Students

Seeking ROI on Undergraduate Education

Eduflack higher ed, Students

It is common to hear that college is about more than classes.  At the end of four (or five, or six) years, successful students will have built relationships with a network that will support them for decades, gained valuable skills in areas like problem-solving and teamwork, figured out the notion of multitasking, and generally had to take responsibility for their own day and the hours within it.

Don’t get me wrong, college classes are important.  But they aren’t the end all-be all of the postsecondary experience.  Personally, I spent four years at the University of Virginia, the top public university in the nation.  I took a lot of interesting and engaging courses, particularly in the fields of government and communications.  But my real college experience came from my internships on Capitol Hill and my tenure at The Cavalier Daily, U.Va.’s independent student newspaper.  As managing editor of The Cavalier Daily, I worked 60-80 hours per week (for no college credit and no pay), managed a staff of nearly 150 volunteers, and put out a daily newspaper (usually 16 pages a day) that boasted an operating budget of nearly $500,000 generated exclusively from advertising revenue.  That was the real education, and The CD provided me writing, management, thinking, and leadership skills that simply could not have been captured elsewhere, at least not for the average 21-year-old.
Today’s USA Today commits an entire page to the National Survey of Student Engagement (http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-11-10-nsseonline_what-is-nsse_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip)  and the role it places in improving the quality of higher education.  According to our nation’s paper of record, USA Today and NSSE “aim to provide new tools and information to help college-bound students and their families assess the quality of undergraduate experience at the schools they’re considering.”  Nearly 400 four-year colleges and universities are participating in the experiment.
How are they doing it?  Schools are looking at how they deal with helping students transition into postsecondary education, how they connect with students, and how they provide alternative learning experiences such as community service, study abroad, and internships.
Eduflack’s not sure what USA Today’s long-term goals are with NSSE, but personally, I wish all 4,000 of our postsecondary institutions would sign on and become part of the process.  A 10% sample is a good start, particularly if it is the right 10%.  But the issues and questions posed by NSSE are important for educated and interested families to consider when making postsecondary choices.
For decades now, students have pored over the US News & World Report rankings and books such as the Fiske Guide to Colleges to help make informed choices about college. Princeton Review and others have done a good job of breaking colleges down into interesting subsets, at least showing students the top institutions in key categories.  Parents have kept a watchful eye on things like the top party schools, hoping to steer their kids away from the best places to “enjoy themselves.”  But it is useful to know how all colleges compare, not just the creme of the crop.
When Eduflack was making the college decision, it was between U.Va. and Princeton.  Both schools were equidistant from my high school in West Virginia, so mileage from home wasn’t a factor.  At the end of the day, U.Va. felt right.  There was just something about standing on the Grounds, the history of Thomas Jefferson, and the general feel of Charlottesville that spoke to me.  I got far less of that feeling from the ivy in central New Jersey.
And that was before I knew about the college newspaper and the opportunities it would provide.  That would be before an American Government term paper on healthcare reform led me to an internship on Capitol Hill. That was before I knew the true value and impact of an education from Mr. Jefferson’s University.  That was before I knew much of what a tool like NSSE could have told me. 
If NSSE, in partnership with USA Today, can give today’s high school students just part of that glimpse of college life — that look beyond student-teacher ratios, majors, and percentage of kids who go on to law/grad school — then it can make a significant contribution to guiding the next generation into postsecondary education.  Making a decision about college is hard.  The more information you have, the more educated a decision you can make.  If we want college to be a pathway to life success, we need to equip our student decisionmakers with the full picture of the college experience.  From the cheap seats, NSSE moves us just a little closer to that reality.

The True Cost of Higher Education

Eduflack higher ed, Students

For years now, we have heard how the cost of college has been increasing dramatically.  Higher education costs have risen far higher than virtually every other sector in our economy (aside from healthcare), with increasing easily outpacing raises, cost-of-living adjustments, or savings interest rates for the average family.

