put kids first

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform April 8, 2016

Texting, Tweeting and Terrible Grammar in K-12 Schools

Internet and cell phone cultures have brought a whole new meaning to American slang. Not only are kids these days speaking informally, but now those relaxed rules of grammar are sneaking into written words too.

The Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life project asked middle and high school educators about their thoughts on digital tools and the impact on student writing. Over two-thirds of the respondents said that writing platforms provided through Internet and cell phone use have improved student creativity. Students also have more outlets for collaboration which encourages improvement and “putting it out there” in terms of writing that may have been closeted to notebooks or diaries in pre-Internet generations.

The biggest problem with these digital avenues of composition, according to surveyed teachers, is the blurring of lines between formal and informal writing. Abbreviations are common, particularly on platforms like Twitter that have a 140-character limit. Most smartphones now have no limits on texting characters, but students that owned phones with the 160-character limits of just a few years ago have already formed short, abbreviated habits. In the digital realm, short and sweet is the key – even if a grammar, punctuation and writing formalities fall by the wayside. The same is not true of educational writing pursuits though, as K-12 writing instructors must prepare students for the demands of strong, professional writing in college and the workplace.

A report released by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills found that over 26 percent of college graduates have deficient writing skills. These findings were not based on graduation assessment exams, but compiled by interviewing actual employers. These employers said that many college-educated employees could not even accomplish the basic writing tasks of the job proficiently. How are these students earning college degrees if their writing is not up to par though? With the average U.S. student accruing $35,200 in college debt, it would seem learning the basics of writing, at least above a “deficient” level, would be a given takeaway.

The deficiency is not the fault of the colleges and universities though, at least not totally. Students are showing up for college without the skills needed to write well and with schools assuming they already know the basics. The 2011 book Academically Adrift found that less than half college students felt their writing had improved at all in college. Less than half also said they were never required to write a paper longer than 20 pages. In a nutshell, the writing proficiency that half of these students exhibited as seniors in high school was the same four years later, despite the so-called rigors and high cost associated with a college education.

While colleges could certainly take a hint from these numbers, the work of remedial writing education is not the responsibility of colleges. It falls on the teachers that come long before the adult years. These teachers face an uphill battle though, especially in an age where formal writing is often confused with everyday communication. The tools for creativity in the writing process may be better than ever, but the constraints of digital communication are hurting students’ composition and their attention spans too.

How can students who have essentially made a lifestyle of short, segmented, slang-ridden writing conform to the formal communication still expected in the real world? It starts with teachers who set high standards and do not waver. In the long run, the fear of losing a student’s interest by insisting on high writing standards is a small one compared to the implications of college graduates viewed as writing-deficient by the people who sign their paychecks.

How can K-12 teachers win out against the negative impact of digital communication on formal writing?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform March 31, 2016

Does school choice help or hurt students?

Last week over 10,000 schools and organizations across the country celebrated National School Choice Week with yellow scarves, marches on state capitols and a variety of independently planned events in all 50 states.

In some instances, these gatherings were met with resistance from teacher’s unions who accuse the organizers of the week of trying to create a hostile environment for traditional public schools by touting a family’s ability to choose other options. I don’t know the official motives of the week itself but it does bring up a point I’ve discussed before: Does the school choice movement hurt public schools?

Mississippi, which ranks last in student achievement in the nation, does not have charter school options just yet. It seems to me that any attempt to offer solutions to this cycle of student non-achievement would be welcomed, especially since public charter and magnet schools have shown some success in other low-performing states. On the other hand, by essentially privatizing education are we taking away precious resources from public school reform and hurting the students who stay in them?

National School Choice Week does not just emphasize magnet and charter schools. The official releases from the organization call it an all-inclusive “celebration of educational opportunity” that encompasses traditional public schools, magnet schools, charter schools, private schools, virtual schools and even homeschooling. No type of schooling is promoted over another and all positive celebrations are accepted.

