Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Smaller Schools = Better Schools ?

City Students at Small Public High Schools Are More Likely to Graduate, Study Says
By WINNIE HU
Published: January 25, 2012

New York City teenagers attending small public high schools with about 100 students per grade were more likely to graduate than their counterparts at larger schools, according to new findings from a continuing study released on Wednesday night.




The findings are part of a study that tracked the academic performance of more than 21,000 students who applied for ninth grade admission at 105 small high schools, mainly in Brooklyn and in the Bronx, from 2005 to 2008. The study appeared to validate the Bloomberg administration’s decade-long push to create small schools to replace larger, failing high schools.

Of the students studied, about 40 percent were admitted by lottery to the small schools, and 60 percent attended other high schools.

The $3.5 million study — one of the largest and most comprehensive reviews of the impact of small schools on learning — is being financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and conducted by MDRC, a nonprofit education research group based in Manhattan.

The latest findings show that 67.9 percent of the students who entered small high schools in 2005 and 2006 graduated four years later, compared with 59.3 percent of the students who were not admitted and instead went to larger schools. The higher graduation rate at small schools held across the board for all students, regardless of race, family income or scores on the state’s eighth-grade math and reading tests, according to the data.

This increase was almost entirely accounted for by a rise in Regents diplomas, which are considered more rigorous than a local diploma; 41.5 percent of the students at small schools received one, compared with 34.9 percent of students at other schools. There was little difference between the two groups in the percentage of students who earned a local diploma or the still more rigorous Advanced Regents diploma.

Small-school students also showed more evidence of college readiness, with 37.3 percent of the students earning a score of 75 or higher on the English Regents, compared with 29.7 percent of students at other schools. There was no significant difference, however, in scores on the math Regents.

The Bloomberg administration has advocated for nearly a decade for small schools to replace larger, failing high schools, a strategy that was initially supported by the teachers’ union. In recent years, though, union leaders have contended that the city was shifting its most disadvantaged students into the larger high schools to ensure the success of the small schools.

Schools Chancellor Dennis M. Walcott saw encouragement in the numbers.

“This study shows conclusively that our new small high schools changed thousands of lives in New York City, across every race, gender and ethnicity — not only helping them graduate, but graduate ready for college,” Mr. Walcott said. “When we see a strategy with this kind of success, we owe it to our families to continue pursuing it aggressively.”

But Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, questioned whether there were other factors that might explain the higher graduation rate in the small schools, like fewer special education students or better attendance records for those entering the small schools, since attendance rates have been shown to be an indicator of on-time graduation.

“I’m very happy for any school that is graduating students,” Mr. Mulgrew said. “But a study that is trying to say that one particular type of school is better than the other without looking at all the relevant factors is disingenuous.”

Gordon Berlin, president of MDRC, said the lottery process ensured that there were comparable numbers of special education students and English-language learners represented in both groups of students being tracked. He said attendance records for the students prior to high school were also comparable, and would not have affected the results.

Mr. Berlin and Howard Bloom, a co-author of the study, said that New York’s small schools were unusual because they were created from scratch rather than by reconfiguring existing schools. They said that these small schools tended to have common traits, including a rigorous curriculum, often built around themes like conservation and law, and highly personalized relationships between students and teachers.

The schools have also formed partnerships with community groups and businesses to offer hands-on learning experiences, like building an oyster bed in New York Harbor (at the Urban Assembly New York Harbor School on Governors Island) and participating in a moot court case at Cravath Swaine & Moore (at the Urban Assembly School for Law and Justice in Downtown Brooklyn).

“It’s certainly not just size,” Mr. Bloom said. “It’s how the size is used. These schools were organized from the ground up in ways that would be extraordinarily unusual.”

Richard Kahan, founder and chief executive officer of the Urban Assembly, a network of 20 small high schools and middle schools in the city, said he knew that students were doing better in small schools than large schools, but was still surprised by how positive the results were in the study.

