No teacher left behind

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA) has been at the center of controversy since it became law in 2002. Two significant intentions of this legislation were to improve academic achievement for the disadvantaged and to provide language instruction for limited English proficient and immigrant students. Although meritorious goals, the controversy centers on the NCBLA not only failing in its desired results, but actually hurting high school graduation rates.

Researchers at Rice University and the University of Texas at Austin found, in a recent study, that the impact of Texas’ public school accountability system, which served as the model for the NCLBA, directly contributed to lower graduation rates in large urban school districts. The NCLBA held schools accountable for student achievement based on standardized test scores and tied federal dollars to the outcome of these scores.

Under pressure to show improved ratings in student test scores, school districts took measures to ensure higher test scores by holding students back. Although this helped raise test scores, it also contributed to affected students getting discouraged and dropping out of school. Ironically, the disadvantaged students who were supposed to be the beneficiaries of the NCLBA had become disenfranchised from public education and this in turn has made the school districts look as though test scores were improving. Consequently, the loss of disadvantaged students has allowed the school districts to be rewarded for improved test scores.

If the NCLBA has failed, it begs the question of what we can do to reform education. Maybe it’s time we turned away from government mandated programs, standardized testing for success measures, and go back to the basics of hiring the best and the brightest teachers we can find. After all, when those classroom doors close at the start of each school day, it is the teacher that is at the center of helping students succeed. If we want to fund a worthy reform in education, then let’s implement the No Teacher Left Behind Act where adequate funding is provided to attract and retain the best and brightest teachers we can find. Let’s put our resources into ensuring that we can provide the best salaries and working conditions for our teachers commensurate with the value they add to an ever-advancing civilization. We can’t begin to think about “no child left behind” if we’ve left our teachers behind.

Would you like that degree super-sized?

The gigantic department store chain culture that has all but eliminated small businesses has not left education untouched.  The small, proprietary specialty shops of an older era were either put out of business or were bought and merged into the big business supermarkets and super department stores of today – where the wide array of commodities are standardized and available under one roof.  Similarly, the wide array of course offerings at colleges and universities have also become, to some degree, standardized.

A number of years ago, Colorado, like many other states, passed legislation that allowed any student from a Colorado community college graduating with an A.A. or A.S. degree to automatically transfer to the Colorado college or university of his or her choice with junior status.  The rationale was that the courses are virtually the same at every college for freshman and sophomore-level classes, and Colorado taxpayers should not have to foot the bill when a four-year institution capriciously and arbitrarily doesn’t accept a student’s transfer credits from another public institution of higher education within the state of Colorado.

But are these courses really the same?

What happens when universities value the bottom line more than the quality of the curriculum and the quality of the student experience?  Similar to the department store approach of protecting the bottom line by selling in large volume and outsourcing the manufacturing of products, some institutions are known for large volume and outsourcing.  At a large university, for example, freshman and sophomore classes of 300 to 400 students in a single class are not uncommon.  Outsourcing instruction to teaching assistants is typical.

Community colleges generally have not been caught up in the competitive bottom-line mentality because, without graduate programs, they cannot outsource to teaching assistants.  And by the nature of the community colleges (at least in Colorado), large class sizes of 300 to 400 students run contrary to the community college role and mission of providing more personal attention.  Although a course may look the same on paper, there may be a great deal of difference in the student experience if the course is taken at a community college or if it is taken at a large university.  And bigger doesn’t always mean better, nor does it mean it is less expensive.

Education is not a super department store of classes, and the measure of success should not be on profit margins and the marketability of courses and programs.  The bottom-line in education is measured by how we change lives.

Balancing technology with life's lessons

Balancing technology with life's lessons

Computer technology in education hasn't lived up to the hype it originally had. There was once a promise and a hope that technology would exponentially improve student learning. But then, we should remember that Tomas Edison proclaimed in 1922 that the motion picture would replace textbooks. So what's the status of children using computers to enhance learning in the 21st century?

In a study done several years ago, researchers working through the University of Munich found that 174,000 students in 31 countries perform worse academically with frequent use of computers compared to students who use computers rarely or do not use computers at all.

Proponents of instructional technology argue that never before have students had unprecedented power over their external world. Is this a good thing? At what cost do we encourage children to immerse themselves in a deadened, alienated, and manipulative relationship with the world? If there is too much time spent in the virtual environment of information without a balance of allowing students to fully nurture and develop human and biological relationships with the communities in which they live and learn, our children - and subsequently society - will pay the price.

I admit I was never a big proponent of recess when I taught at the elementary level. However, I now realize that recess provided a chance for children to learn about themselves as they learned to negotiate relationships. I use the example of recess because while computer technology in the schools increased by 300 percent during the last decade, 40 percent of the elementary and middle schools in the United States eliminated recess altogether during this same time period.