By highlighting all the options, are parents more empowered (and students set up better for success) or are we undermining the great equalizer of our youth — the public school system?

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Parental Involvement, Policy & Reform March 30, 2016

Understanding Parental Involvement

When we discuss parental involvement in schools, we often concentrate on ways in which parental involvement can help schools perform better and how parents can help their children excel in learning. It is a well-known fact that parental involvement can help students achieve success in school; however, it is difficult to measure how much parental involvement is required of parents in order for them to help their children to improve their learning skills and performance.

Parental actions that obstruct the learning process and other educational goals are equally immeasurable. Comprehending the impact of parental involvement requires understanding deficiencies that reduce student performance, and providing parents with tools to diminish their effects. This same principle applies to understanding the ways that schools can encourage parental involvement in low income communities. Situations like these necessitate sensitivity to ethnicity, race, religious affiliation, linguistic challenges, single parenthood, and familial characteristics.

Parents are often influenced by their ethnic background when trying to help their children improve academically. It is imperative that school personnel understand the importance of the family’s cultural characteristics in the educational process. Schools should structure parental involvement programs that take advantage of the strong qualities individual parents bring to the schooling process, as a means for promoting improved relations between parents and the school. Interactions between parents and school personnel are meant to provide information and assistance to both the school and parents.

It is important to monitor how parents act on the instructions, information, and advice offered through such programs. Due to various cultural differences, some families may succeed in obtaining the maximum possible benefit of such interactional programs, while other families may fail to utilize these opportunities. Another factor to consider is the possibility of conflicts between parent’s cultural and linguistic background, and the social, linguistic, and cultural values existing in the school.

Schools often promote common ideals of a capitalistic culture, and, in doing so, present the impoverished, minorities, the disabled, and immigrants, as inferior. The success of parental involvement programs often depends on reaching parents living within different political, economic, cultural, and social realities. In order to help parents make better use of parental involvement programs, it is necessary to attend to these differences, and incorporate ways to meet the varied needs and expectations of parents within the parental involvement program.

The success of parental education and involvement programs depends on the ways parents can make use of their social, human, and financial resources to help their children perform better at school. Parents can also help their children improve their learning skills by providing attention to their children’s studies and participating in meaningful collaboration with school personnel and authorities. Historically, schools have played a major part in improving social conditions. Collaboration between schools and parents can help alleviate the challenges facing students who are living in families that have a lower socioeconomic status.

Policy makers must realize the importance of public schools and their role in facilitating the prosperity of our nation. Federal and state agencies have initiated various programs to improve the relationship between schools, parents, and communities. In order to increase parental involvement and reduce barriers that restrict parents from participating in the education system, it is essential to offer parent education for impoverished parents or parents with disabilities, so that they may learn better ways to boost their children’s learning skills.

The value of parental involvement programs has been well established. Effective parental involvement programs are best achieved when the program originates with the study of the school community, and then proceeds to develop instruction, and provide advice and information that reflects the circumstances, needs, and potential contributions of families who are a part of the school community.

Schools must be prepared for the fact that one outcome of effective parental involvement programs will be the desire of parents to become partners in the decision-making process existing in schools. Thus, school personnel must possess a genuine belief that shared responsibility for multiple aspects of the educational enterprise will result in improved learning environments for children and youth.

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform March 30, 2016

5 Years Later and We Are Still Waiting for Superman

By Matthew Lynch

Recently I viewed the documentary, Waiting for Superman, for the umpteenth time, and I noted that almost 5 years after the film’s September 24, 2010 U. S. premiere, the American educational system is still not living up to its potential. Sure, education reform was the phrase on the tip of everyone’s tongue, but after a year most of the fervor and commitment to educational change that was initially exhibited has all but subsided.

The comparisons with other developed countries show that the strongest nation in the world is still falling behind academically. The cost per pupil in the U.S. has soared to five times the level in the 1950s, after adjusting for inflation. With this kind of money being pumped into the system, why are many our school systems of such a low caliber, and further falling behind?