“I wouldn’t even dream of getting these results if these schools weren’t small and structured the way they are,” he said.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

New Study Reveals Student Perspective on Technology Use in Higher Education

By Kanoe Namahoe
10/03/11

College students believe that technology has a direct impact on their academic performance, according to findings from a new student-driven study out of the Lone Star College System. In “The National Lone Star Report on Aligning Technology with Student Success,” 78 percent of college students reported that their grades and learning experience are improved when technology is effectively and consistently implemented on their campus.

The Report is a compilation of survey data collected from more than 6,000 students on 36 campuses across the country. Focused exclusively on two-year colleges, the study also included analysis of more than 1.5 million helpdesk inquiries from 55 institutions. The student-led initiative is the first of its kind, according to LSCS vice chancellor and CIO Shah Ardalan.

"'The National Lone Star Report on Aligning Technology with Student Success' will allow college administrators access to the collective voice of American students and it provides invaluable data on students' needs, desires and dreams, and how technology can help them achieve these goals," Ardalan said in a prepared statement.

Key findings in the report reflect students' desire for reliable, effective technology that is used consistently by instructors:
Colleges should not implement technology for the sake of technology;
When technology is deployed, make sure that it works; and
Faculty members need to know how to use the technology and they should actually use it.

While students believe technology is integral to their learning success, the report showed that they do not simply want more technology--they want the right technology. Students want systems and applications that serve their needs, support learning, and work properly "without getting in the way." Students expressed frustration with non-working technologies that waste time and money.

"Technology, when effectively used, strongly impact[s] my ability to learn," one respondent noted. "However, when it is not used properly or [is used] inefficiently it is very much a distraction and annoyance."

The National Lone Star Report was based on interviews and surveys from students at rural and metro-area community college campuses throughout the United States. The report will be produced annually and is available for free download to participating colleges. For additional information, visit lonestar.edu/nationalstudentreport.

About the Author

Kanoe Namahoe is the e-content producer for 1105 Media's Education Group. She can be reached at knamahoe@1105media.com.                     

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Moving beyond the Bologna process: Europe as one higher-education space


Moving beyond the Bologna process: Europe as one higher-education space

A fresh perspective and a new pilot scheme is needed to unify higher education across Europe, says Maastricht University'sProfessor Martin Paul
Bologna University, Italy
Students at Bologna University, Italy: Professor Paul Martin wants to see Europe as a single higher education space. Photograph: Eamonn Mccabe
Not before time, the House of Lords in the UK has announced an inquiry into European Union support for universities and student mobility. By now, the vision of a single higher-education space across Europe was supposed to be a reality. But achieving that goal is taking longer than expected.
The idea was that by 2010 students and academic staff would be moving freely between European countries and institutions, secure in the knowledge that the qualifications they achieved would translate between EU member states.
Some significant progress has been made in the 12 years since all this was first envisaged in the Bologna protocol, drawn up by 29 countries across Europe, and in the five years since recognition of common European degree standards was agreed in Lisbon. More than 210,000 students now spend part of their degree abroad through the Erasmus exchange scheme alone, and the number of academics crossing national borders to teach is increasing year on year.
But no-one would argue that we are anywhere near reaching all the goals these two agreements set out. A report last month on the Erasmus scheme showed that one in five students was forced to retake courses and exams after failing to receive full credit for studies abroad, while the European Commission has just put forward new measures to support the aims of the higher education area, including profiling institutions and giving financial support to master's students studying abroad.
In my view, we need to act faster than this. Educating young people, and, more important, preparing a European workforce, is becoming an urgent priority thanks to increasing competition from the United States, China, India and emerging countries. Add to this the economic crisis facing Europe, and the need to move fast to create more promising career prospects for our students becomes clear.
We do not have time to spend painstakingly matching education qualifications and waiting for every institution in every country to reach exactly the same standards. For one thing, not every institution can, or should, be aiming to do the same things. Differentiation is important. Some universities are regionally focused, some nationally focused, and that is what they do best.
Other institutions, however, are much more advanced along the road of internationalisation. At Maastricht, our ambition has long been to be aninternational university with an international classroom.
We have attracted attention in the UK since increasing the number of UK students we recruit fivefold over the past two years. Our motivation for this is our European and international agenda. We have a European law school, a European business school and a European public health programme. Our European focus and international outlook means we want students from the UK to join the thousands that already come here from other countries in Europe and beyond.
Of course, we are not the only ones. There are other institutions like ours across Europe that have similar missions. What we now need is a kind of pilot scheme bringing all these together, a sub group of universities that have been working in an international context for some time – perhaps one or two from half a dozen European countries – to be at the vanguard of creating the European higher education area.
This group could gather evidence on what sort of education works in an international context, what professional skills students need, and what kind of careers they develop. It could produce a blueprint of what a European university should look like and what the quality of students should be.
This could be achieved very quickly because the institutions already exist. It would need European-level funding, but it would be an essential investment in Europe's future labour market.
We already run many Europe-wide competitions for research grants. Why not run a similar competition for institutions wanting to be part of this pilot scheme? Then we could also stimulate a process that would make many institutions across Europe think about adopting a more European and international focus.
We badly need to develop the tools to be competitive in producing a knowledge-based workforce for the European and global market. But we have tried for 12 years to create a European higher education area on a macro level with mixed results. This big machine approach is not working. A smaller, more focused model, would increase our chances of success.
Professor Martin Paul is president of Maastricht University.
Source: 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/nov/09/europe-higher-education-bologna-process?newsfeed=true