The charge of balancing our children's lives belongs to parents as well as our schools. Contemplating the meaning of life as a child lays on a grassy hill and looks up at the sky on a lazy summer afternoon (instead of staring into a computer screen) provides the impetus for philosophical inquiry. Organizing games with friends (instead of playing computer games) provides lessons in cooperation. Opportunities to dig in real dirt to discover the insects and observe the plants that populate the most miniscule segments of our earth will help children learn to explore, appreciate, and protect nature as adults.

Although virtual trips to the Himalayas and cyber trips in space have intellectual merit, there must be a balance for children to have the chance to learn to understand the fragility of the petals of a flower, to use their imaginations in order to learn how to solve problems; and above all, to develop qualities of self-discipline, courage, integrity, and compassion that can only come from human interaction in the real world. An imbalance of technology can take these learning experiences away.

Technology has a place. The vast world of academic, scholarly, and wholesome information available on the internet is invaluable. But it is dangerous if this virtual environment becomes so pervasive it stunts our children's internal growth and their ability to function effectively in relationships. In fact, the conclusion of the Munich study does not advocate doing away with computers and/or technology. The conclusion indicates that technology (computers) may well have a time and a place, but not just any place and any time.

Helicopter parents: to be or not to be

There's the one about the mother who called to ask the college president to make sure her son was wearing his sweater. Then there's the mother who called the college administration to have a light bulb changed in her daughter's dorm room. I've had my share as well. One example of a helicopter parent that I thought was a bit extreme was a couple who submitted a hand-written letter as a job application for their son for a faculty position - albeit their son was not part of the millennial generation. He was 54 years old.

Administrators will tell you it didn't use to be this way. When a student graduated from high school, he or she was considered an adult and responsible for his or her own welfare at college. In fact, being responsible and assertive were attributes that were part of the learning experience in transitioning from adolescence to adulthood. But there's an irony here.

Statistically, most helicopter parents are those who have a college degree and understand the channels in the college hierarchy. This is knowledge parents can share to help their college-age children learn how to take responsibility in an appropriate way. There is less parental involvement from parents of first generation college students; yet first generation college students are at the greatest risk of non-completion of their college degree and could probably use both guidance and support from their parents.

Colleges and universities can address the problem of parents on both sides of the involvement issue by doing a better job of communication. Positive and useful pro-active communication to parents that explains and encourages a positive parental role will potentially alleviate the need for concern from the helicopter parents. And at the same time, those parents who are unfamiliar with college systems would be empowered to be supportive for their children in this uncharted and unfamiliar territory of higher education.

Gender Equality in Learning

Math performance scores between boys and girls is a matter of equality

A few years ago, Former Harvard University President, Lawrence H. Summers made a remark at an academic conference stating that "The innate differences between men and women might be one reason fewer women succeed in science and math careers." This comment caused an uproar that eventually contributed to Summers' demise as the president of Harvard.

Since that remark, there has been a debate in academic circles whether the difference in math performance between boys and girls is "nature" or "nurture." The debate may be over. In a recent study that was published in Science, four researchers found that out of 276,000 15-year olds in 40 countries who took a math test, girls scored 2 percent lower than boys.

But on its face, the facts are misleading. The researchers found that it was national culture, not innate ability that caused the lower test scores with girls.

In countries that promoted a culture where women were considered subordinate to men, the math scores were lower for girls. These countries included Turkey and Korea. In countries where women have an equal status with men such as Norway, Sweden, and Iceland, there was no difference in test scores between boys and girls. The United States ranked in the middle for both gender inequality/equality and the gap on the math test scores.

The researchers could not determine whether a culture that promoted inequality between men and women caused the gap in test scores between boys and girls was due to a lack of female role models in math (and science); or whether a culture that promoted inequality of men and women created low self-esteem and consequently undermined the girls' self-confidence in taking the math test. However, Paola Sapienza, one of the authors of the study and a professor of finance at Northwestern University, indicated there is no gender gap in mathematics when the societal culture promotes gender equality.

The findings in this study have profound implications that connect our behavior to learning that takes place in the formal educational setting. If we want our girls to excel in math (and science) in the classroom, it is the responsibility of each one of us to model the principle of the equality of men and women so that we create a cultural attitude that will positively affect self-esteem and confidence - and consequently higher academic performance in math - for both girls and boys.

Reading, Writing, and Multitasking

Reading, Writing, and Multitasking

Educators continually sing the praise of this new millennial generation for their technological and multitasking skills. Go to an education conference of any type at any level and there will certainly be sessions on how to understand and keep up with this new generation. Veteran teachers learn new pedagogical and technological methods to capture the attention, teach in short bursts, and move quickly to new and varied activities because students think faster and grasp information much more readily than the generation of their parents.