Statistics and common sense born of observation tell us that the biggest crisis in our schools is finding ways to educate students in low-income areas. However, as Waiting for Superman illustrates, our educational problems are not limited to poverty-stricken areas alone. As Lesley Chilcott, producer of the Waiting for Superman put it, “the dirty little secret… is that middle- and upper-class communities are suffering as well. When we talk about U.S. students ranking twenty-fifth in math, we’re not just talking about underserved communities, we’re talking overall.” Yet, despite decades of knowing that these problems exist, little improvements are being made to the system itself. Of course, everyone seemingly wants to improve America’s education system; they just do not seem to know or agree on how to do it.

The American public must believe that educational reform is a top priority issue in these times of severe economic troubles. It is understandable that, in today’s economy, people are primarily concerned about their jobs and putting food on the table. Upgrading education, although important to most, can hold a low priority in the mind of the average American, who is mostly concerned with keeping a roof over their head. The paradox here is that this is precisely the time to make that investment into education. When times are tough in an economy such as ours, workers need to improve their skills to compete effectively in the local (and global) marketplace. The education system is where people turn to acquire these skills.

Furthermore, enhanced skills and technological talents are going to be desperately needed in the future as America continues to struggle towards sustaining a dynamic 21st century labor force. Production is not getting easier and simpler — in fact, it is just the opposite. Along the same lines, workers down the road will need to be able to adapt to technologies that are just now being developed. If American students and workers find themselves in an educational system that cannot fulfill these necessary, required functions because it is sub-par, not only will these individuals and their families find little success in an economy that has left them behind; it will cripple America’s competitiveness.

Waiting for Superman has been criticized as being against teacher’s unions, placing the blame too squarely on the shoulders of educators, and misrepresenting educational statistics. Nevertheless, the film shined a bright spotlight on the harsh reality of our educational system, showing the exodus of middle and upper class children from our public schools; the sadness of the lottery system; and the general hopelessness that some express about our educational system and its future.

One segment of Waiting for Superman illustrates American self-confidence through an image of kids doing daredevil bike stunts, and then crashing. This scene shows, in a metaphorical sense, that while our students seem to have confidence, many do not have the skills to actually succeed.

A year later, Waiting for Superman still serves as a stark reminder of just how bad our educational system has become, and just how ineffective most of our efforts at improving it have been. The American educational system has reached a turning point, a time when things seem at their most dire, and yet many appear to simply sit idly by “Waiting for Superman.”

America needs to view this film as a public call to action, where each of us is summoned to be a Superman (or Superwoman, as the case may be), or at least to lend a hand in saving our educational system, perhaps without the flashy heroics and cape. Rather than waiting, we should strive towards getting every educator, educational leader, government official, parent, and citizen to educate themselves about the problems that exist in our educational system, and to work together to fix them.

What is most important is that we understand the deficiencies in our educational system, and strictly forbid placing blame — which rarely serves to encourage cooperation. Rather, we must demonstrate accountability for our situation and fulfill our responsibility to our children. Collectively, we must come together with an understanding that “Superman” is not coming to save our children, and it is up to us to work together to find innovative ways to rise to the challenge of fixing our education system.

The future must be planned for; now. It certainly will not be an overnight process. However, by taking positive, productive steps, one at a time, an enormous amount of ground can be covered in the coming years. If we simply work together, we can restore the U.S. educational system to its former preeminence, and give our children the bright futures they deserve in our great country and aboard. We must become the Super-citizens that we have been waiting for.

Follow Matthew Lynch, Ed.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/lynch39083

Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, list, Matthew Lynch, Teachers March 27, 2016

5 Reasons Why Teachers Can’t Do It All

You are probably familiar with the concept of the “superstar teacher,” particularly since it is perpetuated in popular culture through movies like the classic Edward James Olmos film “Stand and Deliver” and 2012’s “Won’t Back Down.” The idea is that with the right teacher – a committed, bright, in-tune, talented teacher – P-12 problems like the achievement gap and high dropout rates will cease to exist. If only every student had a standout teacher like the ones portrayed in these shows, the very P-12 system as we know it would be transformed for the better.