Based on the annual college price increases, Eduflack estimated it would cost more than $125,000 a year to send eduson to Stanford University for his undergraduate education (following in his mother’s footsteps).  This, of course, recognizing that in addition to tuition and fees, he may need to buy a book or two, find shelter for his head, and eat the occasional meal.  (It doesn’t account for the costs associated with the extracurriculars, the frats, the girls, and the spring break trips, though.)  Thank goodness I’m planning on edudaughter to head down to daddy’s alma mater at the University of Virginia, her first step to becoming governor of our fair Commonwealth and ultimately the senior senator from the Old Dominion.
In today’s USA Today, Mary Beth Marklein takes a closer look at college costs for the current academic year, a year when virtually every family is worried about where the dollars will come from to afford college this year and next.  Marklein looks at just tuition and fees (just the first of many line items in the cost of college), and finds the average private four-year college now costs $25,143 a year, up 5.9% from last year.  The average public four-year (for in-state students) clocks in at $6,585 a year, up 6.4% from last year.  And the average public two-year is $2402, up 4.7%.  Every number reflects an increase after adjusting for inflation, except for our average community college.
The full story can be found here — <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-10-29-college-costs_N.htm
Of”>www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-10-29-college-costs_N.htm
Of course, USA Today is looking at College Board numbers on sticker prices, released this time every year.  What we need is a closer look on the actual purchase price.  Eduflack has never met an alum who actually paid sticker at Boston University, for instance, knowing that BU offers a Harvard sticker with a sizable markdown for those willing to drive off in a BU education today.
As we’ve noted throughout the week, the common drumbeat in education is that every student needs some form of postsecondary education if they are to succeed in the 21st century economy.  But what is it saying when such an education requires home mortgage-sized debt?  What does it say when, as Marklein notes, that except for the wealthiest of families, family income over the past 30 years has not kept pace with tuition increases?  
As part of his education platform, Obama pledges to make $4,000 a year available for every family to make college possible.  A noble idea, yes, but does it solve the problem?  Some would say it creates a deeper class system, where those who qualify for the federal assistance can only manage to attend their local public institution.  (Not that there is anything wrong with that.)  But it still puts private institutions or out-of-state public institutions far out of reach for far too many families.
When Eduflack has discussed the cost of college in the past, he’s often heard, as ridiculous as it sounds, that the simple fact is that college is still TOO affordable.  The economic model follows that there is great demand for seats at colleges and universities throughout the nation.  As long as applications outnumber enrollments, the price is still too low.  Demand outweighs supply, thus price can and should be increased.
I’m not going to redebate what a silly notion that is.  Yes, there will always be people who will pay $50,000 a year this year to go to Harvard, or $125,000 a year in 2024 to attend Stanford.  But if our goal is universal postsecondary education, we need to get our hands around costs and affordability.  It isn’t an issue of making college cheaper, it is an issue of putting college costs on par with the earnings of an average family and what is reasonable when it comes to family contributions, scholarships, loans, and work study.  Its an issue of colleges making cost savings that get passed on to the actual student, instead of simply getting absorbed by the administrative infrastructure.  It is about impacting the bottom line for the customer, and not for the seller.
And all of this is an issue of understanding where higher education dollars are going.  How is that $25K a year at the average private college being spent, particularly if most undergraduate courses are being taught by graduate assistants?  How many tuition dollars are going to support non-academic issues, such as athletics?  And what are the benefits of top publics, like my alma mater U.Va., are making due as a public institution receiving less than 8% of funding from the state government they were constructed to serve?
If we truly believe that every student needs postsecondary education to succeed, we need to provide them with multiple clear paths to high-quality postsecondary education.  And those paths require real choices and real options.  Is it too bold to say that every student, if they work hard, meet the requirements, and gain admission should be able to attend the college of their choice?  Is it too bold to ask that students — the true customers of higher education — fully understand the return on their investment?  I think not.  

Failing to Meet Our Parents’ Expectations

Eduflack early college, Gates Foundation, High School, national standards, NGA, PR, Students

Earlier this month, we had the American Council on Education release data showing that today’s students are attaining less education than their parents.  At the time, I took that to mean that many students stopping at their BAs have parents with advanced degrees, the kids of BA parents are wrapping up at the associates level, and some children of college grads are settling for just a high school diploma.