Silicon Valley Wows Educators, and Woos Them


Craig Lassig for The New York Times
GRADING THE DIGITAL SCHOOL

Silicon Valley Wows Educators, and Woos Them

 at Little Falls Community High School in Minnesota trying out some iPad apps.

In visits the officials described as inspirational, they checked out the company’s latest gadgets, discussed the instructional value of computers with high-level Apple executives and engineers, and dined with them and other educators at trendy restaurants. Apple paid for meals and their stay at a nearby inn.SAN FRANCISCO — Three times over the last two years, school officials from Little Falls, Minn., have escaped the winter cold for two-day trips to Silicon Valley. Their destination: the headquarters ofApple.
The visits paid off for Apple too — to the tune of $1.2 million in sales. In September, Little Falls handed out iPads to 1,700 of its 2,500 students at a celebration in the school gym. And a few days earlier, 200 teachers got a pep talk via video chat from an Apple executive whom the school superintendent had come to know during his company visits.
“Both my visits there have been extraordinary,” said Curt Tryggestad, superintendent of the Little Falls Community Schools, who visited Cupertino in 2010 and earlier this year. “I was truly amazed to sit in a room with Apple vice presidents, people who were second in command to Steve Jobs.”
The demand for technology in classrooms has given rise to a slick and fast-growing sales force. Makers of computers and other gear vigorously court educators as they vie for billions of dollars in school financing. Sometimes inviting criticism of their zealous marketing, they pitch via e-mail, make cold calls, arrange luncheons and hold community meetings.
But Apple in particular woos the education market with a state-of-the art sales operation that educators say is unique, and that, public-interest watchdogs say, raises some concerns. Along with more traditional methods, Apple invites educators from around the country to “executive briefings,” which participants describe as equal parts conversation, seminar and backstage pass.
Such events might seem unremarkable in the business world, where closing a deal can involve thinly veiled junkets, golf outings and lavish dinners. But the courtship of public school officials entrusted with tax dollars is a more sensitive matter. Some critics say the trips could cast doubt on the impartiality of the officials’ buying decisions, which shape the way millions of students learn.