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 23, 2016

Necessary Shifts: A Change in K-12 Teacher Education

In the not-so-distant past, public schools used to represent the most major building block in the education and socialization of students outside of the home. Young minds were molded by the teachers, administrators and friends they met in the confines of the school setting. Teachers had the ability to teach in much more isolated circumstances, even ten years ago, than they are able to do today.

With respect to the students of the past, modern classrooms are full of sophisticated youngsters that show up with a detailed view of the world formed from more than home life experiences. Instant access to knowledge from the age a child can press a touchscreen on a Smartphone and widespread socialization from as young as six weeks old in the form of childcare atmospheres mean that kids arrive at Kindergarten with less naivety than previous generations. Teachers are not handed a clean slate but rather one that is already cluttered with random knowledge that must be fostered or remediated.

Teacher Education Innovation

It stands to reason that if students are changing, teachers need to change too. More specifically, the education that teachers receive needs to be modified to meet the modern needs of K – 12 classrooms. There are policy and practice changes taking place all over the world – many driven by teachers – that address the cultural shifts in the classroom. Some that show a lot of promise include:

Subject-specific recruiting by colleges and universities. The book Teaching 2030, written by 13 experts in K-12 classroom pedagogy, calls for education schools to stop letting in any and every education major in the broad sense of the subject area. Instead, the experts suggest that colleges become more selective to meet the demand of actual student need. Young people that are interested in teaching high-demand subject areas like mathematics, bilingual education, physical science and special education should be viewed as more valuable to institutions of higher learning. This needs-based philosophy addresses actual voids in the industry and better equips schools to meet students’ needs.
Virtual learning options. Though colleges often get all of the attention when it comes to online learning programs, K-12 education is also shifting more toward distance learning options. During the 2010-2011 school year, 1.8 million students in grades K-12 were enrolled in some type of distance learning program. That is up from just 50,000 in the 2000-2001 school year, according to the International Association for K-12 Online Learning. This is a trend that teachers-to-be simply cannot ignore. Virtual learning is not reserved for only those that can afford it; 40 U.S. states have state-run online programs and 30 of those states provide statewide, full-time K-12 schools. The University of Central Florida is one of the only schools to offer a virtual-school emphasis for education majors that lets students apprentice with Florida Virtual School instructors.
Continued classroom learning for administrators. Since the people at the top are generally the decision-makers, they should be required to return to the field every now and then. On the other hand, the teachers that are actually in the student trenches should be empowered to help change educational policy based on the reality of the modern classroom. The Center for Quality Teaching supports a “teacherpreneur” program that would “blur the lines… between those who teach… and those who lead.” Actionable strides toward closing the public education gap between teachers and administrators are necessary for real, effective change to take place in K-12 classrooms.

Public education in America needs teachers that are better trained to meet the needs of specific student populations, those that understand the necessary role of distance learning, and those that are willing to speak up to facilitate classroom change. Without these teachers, effective reform to meet global demand is not possible.

How have the roles of teachers changed over the years in your opinion? What is the single greatest obstacle that teachers face that stands in the way of maximum K-12 student achievement?

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

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform, Teachers March 22, 2016

The Four Biggest Factors In Teacher Turnover

Teacher turnover is a major problem in education that affects student, teachers, and administrators alike. But what’s behind the massive migration and exodus of new teachers? And what’s to be done about it? Researchers have identified four major factors that should be addressed to reduce teacher turnover and to retain them for a longer duration in the profession.

1. Compensation

Some studies suggest that, contrary to popular belief, salary is not the number one reason for teachers’ leaving the profession, although sufficient evidence indicates that it plays a significant role. Those who teach in-demand subjects like mathematics and science are more likely to quit because they receive more attractive offers for opportunities outside the teaching profession. While salary is a major factor in attrition among young teachers who are beginning their careers, it also acts as a deterrent to the retention of experienced and well-qualified teachers.