The traditional lecture is out; group activities are in; and information-gathering skills have supplanted memorization. In fact, a number of teachers eliminate exams and replace the traditional demonstration of knowledge acquisition with a demonstration of information-gathering skills on the internet. This break from traditional education is not necessarily bad. It's just different and a valuable skill for some things. But we need to be cautious that we don't supplant important time-tested learning theories with what may be perceived as an enhanced brain function in the younger generation.

Students can text-message a friend while participating in a conversation as they're watching television and performing other tasks at the same time. But it's a different story if you ask these same students to write an essay while doing another task. Teachers have told me that when it comes to the basics of reading and writing, students cannot excel unless they can focus on the single task at hand - a skill that is increasingly being lost in this high-tech era.

If students approach literature, for example, the same way they approach the internet, they will skim through the words of Hemingway, Faulkner, Yeats, and Tennyson for the factual information. They would lose the meaning of a story or a poem. Reading can't be reduced to data and figures. Literature, like the performing and visual arts, is a process - a sensual process in which the experience of reading, contemplating the symbolism, and getting beyond the literal interpretation of the story is really the whole point. It is an experience in developing insights into the human condition - something that can't be acquired from the internet while watching television and text-messaging at the same time.

Research supports findings that the brain needs a relatively long period of time to perceive and understand. Multitasking and the ability to gather information in record time are great skills in certain circumstances. But enabling students to focus on a single task in order to develop perceptions and understanding is a long-standing and time-tested methodology that can't be supplanted by technology. In the final analysis, there is no substitute for the value of developing contemplative thought with a single focus when it comes to reading and writing.

Generation mix brings challenges, opportunities

There are currently about 80 million baby boomers born between 1946 and 1965, who will reach retirement age during the next 20 years. Many of them intend to forgo full retirement and remain in the workforce well into their 60s and possibly their 70s. According to recent estimates by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 41 percent of adults 55 and older will still be in the workforce by 2014. This has significant implications for a changing role of higher education.

Many blue collar workers, after a lifetime of working in heavy labor, are seeking skills that will open up new opportunities to get away from heavy lifting, to get away from working in the cold weather, and to find a meaningful second career that will keep the paychecks coming in. In some parts of the country, the trend is starting to shift away from personal interest classes to retraining for new jobs that are less physically taxing.

Although the typical comprehensive community college will continue to offer academic transfer classes, career-tech classes, personal interest classes for life-long learning, and customized training for business and industry, many of the baby boomers returning to college are seeking courses and programs that will help them retool - particularly in technology.

In addition, community colleges are going to need to break away from their traditional scheduling patterns and find ways to accommodate this new population by offering classes on weekends, evenings, and on other sites in the community that provide easy access - and by finding creative ways to tailor the curriculum to maximize learning.

The new demands placed on the community college go beyond making changes in the curriculum and providing enhanced support services. Community colleges are going to need to increase partnerships with industry, local economic development groups and other institutions in order for the curriculum to provide a fair reflection of job opportunities.

With this new trend comes a hidden benefit to traditional-aged students. The boomers are bringing a high work ethic into the classroom that provides healthy competition for academic achievement and also serves as a role model for the traditional 18-year-old student. Many in the very group who once disassociated themselves with mature adults now find themselves amicably comparing class notes with the current generation of younger students.

The times, they are indeed a changin'.

College policies based on moral values

College policies based on moral values

For-profit universities are currently under government scrutiny for alleged unethical recruiting practices. In a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education (August 2, 2010), one former recruiter from a for-profit university commented to the U.S. Department of Education that, "We are forced to do anything necessary to get people to fill out an application. There are good people out there right now who are in debt because I put them in school and they didn't belong there."

This type of recruiting practice common among some of the for-profit colleges and universities presents us with a question of morality and values. Colleges and universities that are more concerned about collecting tuition than they are about the success and welfare of students teach us an extreme lesson about the level of immorality that can be exhibited by an institution. It demonstrates that the once forbidden topic of teaching values in a public institution goes beyond speech and discussions in the classroom. The truth is that morality and values have been, and still are, intertwined in public educational institutions in every policy and practice associated with the institution. Our educational institutions teach values and morality by example.

A lesson in morality begins with college and university admissions policies. When a college advocates a dry campus where alcohol is prohibited and there is zero tolerance for illegal drug use, a message about moral expectations is communicated. Following the money trail can also reveal a lot about the values and morality of an institution. Are scholarships awarded to bright, capable, students in need, or does the lion's share of scholarships go to support athletic teams?