 5–7 years to be proficient in a second language.  Second-generation Hispanic children raised in the United States usually learn to speak English very well by adulthood, even though three-quarters of their parents speak mostly Spanish and are not English proficient.  However only 23 percent of first-generation immigrants from Spanish-speaking countries—those that began learning later in life, say they speak English very well.  Pew Hispanic Center statistics have shown that 88 percent of the members of the second generation—those children that were introduced to English at an early age, described themselves as strong English speakers.  This phenomenon should apply to children who speak English as their first language as well.  In other words, U.S. students should be introduced to a second language at a young age in order to be fluent by adulthood.  In fact, I believe that all K-12 students should have Spanish and English fluency by graduation.

  1. Bilingual children have an academic edge.

Studies in language development show that when young children have more exposure to all languages at an early age, it actually gives them a distinct academic advantage throughout life. There is often an argument that students should first master the English language before branching out to others – but why can’t both be taught simultaneously? Bilingual children are able to focus more intently on the topics at hand and avoid distractions from academic pursuits. They are also able to demonstrate higher levels of cognitive flexibility, or the ability to change responses based on environment and circumstances.

  1. There are cultural benefits that come from learning other languages.

The children who come from English-speaking homes can lend their language expertise to friends from Spanish-speaking homes, and vice versa. Contemporary communication technology has eliminated many global barriers when it comes to socialization and even doing business. It makes sense that language boundaries should also come down and with help from our K-12 education system.

Dual language programs show students a broader world view, whatever the native language of the student.

  1. A bilingual brain is a more powerful brain.

Children who learn their first second-language words at the age of 5 can benefit from dual language curriculum. Learning is learning. The more that children can take advantage of new concepts, the more in tune their brains will be to all learning throughout life. Some studies have also found that the aging of the brain is slower and the employment rate is higher in adults with bilingual capabilities. Why not set kids up for success and strengthen long-term brain health while we are at it?

  1. It leads to greater opportunities with collaborative learning.

Dual language programs show students a broader world-view, whatever the native language of the student, and lead to greater opportunities for collaborative learning. We should not limit what children learn based on outdated principles masked in patriotism.

By implementing bilingual options even younger, K-12 students stand to benefit long-term – both academically and in life. There really should be no reason why these students are not introduced to a second language as early as Kindergarten.

What do you think about introducing dual-language to early elementary-school aged children?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in list, Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

3 Simple Ways to Improve Parental Involvement in Schools

As educators, we talk a lot about the role of teachers in the lives of students and debate the best ways to strengthen the classroom experience for students from all backgrounds. There is only so much a teacher can do, though, particularly with large class sizes and limited resources. Even teachers in the best of circumstances are limited when it comes to hours in the day and the amount of material that must be covered. As K-12 academic standards become more rigorous, parental involvement becoming an even more integral piece of a student’s success.

The timing couldn’t be worse though, from a cultural standpoint. A report released in February by Stanford University that found that the number of U.S. households with two working parents nearly doubled from 25 percent in 1968 to 48 percent in 2008, and that doesn’t even factor in parents who have part-time jobs, health issues or other children that vie for their time. Sending children off to school is a relief for many parents who need a place for their children to go and put their faith in the school to make those hours productive ones.

Asking parents to pick up some of the “slack” for teachers is often perceived as a burden and not as the legitimate parental duty it actually is. If you look at students living in poverty, whose own parents may not have played an active role in their own K-12 learning, the chance of parental involvement in the education process is even slimmer. No teacher would argue the fact that parents ARE needed to maximize student success – so how can educators, and society as a whole, make it so?

The parental difference

The most obvious benefit of parental involvement is more time spent on academic learning, with direct results in student performance. There are other benefits too, though, like:

  • Parents being aware of what is taking place at the school and getting involved.
  • Parents better understanding where their children may struggle, and not just hearing it secondhand at a teacher conference.
  • Better attendance and participation for kids who follow the enthusiasm and good example of their parents.
  • Parent-child bonding over a common goal (and what better one than education?).

Parents are important to children’s success…now what?

Teachers reading this are likely shaking their heads as their frustration builds. Yes, parents are needed! Yes, students perform better if their parents are involved in their academics! But HOW do we get the message across to parents?