2. Working Conditions

According to a national survey, teachers place a lot of importance on their working conditions and consider it a key factor in their decision to leave or continue in the teaching profession. Good working conditions include administrative support, availability of professional resources, freedom to express their opinions on matters related to their profession, and the empowerment to influence policy in their schools.

Research studies reveal that the teachers who work in affluent and advantaged communities experience better working conditions than those who work in low-income communities. These conditions include lesser numbers of students to teach and more decision-making power in their schools. Teachers who work with disadvantaged students experience less appealing working conditions, with limited administrative support, fewer textbooks and supplies, and larger student groups to handle. Thus, it is evident that working conditions play an important role in a teacher’s decision to continue or leave the teaching profession, and that they contribute significantly to high teacher attrition rates.

3. Teacher Education

It is evident from several research studies that better prepared teachers stay in teaching for longer periods of time. This is especially true for those who complete traditional teacher education programs, as compared to those who are trained for a few weeks before being released into the student community.

Not all alternative pathways are ineffective or poorly conceived. Some well-designed post- baccalaureate programs enable students to acquire the same high standards as those who graduate from traditional teacher education colleges. This is accomplished by combining traditional coursework with a well-established fieldwork training experience.

However, alternative routes that do not provide adequate training and mentoring to prospective teachers add to the “revolving door” syndrome that currently plagues the teaching profession.

4. Mentoring

Without good mentors, new teachers can feel lost, frustrated, and stuck. It’s much harder to get out of a problem not faced before without the guidance of someone who already knows the solution. It’s also much easier to keep making the same mistakes without the wise word of an outside perspective. Learn more about the importance of mentoring in reducing teacher turnover in future articles!

Are you interviewing for a new placement? Ask your prospective employers what they’re doing to reduce teacher turnover. Are you already working at a school? Ask your administrators what steps are being taken to address turnover at your site. If there’s no plan in place, look over the list above and come up with some suggestions of how to tackle the four big problem areas within your district!

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Teachers March 20, 2016

Who Owns Knowledge? A Look At Curriculum.

The central focus of every curriculum is imparting knowledge in the best way possible. But who decides what “the best way possible” really is?

The K–12 curriculum is often referenced in abstract ways, with many schools and districts claiming to want to teach the “whole child.” But what does that actually mean in the context of contemporary classrooms? Not every student exposed to the same information will achieve the same success and life outcomes. Just what is actually considered knowledge is interpretive, at best. Educators must narrow information to the learning materials that will make the biggest positive impact on a particular group of students.

K–12 schools have four kinds of curriculum. Official curriculum is outlined by governmental or educational bodies as the framework for every student. Taught curriculum is what teachers actually pass on to the students under their care. Tested curriculum is what is examined in standardized and graded testing materials. Learned curriculum includes those items that may not show up on testing results but are integral to student development and the learning experience. Depending on whom you ask, any one of these categories of curriculum may be considered the strongest, while others may measure as weak or unnecessary.

Though there is some federal oversight on curriculum choices and the funding accompanying them, curriculum is generally chosen on a local level. Some of the factors that go into curriculum choices are the personal belief systems of the decision makers and their overarching worldviews. Some things are considered “absolute”—like the rules of grammar or the way math equations are solved. Many other parts of K–12 learning are interpretive and are influenced by the individual educator or by imposing views on a global scale. Even the “facts” of history may be presented in differing ways based on the type of curriculum believed correct by officials. Often what is left out of curriculum is just as telling as what is included.

