school reform

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform

Why You Need Both Data and Common Sense for School Reform

By Matthew Lynch

The first step to positive K-12 reform within a school and a district is to find a starting point. Often, data sets are used to determine this – but really, so much more should go into it.

Districts that demonstrate continuous positive results often base their decisions on data alone, as opposed to relying on observations and data together. Schools should regularly evaluate the pros and cons of instructional programs and realize that standardized tests should constitute only a piece of the assessment puzzle rather than the entirety. Continuously monitoring the progress the school’s student body makes will allow the task force to amend the reform plan as needed.

Balancing Reform

Successful schools also take measures to institute checks and balances, to ensure the decision-making process is distributed among a variety of reform participants. Superintendents are charged with the duty of ensuring that the implementation and sustaining of improvement efforts are done in a positive manner and meet the needs of the students. The team leader’s job is to ensure teachers have all of the tools needed to foster the academic performance of students.

Accountability, Too

Districts all over the country recognize accountability as the key to the school’s improvement process. Everyone is expected to perform at optimal levels, or must face the consequences. To ensure that staff and faculty members are able to perform at optimal levels, the school district must provide them with high-quality professional development.

Modify, Modify, Modify

In order to complete the process of school reform, restructuring efforts must be monitored and evaluated. The process of evaluation can be completed in-house, or the leader can hire outside consultants to perform the task. If the task force is willing to evaluate the success of the school’s reform, they must first develop a plan for evaluation.

The team’s evaluation plan should have been developed before the reform was implemented. Performance goals that were created at the beginning of the restructuring process should be used to guide the evaluation process.  The team will need to decide who will collect, analyze, and interpret the data. In order to avoid biased results, it may be in the best interest of the school to hire an outside consultant who may provide a more objective assessment of the reform efforts. The team will also use the results to determine whether or not the reform efforts were effective.

The results may indicate that the reform was not a success. In this case, the best solution is to build upon the small successes and learn from mistakes. Another reform could then be implemented or the unsuccessful reform amended to better suit the needs of the school. School restructuring is a long-term process. Reform occurs on a continuous cycle that must be sustained in order for improvements to be maintained and furthered. Keep in mind that not every restructuring effort bears fruit. Even the best schools have to continue to work in the restructuring process.

Successfully implementing and sustaining school reform is possible. It may not be easy, but with a tremendous effort, the utilization of all resources, and the expertise of professionals, school reform can be successful. The level of success the school is able to achieve will be based on the school’s predicament. Whatever the obstacles, the leaders’ decisions need to be resolute to foster academic achievement. While data is certainly a starting point, there is a lot more that goes into the bigger picture of smart school reform – and districts should recognize that and work towards solutions that not only make sense on paper, but also in real life.

 

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

Libraries of the Future: Where Trends Are Taking K-12 Public School Libraries

Modern K-12 public libraries will offer intensely engaging learning environments to all students. How they will go about doing this is less certain but the principle trends are readily identified in various research efforts.

The goal of this post is not absolutely to regurgitate the details of high-brow research, but rather to summarize the key points, to paint a picture of what the libraries of the future will look like and how they will support students, teachers, administrators, and even parents.

The first thing to note is that students are going to have, at their disposal, a greater range of resources than ever before (and that is saying something). A principle goal of school libraries is inevitably to engage students and to provide them with skills necessary to effectively function in academic life. With the help of qualified libraries, students learn to independently research and expand their reading and writing via library resources.
Modern library resources, though, include a whole range of elements, from ebooks, to academic databases, to innovative programs that allow students to explore their creative inclinations, learn new skills, and apply their learning in innovative ways.

A key component of future libraries will be increased effectiveness as well as greater access to these types of elements. More K-12 public school libraries will learn to automate their resource management strategies and develop rewarding collaborative partnerships.

Teachers will likely see an increase in direct library supports for the classroom too. Research consistently shows evidence for the general finding that student with access to full-time, qualified librarians and to large library collections perform better in standardized tests for reading and writing.

Administrators are likely to see more return on their investment in library resources. Inevitably, the cost-efficiency of libraries is very likely to increase. This is a general trend in technology, anyway, with new technologies and features such as remote access to resources helping to reduce the general costs associated with library management. Librarians can readily expand their library resources without having to take up additional space.

Parents and students may very well enjoy better access to their public school libraries from home, too, since remote access is set to be a definite future trend. Perhaps most interesting, though, as I touched on before, is the expansion of partnerships. For instance, some public schools have taken to partnering with their local libraries and with online organizations such as Limitless Libraries and MyLibrary NYC. The latter is a major innovation launched in 2011 to essentially combine public library and school library resources for students in New York City, allowing students to request materials from any of the three public library systems that serve the area.

Anyone particularly following library trends and looking to remain up to date must also allow that there will be some further changes and shifts to come. Technology is an inevitably dynamic thing and it is having an impact on most things, education perhaps higher on the list than most.

The test for public school libraries will be the maintaining of a balance between access to resources – innovative access where possible – and managing associated costs. The good news, long-term, is that the future trends look set to help this balance, not hinder it. In the end, though, only time will really tell which trends stick among those that we are already noticing, and what new technologies will do for school libraries in the longer-term.

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

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

3 Things Every Educator Should Know about Supporting LGBT Students

With a staggering 90 percent of LGBT students experiencing verbal harassment related to their sexual orientation, it is obvious that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender, or LGBT, students have additional barriers to overcome. Dealing with discrimination toward LGBT students is a very real concern for teachers and though students have come a long way, they can still be cruel to those that they perceive as different. Peers of LGBT students frequently single them out for bullying and physical and verbal abuse.