Mike Dean, a spokesman for Common Cause of Minnesota, a nonpartisan group that promotes open government, was critical of the Apple visits, calling them “influence peddling.” He said he believed that a Minnesota lawprohibiting government officials from accepting “anything of value” from contractors would apply to the hotel stay and dinners. And he said Apple was offering an experience that made potential buyers feel like insiders.
“There is a geek culture that very much worships Apple, and they’re feeding into that to get more contracts.”
Apple declined to discuss the executive briefings. Natalie Kerris, a spokeswoman for the company, said education was “in its DNA.” As to the public employees who participate in the trips, Ms. Kerris said: “We advise them to follow their local regulations.”
Broadly, efforts by technology vendors to get close to educators are becoming more sophisticated, said John Richards, an adjunct lecturer at the Graduate School of Education at Harvard, where he teaches about education and technology.
“What the textbook sellers had perfected for years has moved into the high-tech world,” said Mr. Richards, who also works as a consultant for technology companies in the education market.
The sales pitches come as questions persist about how effective high-tech products can beat improving student achievement. The companies say their products engage students and prepare them for a digital future, while some academics say technology is not fulfilling its promise.
Even Mr. Jobs, Apple’s co-founder, turned skeptical about technology’s ability to improve education. In a new biography of Mr. Jobs, the book’s author, Walter Isaacson, describes a conversation earlier this year between the ailing Mr. Jobs and Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, in which the two men “agreed that computers had, so far, made surprisingly little impact on schools — far less than on other realms of society such as media and medicine and law.”
The comments echo similar ones Mr. Jobs made in 1996, between his two stints at Apple. In an interview with Wired magazine, Mr. Jobs said that “what’s wrong with education cannot be fixed with technology,” even though he had himself “spearheaded giving away more computer equipment to schools than anybody else on the planet.” Mr. Jobs blamed teachers’ unions for the decline in education.
Still, Mr. Jobs seemed to hold out hope that devices like the iPad could change things by replacing printed textbooks. Mr. Isaacson writes that the textbook market was the next big business Mr. Jobs hoped to disrupt with technology.
The executive briefings on Apple’s campus have been going on for more than a decade, but have received little attention, partly because participants sign nondisclosure agreements that are meant to protect the company’s technical and business secrets.
Matt Mello, director of technology for the Holly Area Schools in Oakland County, Mich., went on a two-day trip to Apple headquarters in Cupertino, Calif., in April 2010, and his description of it is similar to those of other participants.
Mr. Mello chronicled his visit using the Moleskine notebook Apple gave him. On the first day, he said, there was a light breakfast at the hotel, a ride to Apple’s campus and a briefing around a U-shaped conference table that began with company executives asking the educators about their needs. The latest Apple laptops and other products were scattered around the room. They had lunch in the gourmet cafeteria, where Mr. Mello sampled a bit of everything, and visited the company store.
“I joked that I felt like we were on hallowed ground,” Mr. Mello said of the campus. “There’s this mystique.”
Still, Mr. Mello said he was not sure what would come of a trip that had developed a few months earlier, when the regional sales representative for Apple “snuck a MacBook under my nose and got me to try it.” Soon, he said, the district was conducting a test with 30 Apple laptops and considering whether to upgrade hundreds of Windows-based computers or switch to Apple.
Mr. Mello said the sales representative told him: “If you guys are serious, we could get you an invitation to an executive briefing in Cupertino.”
The representative traveled to Cupertino for the meeting but hung in the background. The sales team wore ties, and the engineers and executives dressed casually. Sales pitches took a back seat to conversations and presentations about how students use computers. One video showed a 10-year-old boy talking about creating podcasts with a MacBook.
The group met with a local participant in Apple’s “distinguished educator” program, Ted Lai, who talked about podcasting in schools. Then, in a room called the Jim Henson Studio, they learned to create podcasts using iMovie software. Soon, Mr. Mello was convinced.