When educators are involved in the role of choosing curriculum, there is an assumption that the best interests of a student population and its achievement are at heart. For the most part, this perception is true. There is a reason why teachers and administrators require degrees and continuing education courses to obtain and keep their licenses; a lot of expert thought goes into the material that is chosen for students. In recent years parents have started to become more of an influential force in curriculum choices of K–12 schools. A law passed in 2012 in New Hampshire allows parents to object to any course material presented in public schools, provided that they can recommend a suitable alternative. While this law affects a very small subset of the national student population, it represents a trend in all schools to cater to students, and more specifically to parents, as customers. If public K–12 schools are to remain equalizers, however, the demands of small, fringe groups cannot be met. While parents may believe they know what is best for their own children, curriculum decisions for the collective student body are best reserved for objective, expert educators.

As an educator, it’s your job to thoroughly understand the reasoning behind any curriculum you implement. Know the pros, so you can defend what you’re teaching, if necessary. But know the con’s, too, so that you’re prepared to explain how you’re handling or working around those. Be realistic. Be informative. Be a teacher.

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform March 17, 2016

Becoming Superman: How Americans Can Save the Nation’s Educational System

As referenced in the recent documentary, Waiting for Superman, the American educational system is not living up to it’s potential. Comparisons with other developed countries show that the strongest nation in the world is falling behind academically. Even with the tremendous changes taking place since No Child Left Behind was enacted, serious problems still exist. For example, the cost per pupil in the U.S. has soared to five times the level in the 1950s, after adjusting for inflation. With this kind of money being pumped into the system, why are our school systems in the state that they are? This is a common problem with any bureaucratic monopoly.

Statistics, and common sense born of observation, tell us that the biggest crisis in our schools is finding ways to educate students in low-income areas. However, as Waiting for Superman illustrates, our educational problems are not limited to poverty-stricken areas alone. As Lesley Chilcott, producer of the Waiting for Superman documentary put it, “The dirty little secret… is that middle- and upper-class communities are suffering as well. When we talk about U.S. students ranking twenty-fifth in math, we’re not just talking about underserved communities, we’re talking overall.” Yet, despite decades of knowing that these problems exist, little improvements are being made. Of course, everyone wants to improve our system; they just do not seem to know how to do it.

The American public must feel that educational reform is a top priority issue in these times of severe economic troubles. Today, people are concerned about their jobs and putting food on the table. Upgrading education, although theoretically important, can hold a low priority to the more pressing problems of keeping a roof over their heads. The paradox here is that this is precisely the time to make that investment into education. When times are tough, workers need to improve their skills to compete effectively in the marketplace. Education can provide those skills. Furthermore, those enhanced skills and improved technological talents are going to be desperately needed in the future as America continues to struggle in the 21st century labor force. Production is not getting easier and simpler. In fact, it is just the opposite. The skills needed in the world marketplace require a better education and improved, and more advanced abilities. Planning to turn out workers for the factories of today is a crucial element, but those same workers also need to be able to adapt to technologies that are just now being developed. Workers taught in an educational system that is subpar will not only hurt them and their families; it will cripple America’s competitiveness.

Educational reform will occur once we decide that enough is enough and make the commitment change happen no matter what it takes. When America realizes all children deserve a stellar education regardless of where they are from, whom their parents are, or what their socioeconomic status is, we will be able to reform our educational system. Americans have to stop treating minority students in underperforming urban environments like collateral damage. The disheartening reality is that America has billions of dollars to fight a two-front war, but cannot or will not properly educate its children. If a hostile country attacked America, it would take less than 24 hours for American troops to be mobilized into battle. However, we seem unable to mobilize a sea of educated teachers and administrators to wage war against academic mediocrity, which is a bigger threat to our national security than Iran or North Korea.