Here are a few approaches that have worked to trigger parental interest in what happens at school:

In schools

The Sunnyside Schools school district in Washington has designed a pilot program that will engage parents and investigate what methods best keep parents involvement in education of children the highest. Regular, informal meetings are part of the plan and a family advocacy group is working with the school district to find the best solutions.

In June 2013 Chicago Public Schools CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett unveiled a five-year action plan to help kids get ready for their college, career and life. In that plan, she discussed the importance of holding adults accountable as indispensable allies and says they must enforce homework, turn off the television and make education a priority. To help parents keep children on track, her action plan promises to launch city-wide “Parent Universities” that help parents learn more about appropriate expectations of their children, how to build academic skills and ways to support their college plans. Parents can also learn more to help better their own lives.

Using technology

ParentSquare is a simple to use, private communication platform that streamlines communication via web, email, text or mobile app. The easy-to-use interface offers two-way messaging, file and photo sharing, event and volunteer sign-up and more. With tabs for messages, events, people, photos, files and other options, parents can log into one system and have all the information they need. In short, ParentSquare makes school-to-home messaging simple, empowering parents to take a more active role in the academic success of their kids. Some of the standout features of ParentSquare include two-way messaging, text, email, web and mobile apps ensure schools reach every parent, and a safe place to store photos.

ParentSquare eliminates overwhelm and fragmentation that can come with the various means of communication available, making it easier for parents to participate and teachers to keep track of their communications.

Although getting parents to the right level of participation will take at least a generation of K-12 students, recent advancements designed to encourage parental involvement in our current cultural climate give us hope that we will see these changes happen.

 

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, OpEducation, Policy & Reform, Testing

Why K-12 Education Still Needs Federal Oversight

Educating American children has always been a responsibility that has fallen heavily on the states. As the public school system matured in the 20th century, however, it became increasingly apparent that states left to their own educational devices meant dangerous consequences for many children—especially students with disabilities and those living in poverty, for example. Historically, the federal government has always been the one to pick up the slack in K-12 education when states have fallen short.

In his piece for The Daily Beast, Jonah Edelman of Stand for Children warns that members of the newly-seated Congress have already voiced intentions to reduce accountability and transparency over states’ educational systems, while providing additional flexibility with federal funding.

Contrary to what some states-rights activists claim, states do not always act in the best interests of their residents, especially when it comes to education. Left to their own devices, states tend to enact discriminatory practices.

My home state of Mississippi is an example of state control gone awry. If its schools were wholly reliant on the state to outline learning benchmarks and divvy up funding (based on a state population with 24 percent in poverty and over 70 percent of its students eligible for free-and-reduced-price lunch), the inequalities would compound exponentially.

And those inequalities are already startling. For example, while 83 percent of high schools in New Hampshire offer calculus, only 41 percent of those in Mississippi do.

Mississippi has never quite been able to recover from its rampant poverty that began after the Civil War. Even when freedom was granted to slaves in the state and nearby, the African-American population was not able to elevate its quality of life due to the barriers erected by segregation and Jim Crow laws. Less-overt inequalities still exist that keep each new generation of African-American students in the state from breaking the cycle of poverty at home and underachievement in the classroom.

Edelman mentions issues like desegregation as wins for the federal government when states refused to do the right thing for all students. Without federal intervention, for instance, we wouldn’t have programs like the DREAM Act, which encourages continued education for students who might otherwise have been eligible for deportation. Instead, because of this federal program, they can contribute positively to their communities and to our country.

For one, federal guidance is needed to measure how much students are learning from one state to the next. Establishing a common high bar for academic performance that includes rigorous college-prep expectations can only be brought forth through federal involvement in schools.

It will be interesting to see what twists and turns the NCLB rewrites take and certainly no group will ever be completely satisfied. But the basic principle that guaranteeing every student in every state equal access to education is one worth fighting for.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform

What Factors Make a School Effective?

Although diverse school models exist, a fundamental question remains—how are we to know whether or not a school model is effective, and how can effectiveness be judged? A number of research studies focus on characteristics of effective schools. However, there is debate over which attributes should be considered when describing successful schools.