“We went there with our eyes open but hesitant. What could be so compelling as to get us to move off our base? And they did it,” Mr. Mello said. What swayed him, he said, were the presentations but also the company’s bright new monitors: “We were looking at each other thinking, ‘Wow. I can’t believe these are available at this price point.’ ”
Since then the district has switched to Apple, giving 350 laptops to teachers in 2010 and, this fall, 450 iPads and computers to high school students. The price: $637,000.
Mr. Mello was joined on the trip by two principals, two assistant superintendents and a teacher. Apple paid for meals and a stay at the Inn at Saratoga, near the Apple campus, where rates run $189 for a single room that looks onto a tranquil creek. Airfare was not included. And the group did not let Apple pick up the drink tab at the hotel, Mr. Mello said, noting: “As a school district, we’re conscious of that sort of thing.”
Rich Robinson, executive director of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, a nonprofit watchdog group, said he did not believe the educators were violating state law. But he said the ethical issue seemed to be a gray area for public officials. “It’s acceptable business ethics,” he said. “It’s not good public ethics.”
For his part, Mr. Mello said he did not think the Apple perks had influenced him. But he said he believed that Apple, by inviting his district, which is relatively wealthy, was seeking to influence other Michigan schools. In fact, he said he was told as much by a senior sales executive during dinner at a Silicon Valley Latin American restaurant.
The executive even offered to throw in about $20,000 of wireless equipment, but the district declined because it already had other plans, Mr. Mello said.
Mr. Robinson and other watchdogs said state ethics rules were not uniform and varied widely. For instance, school officials in Nebraska, several of whom have visited Apple this year, are prohibited from accepting meals and hotels only if they agree to buy products in exchange, an overt quid pro quo that no one is suggesting is taking place.
In all, about 30 states have laws restricting gifts to state officials, laws that might invite scrutiny of Apple’s generosity, said Karen Hobert Flynn, vice president of state operations for Common Cause.
In Microsoft’s case, the company covers airfare, hotels and meals for participants in its events for teachers. It also invites administrators and school technology staff to regional meetings that aim to help them solve technical issues. Because those meetings include people who can be involved in purchasing computers and other gear, Microsoft does not pay for travel or hotels.
And in the case of both the teacher meetings and the technical briefings, Microsoft requires that attendees bring a letter certifying that if they accept meals or any other perks, they will not be violating local, state or federal ethics laws, according to Kevin Hartley, associate general counsel at the company.
There is sensitivity about these issues on the educators’ side as well. In September, a group of state officials and educators in Idaho canceled a trip to Microsoft because they worried it might appear as if the trip had unfairly influenced any eventual purchase of Microsoft products.
Mr. Tryggestad from Little Falls said that Apple did not push him to take anything that would violate state law, and that he did not think he or anyone in the district had done so.
When he went on his first visit to Apple in 2010, Mr. Tryggestad was joined by about a dozen other Minnesota superintendents. On his second visit this February, the group spent an afternoon at Stanford University talking to students and faculty who were experimenting with educational uses of technology.
In March, the district technology director visited Apple in a group that included his counterparts from schools in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas. Less than a month later, the Little Falls school board approved the big iPad purchase.
At the time the district was curious to see how students’ test scores would be affected by the use of the new devices, but the test results from one school’s pilot project last year would not be available for months. And the district decided not to wait, Mr. Tryggestad said, given the enthusiasm for the device among students and teachers.
Mr. Tryggestad said he believed Apple invited him to its campus (and also to larger education meetings in Dallas and Chicago) because he had some influence. He sits on the board of the Minnesota Rural Education Association, a lobbying group, and is on a state advisory committee for online learning.
“Maybe they looked at me as being a conduit,” he said.
Nick Wingfield contributed reporting.