Waiting for Superman has been criticized as being against teachers unions, placing blame too squarely on the shoulders of educators, and misrepresenting educational statistics. However, the film also shined a bright spotlight on the harsh reality of our educational system, showing the exodus of middle and upper class children from our public schools, the sadness of the lottery system for what are perceived as the best schools, and the general hopelessness that some have about our educational system. One segment of Waiting for Superman illustrates American self-confidence through an image of kids doing daredevil bike stunts, and then crashing. This shows that while our students seem to have confidence, they do not have the skills to actually succeed. As a nation we rank behind more than 20 other developed countries when it comes to teaching math and science. Our own deep probing into our educational system has repeatedly revealed serious problems; yet, perhaps we did need such a documentary to bring it back to the forefront of people’s thoughts. Certainly, Waiting for Superman has served as a stark reminder of just how bad our educational system has become, and just how ineffective most of our efforts at improving it have been.

The American educational system has reached a turning point, a time when things seem at their most dire, and yet some simply sit idly by “Waiting for Superman.” What America needs is to view this film as a call to action, where each of us is called upon to be Superman, or at least to have a hand in saving our educational system, perhaps without the flashy heroics and cape. Rather than waiting, every educator, educational leader, government official, parent, and citizen needs to educate themselves about the problems that exist in our educational system. Each of us needs to understand the deficiencies in our educational system, and stop placing blame. Rather, we must come together with an understanding that “Superman” is not coming to save our children, and it is up to us to work together to find innovative ways to rise to the challenge of fixing our educational system. The future must be planned for now! It certainly will not be an overnight process; however, by taking steps one at a time, an enormous amount of ground can be covered in the coming years.

Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, OpEducation, Policy & Reform March 14, 2016

School Security: Just Smoke and Mirrors?

In theory, parents and educators would do anything to keep students safe, whether those students are pre-Kindergartners or wrapping up a college career. Nothing is too outlandish or over-the-top when it comes to protecting our kids and young adults. Metal detectors, security cameras, more police presence in school hallways, gated campuses – they all work toward the end goal of sheltering students and their educators and protecting the most vulnerable of our citizens.

Emotions aside though – how much does school security really increase actual safety? And do school security efforts actually hinder the learning experience? It sounds good to taut the virtues of tighter policies on school campuses but is it all just empty rhetoric?

Recently the University of Kentucky came under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union for plans to install 2,000 security cameras on campus. Representatives at UK say the move is a response to the increasing randomness of school violence at all levels of the learning process and a way to better ensure student safety. The ACLU says it is a blatant violation of privacy.

I say it is money wasted because all the security cameras in the world would not have prevented the largest school tragedies of recent history, from Sandy Hook Elementary to the Virginia Tech massacre. Security cameras and other monitoring devices give us a false feeling of security and an actionable course when there are no answers to pointless questions.

While extreme, UK’s camera monitoring plans are in sync with what is happening in K-12 schools across the nation. In the 2009 – 2010 school year, 84 percent of high schools had security cameras for safety monitoring. Over half of all middle and elementary schools had them too, with 73 and 51 percent respectively. Despite this, the National Center for Education Statistics reports that the percentage of high schools with controlled access to school buildings during normal hours is lower than that of middle and elementary students. Though not expressly stated in these findings, it would seem that in the case of high schools, cameras are more of a way to catch rule-breakers after the fact than a way to prevent violence and other criminal activities.

Students are not the only ones who are the subjects of safeguards like surveillance cameras. Teachers, administrators and other staff are also vital when it comes to putting school safety into place – and in the case of teachers, they are on the front lines of what is going on with students. Limited access to K-12 campuses is meant to protect outsiders from harming the many people who are supposed to be there. But what about student-versus-student violence, or student-versus-teacher physical altercations? In 2011, 12 percent of high schoolers reported being in a physical fight at school that year. Nearly 6 percent reported carrying a weapon, like a gun or knife, onto school property in the month preceding the survey. By the time a security camera picks up on the fact that a student has a knife or gun, is there really any timely way to prevent the inevitable.

Given the fact that state spending per student is lower than at the start of the recession, how much should schools shell out in the way of security costs? Perhaps the best investment we can make to safeguard our students and educators is in personal vigilance. Perhaps less reliance on so-called safety measures would lead to higher alertness.

What role should school security play on K-12 campuses, and should it be a financial priority?