Over the past decade, particularly over the past three or so years, it seemed pretty clear to Eduflack that there was universal agreement, at least among adults, that a high school diploma was a non-negotiable in today’s world.  I’ve even say that every student requires some form of postsecondary education — be it training program, community college, or four-year degree — if they are to compete and succeed in the 21st century economy.  We may say it, but the Education Trust’s latest report is enough to send a chill down my eduspine.
If you’ve missed it, CNN.com has the story — beta.cnn.com/2008/US/10/24/dropout.rate.ap/index.html.  The headline says it all.  Kids are less likely to graduate than their parents.  What the headline is missing, but the lede provides, is that we are now talking about HIGH SCHOOL.  Today, in 2008, teenagers are less likely to graduate from high school than their parents were.  And according to the EdTrust numbers, one in four kids is dropping out of high school, a number than has held steady for a half-decade now.
This story should be a punch in the gut to all of those who have been working on high school reform efforts for the past decade.  After all of the time and money and attention and effort that the Gates Foundation and the Alliance for Excellent Education and Jobs for the Future and the National High School Alliance and others have poured into improving the high school experience, we still haven’t convinced our young people that a high school diploma is a worthwhile goal.
Yesterday, we heard the EdSec talk about the importance of a common high school graduation rate, so we know where every state stands when it comes to handing out the diplomas.  Alliance President Bob Wise likened it to Fedex, providing us real-time data to understand where every student is along the continuum.  But according to EdTrust, even when we let each state set their own rates (and some set the bar awfully low), only half of states are hitting the mark.  Once every state adopts the NGA formula mandated by the U.S. Department of Education, state grad rates are likely to fall in the short term (and not just hold) in a great number of states.  It becomes hard to hide behind the data when you don’t get to set the data collection terms.
Don’t worry, I am not hear to rant (or to continue to rant) about what we need to do to make high school more rigorous or relevant or how to better capture data.  We have enough of that information from those individuals and organizations that have dedicated their work lives to the process.  One just has to look at a state like Ohio, both through its OHSTI and ECHS efforts, to see how you improve the secondary school experience.
No, the EdTrust data isn’t a clarion call for yet another round of ideas on high school reform or redesign.  Instead, it is a clear and unquestioned alert that we need to do a better job communicating with today’s young people.
Speak to many involved in high school redesign efforts, and they will talk about their work with school administrators, teachers, and state policymakers.  They’ll talk about the role of the business community.  Some may even mention a parent or a member of the clergy.  But when it comes to talking about primary audiences for high school reform, we often take students — the end user and ultimate customer — for granted.
All the reform and improvement in the world doesn’t mean squat if the student doesn’t see the value and importance of it.  And the only way we can effectively communicate that value is to communicate with the students themselves.
Are kids dropping out because class is too hard or because it is too boring?  Are they dropping out to pursue a job opportunity or because they want out of school?  Are classes fun and interesting?  Do they have career plans?  Are they getting classes that align with those career plans?  Do they know what it takes to secure the job they want?  What do they deem a good job?  Are they engaging with their teachers?  Are they using technology?  Do they see high school dropouts who are succeeding?  Who are they getting advice from?  What’ll it take to keep them in the classroom?
Over the years, Eduflack has done more than his share of focus groups with high school students.  Each time, I am surprised by how we underestimate them and their views on the value of education.  Often, these sessions are the first time a 15-year-old has been asked by an adult what their goals are and how they get there.  I’ve spoken with kids in some of the poorest areas in our nation, urban and rural, and I can tell you one thing — every kid knows dropping out simply isn’t an option.  They know it is a wasted opportunity.  And they know it means a future of struggle.
So what do we do about it?  As a nation, we have invested billions of dollars into high school redesign efforts, working to improve instruction, delivery, measurement, rigor, and relevance in our secondary schools.  We’ve made great strides.  But the EdTrust numbers and last year’s study on dropout factories tells us we still have a long way to go.  
We don’t need more redesign.  We need a better sales job.  We need state policymakers and superintendents to better understand what works, both to increase the grad rate and boost student achievement on the state exams.  We need teachers to better understand how to relate to today’s students, connecting lessons in chemistry or history or English to student interests and student desires.  But most importantly, we need to sell students on the notion that this is just the first major step down the path they want to take, that they need to take.
Students need to better understand that secondary and postsecondary education are requirements for a good job in this economy.  Students need to know dropping out is never a viable choice.  Students need to know the career and life options before them, and the education required to get them there.  Students need to be challenged, both in terms of curriculum and its delivery.  Students need choices and options, whether they be honor students or struggling learners.  Students need to value a high school diploma as much as their parents or grandparents do.
It is easy to lecture at a kid and tell them this is important.  It is even easy to inform them on why they need to stay in school and why they need to take their education seriously.  And it is somewhat comforting to know that we don’t need to overly worry about three out of every four students out there.  But for that remaining 25%, we need to take bold action to change their minds and change their behavior.  We need to get them to stay in school.  That doesn’t come by changing the drop-out age to 18 or mandating exit exams for all.  That comes from communicating the value and need of secondary instruction.  That comes from engaging today’s kids (and often before they get to high school).  It comes from selling kids on school and their future.  
We may think we are doing it, but the data shows we clearly are not.  Instead of communicating with students, we are speaking past them.  We need big change, at least when it comes to the attitudes of young people.  Without it, our schools, our economy, and our nation will never live up to the sta
ndard we set or the potential we have.