Craig Lassig for The New York Times

Josiah Entriken-Moore took a look at his device.



Monday, November 7, 2011

Report: The Commonplace nature of Sexual Harassment in grades 7-12


Crossing The Line:
Based on findings from a nationally representative survey conducted in May and June, 2011, this report presents the most comprehensive research to date on sexual harassment in grades 7-12 and reveals some sobering statistics about the prevalence of sexual harassment and the negative impact it has on students' education.
The report concludes with concrete recommendations and promising practices for preventing sexual harassment directed at school administrators, educators, parents, students and community members. We hope readers will be inspired to take new steps toward making schools free from sexual harassment.
AAUW has been at the forefront of sexual harassment research for over a decade, including the 1993 Hostile Hallways survey and the 2001 follow up report, Hostile Hallways: Bullying Teasing and Sexual Harassment in School.

Report














The Impact of Shortened School Days


New Ed Trust—West Report “Turning Back the Clock” Spotlights the Negative Impact of Shortening California’s School Year on Students; Calls on State Leaders to Prevent Cuts to Critical Learning Time

OAKLAND, CA (October 31, 2011) – Today, in coordination with a broad range of advocacy organizations, the Education Trust—West, releases Turning Back the Clock: The Inequitable Impact of Shortening California’s School Year. The policy brief highlights research findings that confirm the critical importance of increased classroom time for improved student achievement, particularly for students in poverty and discusses the negative impact of decisions made to shorten California’s school year.  
“Our policymakers have long applauded themselves for ensuring that California has some of the most rigorous academic standards in the nation,” said Arun Ramanathan, Executive Director of The Education Trust—West, a statewide education advocacy organization that works to close the gaps in opportunity and achievement for students of color and students in poverty. “All California’s students, including the more than fifty percent of our students who are low income and our 1.3 million English Learners, deserve a full opportunity to learn those standards and perform on grade level. As a state with some of the widest achievement gaps and lowest student performance in the nation, reducing learning time in our schools should not be an option.”
As the report illustrates, over the past several years, California’s policymakers have made the inequitable decision to systematically reduce the amount of instructional time that our school districts are required to provide. Under AB 114 signed into law by Governor Brown earlier this year, school districts are allowed to shorten the school year by up to seven additional days if and when state revenues fall short of projections. This could potentially result in California’s districts having the shortest school year in the nation.  With the State Controller recently reporting lower state revenues, it appears more and more likely that these mid-year cuts will happen. Once again, our highest need students, including English learners and students from low-income families, will suffer the inequitable impact of state budget cuts as their learning time is taken away.
 “The clock is ticking,” Ramanathan continued.  “We are quickly approaching the day when districts around the state will once again consider cutting days off the school year.  Our students deserve both the opportunity and time necessary to achieve their dreams of college and career.  We call on the governor and the legislature to protect the rights of our children and prevent these harmful and inequitable cuts to the school year.”
To read the full report, click here.

Report: The Hidden Costs of Community Colleges

The Hidden Costs of Community Colleges

AIR Authors: Mark S. Schneider
Executive Summary
Community colleges are an essential component of America’s higher education system. Last year, they enrolled well over 6 million students, a number that continues to grow. Community colleges also are essential to meeting the Obama administration’s goal of having the United States regain its position as the nation with the highest concentration of college-educated adults in the world. Labor force data show that many of the certificates and associate’s degrees awarded by community colleges generate significant returns on the investment that students and taxpayers make in these institutions. And compared to the costs of attending a bachelor’s degree-granting institution, attending a community college is usually far less costly to the student.
Therefore, it is not surprising that community colleges now earn a high level of attention and respect from policymakers across the country. However, not everything is rosy. This report focuses on the high costs of the low retention and completion rates that are far too typical of community colleges.
Community colleges have multiple missions, and their performance ultimately needs to be evaluated on multiple metrics. However, one key mission of community colleges is the awarding of associate’s degrees and certificates to students who enroll with the intention of earning these credentials. Focusing on only first-time, full-time, degree- and certificateseeking students in community colleges and using data from the U.S. Department of Education, this report shows that community colleges are generating costs to the taxpayer that are usually not part of the discussion of their role in America’s system of higher education