According to some researchers, student performance should be the primary indicator of a successful school. It makes sense, really, since the sole purpose of schools is educating their students. Other researchers propose that students’ social characteristics, such as personal growth should be included when determining effective schools. Another issue with school effectiveness research is that findings are predominantly based on research conducted in elementary schools or unique school settings in the inner city.  Consequently, it is suggested that these findings cannot be generalized to all schools.

In truth, there is no one factor that can accurately determine the effectiveness of K-12 schools. Instead, it is a multi-faceted conversation and one that evolves with each generation of students. As suggested above, the context of schooling will impact factors that contribute to effectiveness in specific schools. At the same time, there are attributes and factors that contribute to effectiveness across schooling contexts. By understanding an array of effectiveness attributes we are able to observe which attributes exist at a particular school and which, if adopted might facilitate effectiveness, given a particular school context.

Common elements of success

A 2008 study describes five common characteristics that make up an effective school; these characteristics, and the theory behind them has also been described as the five-factor theory.

  • The first factor is quality leadership.  In other words, students perform better where the principal provides strong leadership.  Effective leaders are visible, able to successfully convey the school’s goals and visions, collaborate with teachers to enhance their skills, and are involved in the discovery of and solutions to problems.
  • The second factor is having high expectations of students, as well as teachers.  High expectations of students have repeatedly been shown to have a positive impact on students’ performance. More attention should be paid to high expectations of teachers. In other words, teachers who are expected to teach at high levels of effectiveness are able to reach the level of expectations, particularly when teacher evaluations and teacher professional development is geared toward improving instructional quality.
  • The third characteristic of a successful school is the ongoing screening of student performance and development.  Schools should use assessment data to compare their students with others from across the country. Effective use of assessment data allows schools to identify problematic areas of learning at the classroom and school levels, so that solutions can be generated as to how to best address the problems.
  • The fourth characteristic of a successful school is the existence of goals and direction.  Administration should actively construct goals and then effectively communicate them to appropriate individuals (i.e., students, teachers, community-at-large).  School principals must also be open and willing to incorporate innovation into goals for school processes and practices. It is important to invite input from all stakeholders in the process of developing school goals. Student performance has been shown to improve in schools where all in the school community work toward goals that are communicated and shared among all in the learning environment.
  • The fifth and final factor of a successful school is the extent to which the school is secure and organized. For maximum learning to occur, students need to feel secure.  Respect is a quality that is promoted and is a fundamental aspect of a safe school.  There are also a number of trained staff and programs, such as social workers, who work with problem students before situations get out of hand.

Other elements of student success

Apart from the five factors of a successful school already mentioned, the size of the school seems to be a school effectiveness factor.  Research has found that the smaller the school, the better students perform, especially in the case of older students.  This is the rationale behind the concept of schools-within-schools. Students in smaller learning environments feel more connected to their peers and teachers, pass classes more often, and have a higher probability of going to college.

A number of school districts view preschool education as a factor that will influence overall effectiveness across all schools located within the district. Evidence suggests that children with preschool experiences fare better academically and socially as they enter kindergarten and beyond. Experiences in literacy and numeracy among early learners not only prepares preschoolers for a kindergarten curriculum that has heightened expectations of prior knowledge, but also helps identify early learners who will need additional support to ensure they are able to have positive learning experiences later on.

Additional factors that influence effective schools include time to learn, teacher quality, and school and parental trust. Research supports the commonsensical view that the more time a student spends learning, and the more efficiently that time is used, the higher their achievement.   Schools that find creative ways to extend time on learning will likely be more effective. Schools with high quality teachers also tend to be more effective. Schools able to hire teachers from high quality teacher education programs increase the possibility of being an effective school.

School effectiveness can also be influenced by the frequency, relevancy, and quality of the teacher professional development offered by the school and/or school district. Trust and parental participation are also features of a successful school.  Trust between all parties of the school community is vital for enhancing the school’s effectiveness because it supports the prospect that parents and teachers believe in the motives and actions of each other.  Parental participation is also important because it sends the message to students that the adults in their lives—both teachers and parents—believe in the importance of education and are willing to make time to support students’ educational experiences and efforts.