Re-Skilling Our Students

Eduflack charter schools, STEM, Students, vouchers

More than a year ago, Eduflack opined on the very real problem of our schools “deskilling” our students.  What does this mean?  In an era where most kids are multitasking, multimedia fiends, we take away the multimedia learning, strip away the collaboration and student interaction, and place them into a learning environment with rows of desks and educators who read to them from traditional textbooks.  In doing so, we are stripping students of the 21st century skills they need to compete, forcing them into a 19th century learning continuum.

Fortunately, many schools and districts have stepped up to align current learning with the current student.  Look at the virtual education movement, where students offered access to high-quality, relevant instruction through and medium and in a venue they are comfortable in.  Look at new charter schools, those with strong oversight and infrastructure designed to meet the needs of today’s communities.  Look at those traditional school districts and states that are integrating technology in the classroom, adopting STEM education programs, or improving the overall rigor and relevance of what is happening in the schools.
When we talk about technology in the classroom and the concerns of deskilling students, discussion often turns to the teacher.  Over the years, I’ve heard that teachers aren’t comfortable with technology.  Teacher ed programs didn’t prepare educators for such developments.  I’ve even heard you won’t truly move into the digital world of public education until the retirement exodus we’re all waiting for happens. 
At the same time, I’ve heard that technology can’t truly permeate the classroom because of the students as well.  As the legend goes, today’s urban students, today’s rural students, and today’s African-American and Hispanic students simply don’t have access to computers to the Internet.  Despite the data from groups like Project Tomorrow that demonstrate virtually all students have access, we like to believe it is still the issue of have/have nots that we experienced a decade ago.
I have just one word in response — hogwash.
Earlier this week, a new survey from Cable in the Classroom crossed my virtual desk, and it provided some fascinating data points.  More than 75% of K-12 teachers either assign homework that requires Internet use or know teachers that do.  More than four in 10 students (and six in 10 high schoolers) are producing their own videos as part of the classroom process.  And this doesn’t even account for the vast numbers of teachers who make homework assignments available online for parents and students to see, as well as those educators who offer email addresses to provide students with additional help and guidance and parents with an additional lifeline to the classroom.
As we look at education improvement and 21st century opportunities, we all know that technology is king.  Tomorrow’s jobs require a technology-literate workforce.  Kids have abandoned the libraries for the Internet.  They are interested in video production and interactive learning and digital opportunities.  At the same time,  we worry about student engagement in the classroom and keeping kids interested enough in learning to keep them in school for a high school diploma or beyond.  There has to be a way to marry the two.
The data recently offered by Cable in the Classroom, coupled by the annual data offered by Project Tomorrow, demonstrate that the sea change is starting to happen.  We are engaging students in the ways they want to learn, and not in the ways their grandparents learned.  We are recognizing the worry of deskilling our students in school before needing to reskill them when they enter postsecondary education or the workforce.
The challenge before us is keeping up with the evolving trends.  Years ago, Eduflack judged a video production competition for a career academy in Texas, and was amazed by the effort and quality of work offered by the students.  In Michigan, students produced the videos the state department of education is now using to promote stricter high school graduation requirements in the state.  And district after district are turning to students to help build online presence and social networking opportunities for the learning process.  
That is all yesterday’s cutting edge, and may now be as new as a VHS tape.  If we are to ensure the value of a public education and to guarantee such education leads to the pathways of 21st century opportunity, we need to continue to innovate, experiment, and engage in the classroom.  Our future depends on it.    