Bullying has real implications for LGBT students, leading to high rates of absenteeism. Thus, as an educator, it is important to consider these three things as we strive to make our educational environments safer for LGBT students.

  1. Mental health is a serious issue. As Dr. Victor Schwartz, medical director of a non-profit organization that promotes emotional health among college students has discussed previously, LGBT students in particular often struggle with mental health problems. Suicide is the leading cause of death among LGBT teens. Transgendered teens are 20 times more likely to contemplate, attempt, and complete suicide.

To help someone who is struggling with their sexuality—or with others’ attitudes regarding their sexuality—Schwartz recommends that you “make sure they know you are supportive and willing to talk about anything. Let them make decisions about their sexual orientation on their own terms and when they are ready. If someone reveals their sexual orientation to you, it is important to be supportive and allow them to talk through their feelings and fears. Coming out can be a difficult process and it helps to have a strong support network.”

  1. Anti-gay bullying contributes to an achievement gap. The levels of harassment targeting LGBT students sometimes lead to absenteeism, and even to dropping out of school completely and never obtaining that very important high school diploma.

LGBT students of color are three times more likely to skip school because they do not view schools as safe places, adding to the achievement gap between the races that educational policymakers are so desperately trying to narrow.

  1. Teachers have a legal responsibility to address anti-gay abuse in schools. Legislation indicates that failure to intervene in these circumstances may jeopardize teaching certificates and licenses.  Lambda Legal Defense cautions that if teachers and counselors are not actively helpful (or worse, hurtful) they may be guilty of legal violation in their failure to address the abusive anti-gay behavior.  In many states, this could jeopardize a teacher’s certificate, as some state laws expressly forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

In recent years, many high schools have formed Gay-Straight Alliance clubs.  Like other after-school special interest clubs, supportive teachers sponsor these groups, and meet periodically to plan social events, public and community service projects, and promote understanding among all students.  Sometimes these organizations meet with resistance from the community, administrators, and school officials on the grounds of conservatism, avoidance of controversy, and the fear of promoting an agenda counter to the majority values of the local demographic.  Make no mistake, however, GSA clubs are protected under the Equal Access Act [20 U.S.C. § 4071], which states that if a school receives federal funding and has non-curricular clubs, a Gay/Straight Alliance student group is entitled to recognition just like any other student group.

It does not matter what a teacher’s personal ideology is. As educators, we have a professional commitment to make the classroom and the school a safe environment for all students.  Educators must provide positive role models and supportive, responsive intervention.  We must actively deliver the message that bullying, prejudice and hate are wrong in all circumstances.  All school personnel are responsible for keeping abusive language and behavior out of the classroom and the school culture.

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

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

Should We Rewrite American History Books?

“History has a point of view; it cannot be all things to all people.” – Samuel Taylor

When it comes to textbooks, every school district in the nation has its own system for ordering. What a district chooses impacts what the students in those boundaries learn. When it comes to subjects like math, science and even English there are some absolute truths that must be followed. When it comes to history or social sciences though, there is some wiggle room. These subjects have their own facts, of course, but the perspective can make all the difference. Of all topics, these have the ability to be biased or slanted towards a particular group.

Since the early 1990s there has been a push to make the American history lessons taught in K-12 classrooms more multicultural in their approach. From the truth behind Christopher Columbus’ alleged ruthless ways to the acknowledgment that Thomas Jefferson bore children with his slaves, the Puritanical, patriotic approach to America’s founders has been questioned – at least by some. Is it right to put these men on a pedestal? Is it wrong to point out their flaws? Which is more important – the truth or shared nationalistic beliefs?

The latest iteration of these arguments comes out of Texas. A coalition of Hispanic-American educators and over 50 organizations have petitioned the State Board ofEducation to have Mexican-American history placed on a list of over 200 electives available in Texas high schools. The list in place now includes electives like Web gaming and floral design. The petition is meeting opposition, however, because of the danger of its “leftist” ideals. Board members also cite the expense (one former member cited “millions” when it comes to price tag) and say that there is no reason to officially add the course since school districts already have the authority to teach it if they want.

Given that logic, there was probably never a need to add floral design, or Web gaming, to the official list either. Yet somewhere along the way that “cost” was justified.

Yet the history of the state told from the perspective of the ancestors of its majority student group is not worth putting on the official list.
The refusal in Texas speaks volumes to the opposing histories that exist in this country. American history has come to mean anything from a migratory European perspective. But the term “American” itself cannot be contained to just one simple definition, or one region of the world. The people here are multicultural and multiethnic, and each home country’s history IS a part of the American one. Yet some educators would rather compartmentalize the rich, vibrant and diverse histories into teachable units with a common theme. I don’t believe that gives students a full perspective on their histories and those of their fellow citizens. The narrowness in our own history classrooms leads to greater close-mindedness when it comes to other areas of the world, too.

There are history and social studies teachers who do a good job presenting more than one side to each story, and those teachers should be applauded for their efforts. But for K-12 students to have a fuller, well-informed view on their own histories and futures, courses like Mexican-American history need to be taught, along with Asian-American, African-American and any other type of “American” ones. We need to give our students the credit to come to their own conclusions about their country, and not leave out inconvenient details. By essentially censoring what they learn, we do our students a great disservice and our country, too.

What do you think? Is it possible to expand the depth of history classes and still have students with shared values?

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
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