So there is no simple solution for labeling the effectiveness of a particular school – but it should certainly go beyond assessments alone.

What are some keys to school effectiveness in your opinion?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, list, Matthew Lynch, Mississippi, Policy & Reform,

6 Reasons Why You Should Care About High School Dropout Rates

The good news is that high school dropout rates are at an all-time low. The national average is 7 percent.

However, there are too many people who slip through the cracks, especially when you consider all the alternate options for finishing school that are available in this day and age. The dropout rate should be negligible.

Having too many high school dropouts is costly. Here are reasons why we should focus on reducing them even further:

  1. The dropout rates cost individuals a lot of money. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that dropouts bring in just $20,241 annually, which is $10,000 less than high school graduates and over $36,000 less than a person holding a bachelor’s degree. The poverty rate for dropouts is over twice as high as college grads, and the unemployment rate for dropouts is generally 4 percentage points higher than the national average. In the end, the lifetime earnings of high school dropouts are $260,000 LESS than peers who earn a diploma.
  2. The dropout rates cost our society a lot of money. The financial ramifications of dropping out of high school hurt more than the individual. It’s estimated that half of all Americans on public assistance are dropouts. If all of the dropouts from the class of 2011 had earned diplomas, the nation would benefit from an estimated $154 billion in income over their working lifetimes. Potentially feeding that number is the fact that young women who give up on high school are nine times more likely to be, or become, young single mothers. A study out of Northeastern University found that high school dropouts cost taxpayers $292,000 over the course of their lives.
  3. The rates are linked with heightened criminal activity and incarceration rates. It’s not just about the money though. Over 80 percent of the incarcerated population is high school dropouts – making this an issue that truly impacts every member of the community. Numbers are higher for dropouts of color; 22 percent of people jailed in the U.S. are black males who are high school dropouts. As a society, we are not just paying into public assistance programs for dropouts, but we are paying to protect ourselves against them through incarceration.

I wonder what these numbers would look like if we took the nearly $300K that taxpayers put in over the course of a dropout’s lifetime and deposited it into their K-12 learning upfront. If we invested that money, or even half of it, into efforts to enhance the learning experience and programs to prevent dropping out, what would that do to dropout, poverty and incarceration rates? Right now the process seems to be reactionary. What would it look like if more preventative actions were put in place?

  1. Those who don’t stay in school are not likely to value a career path over a job. Over 68 percent of high school graduates begin college coursework the following fall. Students who earn high school diplomas are that much more inspired to continue their academic journey and seek out a lifelong career match, not just clock hours at a “job” until retirement. The fulfillment people receive from a job they enjoy should not be underestimated. Studies have found that happier people are healthier and are even able to better fight off common illnesses like colds and the flu. Considering more time is spent working than in any other pursuit, job satisfaction plays a major role in overall happiness. The value of careers go beyond individual satisfaction, however. As a nation, everyone benefits from well-educated workers who earn a living in areas where they possess natural talent too.
  2. Staying in high school allows students to have valuable experiences. The childhood years go by so quickly and high school represents the last stage before adulthood. The social opportunities that high school provides are not duplicated anywhere else, with the exception of a college setting and high school dropouts miss out on both. What’s more, high school dropouts tend to get into more trouble than their in-school peers. The National Dropout Prevention Center reports that 82 percent of U.S. prisoners are high school dropouts. The life lessons found in the later years of high school are more valuable than they get credit for and the peer-level socialization is a vital part of late-childhood development.
  3. To help us value learning for its own sake. In our material society, it is difficult to explain the intangible value of things like intellectualism, particularly to young people. Until greater value is placed on obtaining knowledge for no other reason than to broaden individual and societal wisdom, students will continue to drop out of high school. After all, how can the economic importance of a high school diploma really be explained to children who have never had to earn their own living? Even those in dire socio-economic conditions do not have a grounded concept of what money means in quality of life and long-term happiness.

What’s interesting about high school dropout rates is how far the consequences can reach. It’s not just about someone not finishing school, nor is it even about that individual not making as much money as they could. It has economic and social ramifications for all of society.

Can you think of other reasons we should look for ways to increase high school graduation rates?

  • no reactions
0
Share