Meeting the Education Needs of the Hispanic Community

Eduflack AYP, ELL, Students, Teacher Education

When we discuss education reform, the issue of urban education is usually one of the top discussion points.  But in most corners, urban education translates into the education of the African-American community.  We look at the achievement gap, and it is usually how black students measure up against white students.  Even recent efforts to boost high school graduation rates and college-going rates that focus on underserved populations seem to focus first on the African-American community.

Anyone who has followed politics over the last year, however, knows that much of the political and community action is now happening in the Hispanic community.  The fastest growing demographic in the United States, Hispanic Americans are a growing force in the education reform movement, but in general terms and with regard to issues specific to their community.
Just this week, Eduflack had two interesting announcements cross his desk.  The first was from the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence (ABCTE).  The alternative certification group announced a new partnership with the Florida State Hispanic Chamber of Commerce to recruit and certify more teachers of color for high-need Florida schools.  The real challenge — how do we get more qualified, successful Hispanic teachers at the front of Hispanic-dominant classes?
Through scholarships and incentives, ABCTE will work across a number of Florida counties to build a better program.  To date, they claim 150 individuals, both career changers and recent graduates, have taken up the cause and made the commitment.
Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced a three-quarter-of-a-million-dollar grant to the National Academy of Sciences to study how best to distribute Title III English Language Acquisition state grant funds.  The goal here?  Ensuring that federal ELL funding is actually getting to the communities that need it the most, those with the highest concentrations of English language proficiency.  For those keeping track, the feds are spending about $700 million on such state grants, so delivering them to the right addresses is a pretty good priority.
So why does all of this have my antenna up?  Education reform isn’t just a black-and-white issue.  These two announcements serve as a clear reminder of the need to focus on the Hispanic community in education reform.  And for education communicators, we also need to realize that means more than just ELL/ESL issues.  Accountability and standards are just as important.  Research and proven effectiveness are just as important.  Reading, math, and STEM education are just as important.  PreK and afterschool programs are just as important.  School choice and online education are just as important.  Qualified, effective teachers and equipped, supported schools are just as important.
As the population continues to shift, those who figure out how to effectively engage the Hispanic community in overall education reform issues will be in a position to make a real difference.  To get there, we need to set aside urban legends like Hispanic families don’t have home computers or such families don’t want to get engaged in the educational process.
ABCTE and NAS can help us expand the debate.  But there is a national dialogue on this issue that is just itching to happen.

The Very Real Costs of Free Public Education

Eduflack Students

As a child, Eduflack loved this time of year.  The start of a new school year meant new school supplies.  Just as I do today, back then I loved a good stationery store.  And as I do today, I was always looking for the unique product.  The Trapper Keeper design unlike the others.  The unique pens in inks other than blue and black.  Notebooks as narrowly ruled as possible to hold my small chicken scratch and not have it get lost on the page.  (And, interestingly, I never bought pencils, as I push down too hard when I write, thus unable to keep the point on any wood or mechanical pencil.  Even did my algebra and trig and calculus in pen.)

