اینترنت

دسته: 1

  • Helping students with mental health struggles may help them return to school

    Helping students with mental health struggles may help them return to school


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    Students who are chronically absent from school are much more likely to struggle with mental health challenges, with pre-teen boys and teen girls reporting some of the highest signs of distress.

    When students need help, availability of mental health support often depends on the income of families. “As household income increased, so did the availability of mental health services” in children’s schools, University of Southern California researchers found in a survey of 2,500 households nationwide.

    Their findings are part of an in-depth report on the continuing national school absenteeism crisis in which 25% of students, or about 12 million children, across 42 states and Washington, D.C., were chronically absent in the 2022-23 school year. That rate remains higher than the pre-pandemic national rate of 15%.

    EDITORS NOTE

    This in-depth report on chronic absenteeism is part of an EdSource partnership with the Associated Press and Stanford Professor Thomas Dee.

    For earlier coverage, go to EdSource’s Getting Students Back to School.

    — Rose Ciotta, investigations and projects editor

    While California saw a decrease of 5 percentage points in chronic absenteeism during the same school year, to 24.9%, districts statewide are still struggling to get all students back to school.

    “Chronic absenteeism in California is still twice what it was prior to the pandemic, and roughly 1 in 4 kids in public schools are chronically absent. That is just really striking and is a serious barrier to achieving academic recovery for this generation of students who were so harmed by the pandemic,” said Thomas Dee, a Stanford University education professor and economist who gathered nationwide data in collaboration with The Associated Press and the release of the USC research.

    Emotional and behavioral problems also have kept kids home from school. University of Southern California research shared exclusively with AP found strong relationships between absenteeism and poor mental health.

    For example, in the USC study, almost a quarter of chronically absent kids had high levels of emotional or behavioral problems, according to a parent questionnaire, compared with just 7% of kids with good attendance. Emotional symptoms among teen girls were especially linked with missing lots of school.

    Families with the lowest incomes reported a much higher rate of using mental health services if they were offered to their children in school — more than five times higher than those with the highest incomes. And, crucially, the researchers also found that 1 in 5 respondents would have used mental health services if they were made available at their school, with higher rates among Black and Hispanic families who were surveyed.

    “There is tremendous opportunity here for schools to increase the offerings but also, if they have the offerings, to increase the outreach to the kids and the families that need it because there is clearly an unmet need,” said Amie Rapaport, who co-authored the report and is the co-director of Center for Economic and Social Research at USC.

    ‘I had a very bad year’

    If Jennifer Hwang’s son made it to his first grade classroom, it was rarely without a fight.

    He struggled with severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and Hwang says his teacher’s habit of discarding art work in front of him would spike his anxiety, leading to violent outbursts and refusing to even get in the car or walk onto campus.

    “I thought I would have a good year in first grade, but I didn’t,” said her son, 8, whose name Hwang declined to share to protect his privacy. “I had a very bad year.”

    The absences began piling up during the second semester of that 2022-23 school year; he started missing two to three days most weeks. He soon became chronically absent, meaning he missed at least 40 days total. That classified him as chronically absent because he had missed at least 10% or more days in one school year. He began to see a therapist outside the L.A. Unified district.

    Hwang tried getting her son an individualized education program (IEP), which would grant him access to school-based counseling services given his ADHD diagnosis. But because her son’s academic performance was up to par, the school said he didn’t need it.

    She also inquired about him seeing a child psychologist who went to his Riverside Drive Charter campus in Sherman Oaks once or twice a week — but the waitlists were too long. Because he was already seeing a therapist outside of school, Hwang gave up on pressing for school resources.

    The USC report published Thursday highlights that pre-teen boys, which includes children ages 5 to 12, are struggling significantly with symptoms of hyperactivity and conduct problems, while teen girls, ages 13 to 17, are struggling most with emotional symptoms, such as depression and anxiety.

    Morgan Polikoff, a co-author of the USC report, said they cannot confirm there is “a cause and effect here,” noting that the correlation between chronic absenteeism and mental health challenges could “go both directions.”

    “In reality, it’s probably both ways. There’s probably some kids for whom increasing anxiety is leading them to stay home, and there’s probably kids who are missing a lot of school and that’s increasing their anxiety. So it probably is bi-directional or multi-directional,” Rapaport agreed.