Each year, I would watch as my mother bought her school supplies as well.  My mom was (and is) a dedicated high school English teacher.  She’d buy videos (and now DVDs).  She order supplemental books and student incentives.  She’d have pens and pencils for those students without.  And she’d buy all of the communal products needed in her classroom.  It always seemed unfair to me, that she, instead of the school, had to buy all of the supplies for her classroom.  But that was the way it was, and she just waited for those sales when teachers got an extra 10% off.
Last week, the D.C. Examiner ran several stories on the “costs” of attending public schools.  Parents bemoaned the activity fees and snack fees and similar costs associated with going to school.  The tales of laundry lists of needed supplies seemed to be a bit of an overstatement.
Then I checked out the list for the kids of a close family friend.  This blue-collar family was preparing their first for the start of the new school year out in Loudoun County, Virginia.  Eduflack took a peek at the shopping list, and was shocked by both the length and the specificity involved.  
Three composition notebooks of three different colors (black, red, and blue), none with perforated or spiral pages.  One blue and one red plastic pocket folder.  One school box no larger than 5″ by 8″.  One box of crayons, 24 count only.  One pair of scissors with a 5″ sharp tip.
But that wasn’t all.  Those were for the student’s personal stash.  Then we moved into the student’s communal responsibilities.  Each student is required to provide the class 24 glue sticks of .21 ounces each, a 175-count box of tissues, 36 sharpened #2 pencils, and a box of 80 baby wipes.  Each girl in the class also had to bring a box of resealable plastic bags, quart size, and each boy had to bring a box of the same, in gallon size.
Imagine it.  In a class of 25, students are providing 600 communal glue sticks and nearly 900 sharpened pencils.  This cache would then supplement the students’ individual needs.  What teacher has the storage space?
It took shopping trips to three different stores, and several hundred dollars, to collect all of the items on the list.  And then there was the electric pencil sharpener needed to sharpen the 36 pencils (no surprise, no one sells sharpened pencils).  All, in large part, to get a six-year-old ready for school. 
Makes you want to ask where exactly all the per-pupil expenditures and rising property tax bills are going.

Too Good?

Eduflack AYP, DCPS, national standards, Students

In New Haven, CT, a nine-year-old boy was just told he couldn’t play Little League baseball.  His offense?  League officials have determined that the boy is just too good.  His team is 8-0.  A pitcher, the boy throws a 40-mile-per-hour fastball (which for those unfamiliar with the game is just filthy good).  It means most opposing players are unable to hit his pitches.  He broke no rules; he did nothing wrong.  In fact, he did it all right, performing as all of us former Little Leaguers wish we could.  The result?  The nine-year-old has been banished from the league, and his fellow teammates have been offered slots on the remaining teams in the league.

What does all this have to do with education reform, you may ask?  Actually, a great deal.  Let’s first look at the message we are sending children.  After a decade of soccer games where do don’t keep score, trophies for all kids who participate, and the elimination of games like dodgeball because they make some kids feel bad about themselves, we are now ostracizing students for excelling.  We are telling them that the goal is mediocrity.  Better to remain in the pack rather than strive to be the leader.
It is hard enough to be a student in today’s world.  If we believe media reports, peer pressure, bullying, and the like are far worse today than they were when Eduflack was a kid.  We hear tales of students who downplay their intellect and are ashamed of their achievement, fearful of the repercussions on the playground or in the neighborhood.  And now they have to worry about attacks and dismissal from the adults that were trusted to teach them and further develop their skills?  League officials should celebrate this kid for being an all-star and achieving at levels of kids two, three, or four years older than the one in question.
It is no wonder we have such a difficult time encouraging, supporting, and demanding improved student achievement.  We don’t focus on those schools that regularly make AYP.  Instead, we come up with excuses as to why so many schools are failing to excel.  Instead of offering incentives to ensure that the very best teachers are in DC classrooms, we accuse the DCPS chancellor or racism, sexism, ageism, and any other ism we can think of.  Instead of ensuring all U.S. schools are world class, and can compete with our international colleagues, we turn a blind eye to how our lax U.S. national standards measure up to other industrialized nations.  Instead of striving to continue to offer the best public education available in the free world and a system of meritocracy, we are content with status quo and a life of mediocrity.
Sure, this is a lot to deduce from a Little League pitcher.  But look at the past two weeks.  We celebrated U.S. performances in the Olympic Games, cheering the fact the United States won more medals than any other nation.  But how much attention did educators pay to the educational olympics offered by the Fordham Foundation, which show our standing slipping in critical academic areas?
We should be asking ourselves how we get out kids to throw lights-out when it comes to algebra II or chemistry, Spanish or world history.  We should be encouraging STEM education in the elementary grades and advanced-level courses at the start of high school.  We should be asking how we can get every kid excelling academically — exceeding expectations and grade-level requirements.    

“On My Honor …”

Eduflack higher ed, Students

“On my honor as a student, I have neither given nor received aid on this assignment/exam.”

Eduflack cannot tell you how many times those words were written across the front of a blue book or on the cover of a term paper during his years at the University of Virginia.  The Honor Code was one of the first U.Va. traditions learned as a wet-behind-the-ears first year (sorry, there are no freshmen at Mr. Jefferson’s University.)  The code was started more than 145 years ago after a professor was shot dead on the Lawn.  Since then, it has weathered a number of storms and challenges, but still stands as THE standard when it comes to student honor.

The U.Va. Honor Code is brilliant in its simplicity.  It’s a one strike and your out code.  Single sanction.  Caught cheating, found plagiarizing, you are out of the University.  No exceptions, no excuses.  Honorable students, the sorts we want graduating from the University, must be honorable defenders of both academic freedom and academic achievement.

Once you leave U.Va.’s Grounds, the institution’s traditions never seem to leave you.  and I’d like to believe the Honor Code is one of those that remains part of a U.Va. grad’s DNA.  Maybe that is why I was so taken by an article in today’s Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/09/AR2008080901453.html?hpid=sec-education), citing the woes of students who have recently been expelled from their semester at sea program for violating the University of Virginia Honor Code.

It is unfortunate for these students that U.Va. is currently running the sea program.  That means U.Va. rules apply, even for those students from other institutions with lax standards or differing views of academic honor. It should come as no surprise, then, that they see the Honor Code’s single sanction approach as “punitive” and unfair and downright un-American.

According to the Post, one of the accused students summed up the problem best — “It’s not like we copied and pasted,” Gruntz said, “or bought it online.”  What lofty standards that student’s prospective alma mater sets for its students.

The root of the problem, it seems, is Wikipedia.  The students in question say they didn’t source Wikipedia enough in their term papers.  One told the Post it was simply an issue of paraphrasing, and that there were only so many ways to write up the summary of a topic.

For the record, Eduflack was a strong supporter of the single sanction — the one strike and you are out approach — Honor Code when I was a student there, and after I left.  I was part of a team at The Cavalier Daily that blew the lid off a national story involving the Honor Code and students of privilege trying to manipulate their social standing to avoid the justice of the Honor Committee.  I was a witness in an Honor trial.  And I have been proud the single sanction has remained in place, despite protests against it over the years.

But what the Post really missed is this isn’t an issue of the U.Va. Honor Code.  This is an issue of Wikipedia.  Semester at Sea has students from accredited institutions of higher education studying together in a common learning environment. It is intended to broaden horizons, expand academic inquiry, and stimulate the mind.  And we are using Wikipedia as primary source material for academic papers?

I’m all for Wikipedia.  It plays an important role in our society and on the Internet.  But it is far from a peer-reviewed journal or a card catalog-listed book from a reputable publisher.  It is not even a newspaper article that we used to dig out on microfiche (gosh, I’m old). 

At its heart, Wikipedia is an online bulletin board for information, a source where just about anyone can place their pushpin.  Even Wikipedia’s hosts warn users to “avoid misinformation that has been recently added and not yet removed.”  And in discussing Wikipedia as a research source, the site states “not everything in Wikipedia is accurate, comprehensive, or unbiased.”

So at the end of the day, this isn’t about honor.  It is about common sense.  It doesn’t matter if you are studying on a cruise ship, on Mr. Jefferson’s Lawn, Stanford’s Farm, or Cambridge Yard.  High-quality work is high-quality work.  Good research is good research.  And paraphrasing Wikipedia is neither.
 

SES Not Supplementing Learning?

Eduflack AYP, NCLB, Students

There’s no doubt there are leaders and laggards when it comes to our public schools.  But how do we help those kids in struggling schools without condemning the teacher, the building, or even the school district?  For the folks responsible for No Child Left Behind, the answer was SES, or supplemental educational services.  The idea was brilliant in its simplicity — for students in struggling schools, make extra help and tutoring available to get them up to par.  SES was intended to provide all students with a common base of instruction and support.

Of course, those of us in education reform know that the promise and the reality are often far, far away from each other.  Exhibit 1, today’s Washington Post piece on how SES programs in Virginia and Maryland have done little to improve student achievement.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/12/AR2008061203681.html

For years, Eduflack has heard about the problems with SES tutoring.  For much of the NCLB era, SES funding sat dormant, with many schools not sure how to spend the money.  Originally, people said the tutoring funds would be spent to send poor kids to for-profit providers like Sylvan or Huntington or Kumon.  Makes sense, right?  If a family with means has a kid struggling to make the grade, they pick up the phone and book their kid in a tutoring program.  Why shouldn’t a family without the financial ability be able to take the same advantages with SES?

The hitch, of course, is that many of the for-profit tutors have business models that set them up near those families of means.  We see tutoring centers in the suburbs.  We certainly don’t see them in our urban centers, where many of the struggling schools are located.  So who provides the tutoring?

Unfortunately, in far too many of these struggling neighborhoods, the schools turned to classroom teachers to provide after-school tutoring (with extra pay funded through SES, of course.)  Imagine the logic.  Students are not getting the skills they need during school hours from their teachers, so we pay the SAME teachers extra money to teach the SAME kids after school?  And then we wonder why SES funding isn’t demonstrating measurable improvements on student assessments?  Only in America.

And the circle of life continues.  We look to education reforms to change practice and fix that which is broken.  SES is a well-intentioned reform with strong potential.  But like so many other NCLB-era policies, it fails in the execution.  With so much supplemental money available to boost struggling students, it’s a shame so many don’t get much more than a retread of the instruction that just doesn’t work in the first place.

Where does all of this take us?  Under NCLB, we also give those struggling students the option of transferring to better schools that provide the academic means get students on track.  We’ve all seen the numbers, and few families ever take advantage of the school choice provisions, fearing transportation costs and believing their neighborhood schools are doing the best they can. 

Maybe this latest data will have more families take a second look at the options available to give their kids the educational helping hand they deserve.

The Measure of a Student

Eduflack AYP, high-stakes testing, NCLB, Students

State assessments are always good as an educational conversation-starter.  We like to talk about high-stakes tests, teaching to the test, and whether such exams are a true measure of learning in the classroom.  Like it or not, we take such exams seriously, seeing them as a measure of the student … and the teacher.

Earlier this week, Eduflack was told a story of a Northern Virginia student and a Northern Virginia teacher.  The student is your typical pre-teen boy.  He’s smart, but he lacks focus.  From an immigrant family, his parents are limited in their English language ability, so many notes and instructions home fail to have maximum impact.

This week, the student took a practice test for Virginia’s SOL in history.  Regardless of the reason, he only got about 60 percent of the questions right.  He should be doing better, particularly after nearly a year studying the subject in class. The teacher was naturally worried, so sent a note home.

The note was classic passing of the buck.  The teacher informed the parents of the poor performance on the practice test.  Then the teacher informed the parents that the student had a notebook full of study materials he was required to bring home every night.  The teacher reminded the parents he is to “study every night.”

At face value, the conversation seems pretty basic enough.  Yes, parents need to take responsibility for their children’s performance.  Yes, parents need to make sure their students are studying and successfully completing their assignments.  And yes, parents should care about their children’s achievement on state assessments.

But there are two other issues here.  The first is shared responsibility, the second the intention of state assessments.  Teachers administer pre-tests so they know where their students stand.  Such tests allow teachers to administer targeted interventions to address student learning needs.  It allows for adjustment in classroom instruction, letting teachers see what lessons have sunk in and what lessons have not.

Students succeed in the classroom when parents, students, and teachers all take responsibility for learning.  Teaching is not merely assembling a notebook of study materials.  Requiring a notebook go home each night doesn’t translate into learning.  Such materials are designed to enhance classroom learning.  They can’t replace instruction.

Which gets us to the larger point — the intent of state assessments.  In Virginia, we assume the SOLs will measure what a student has learned over the course of the academic year.  While some may say teachers teach to the test, SOLs (or similar tests in other states) are not meant to be an exam we cram for.  To suggest that SOL success comes from students studying sample questions at home undoes the intent and purpose of the state assessment.

It’s no wonder people have such issues with state assessments.  It cheapens the value of the test when teachers give the impression and all-nighter will result in passing marks or students will learn through notebook osmosis or when parents think the responsibility is all on them to prepare their kids for the state exam.  At the end of the day, state assessments should never be the vocal point of the classroom.  The academic year should be about good instruction.  If teachers teach well, students will succeed.  And they will achieve on any independent exam the state or nation want to throw at them.

I wish my young friend luck on his history SOLs.  And I hope his teacher experiences success with applied instructional methods.  It’s good to encourage parents to get involved, as long as the teacher shares the responsibility, instead of passing potential blame.