    Both the USC researchers and Dee advocated for more research to better understand the causes of persistently high chronic absenteeism rates.

    LAUSD’s chronic absenteeism problem

    Last year, for second grade, everything changed, Hwang said, largely thanks to a teacher who adapted assignments to suit her son’s social-emotional needs and incorporated “brain breaks” into the school day, which Hwang’s son said helped him concentrate.

    “She understood him. She knew that he was bright and he felt things much more deeply, and he saw things differently and with a very different perspective,” Hwang said. “She allowed him to feel heard.”

    “One day (his teacher told me), ‘Oh, my goodness, your son just gave me a hug!’ Hwang said. “That doesn’t come cheap because he does not give out hugs very often. So that he actually hugged the teacher … that says a lot.”

    Hwang and her family aren’t sure what third grade will bring, but they were able to at least secure a 504, a type of plan that helps level the playing field for students with disabilities, so her son could have access to a special chair and space to doodle.

    LAUSD, the second-largest school district in the nation, has struggled with high rates of chronic absenteeism since the onset of the pandemic. Nearly 33% of their over 400,000 students were chronically absent during the 2022-23 school year, down from about 40% the previous year.

    Most recently, in 2023-24, preliminary data shows their rate is hovering at 32.3%, a spokesperson said.

    Still not enough

    LAUSD has increased its staffing of social workers and pupil attendance workers, but staffers say it’s just not enough.

    “We have what we can afford at this point — more than ever before — but still not at an appropriate ratio that I think this board, or myself, would feel comfortable,” Superintendent Alberto Carvalho said at a news conference Monday.

    Carvalho described the district’s staffing as “an unprecedented network” but did not specify how much staffing had increased.

    Ofelia Sofia Ryan is one of roughly 400 LAUSD pupil services and attendance workers trying to bring students back to school.
    Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource

    Ofelia Sofia Ryan is one of LAUSD’s roughly 400 pupil services and attendance counselors who are on the front lines helping get chronically absent students connected with mental health resources and Medi-Cal so they can get back to school.

    This year, the 20-year district veteran works in five elementary schools, including Orchard Academies in the city of Bell.

    “Poverty is the No. 1 issue. Financial issues are … second — the inability of a parent to monitor because they are having two jobs, which also relates to the poverty issue,” Ryan said. “Mental health, I would say that will be maybe next.”

    Darlene Rivas, one of the district’s 800 psychiatric social workers (PSWs), is assigned to two East Los Angeles elementary schools: William R. Anton and Lorena Street.

    “We have to be team players because it can’t just be one person,” Rivas said. “I think that’s why you see a lot of exhaustion within PSW professionals.”

    There is a long waitlist for students in need of therapy, she said. If a parent can’t make it to an initial appointment, it can take months to reschedule.

    Adding staffing can come from school funding, but there are competing demands.

    This year Ryan said she started on an LAUSD campus two days a week. At the last minute, “boom,” they dropped a day, she said.

    “That’s very unfair, because (the district tells) you, on one hand, mental health matters, attendance matters. You’re working your butt off to get attendance improved. I improved attendance in all my schools. Everything was done by the book, and then (the school) just took the money away,” said Ryan. “You cannot do anything. You are powerless.”

    Carvalho regularly touts the district’s iAttend program, where he, among others, visits the homes of chronically absent students to coax them back to school. The district made more than 34,000 home visits last school year, contributing to a more than 4 percentage point decrease in chronic absenteeism, according to the district.

    What the public doesn’t know is how much work it takes after the house visit to get the child back in school, Ryan said.

    Local barriers require local solutions

    Researchers like Dee offer advice for lowering chronic absenteeism rates: “Be acutely aware of the problem” and “look to the really local barriers.”

    That advice appears to be playing out successfully farther north, in Placer County, where more and more of Roseville City School District’s 12,000 students are attending school regularly each year.

    Placer’s 2023-24 absenteeism rate is expected to be about 11% — nearly double what it was pre-pandemic. But that is down from 20% in 2022-23 and 26% in 2021-22.

    School staff have found the two main reasons for the absences are “misinformation and a lot of struggle,” said Jessica Hull, the district’s executive director of communication and community engagement. They zeroed in on these top reasons by closely tracking absenteeism over several years with their attendance system plus a notification system managed by a third-party team, SchoolStatus, that they hired specifically to address chronic absences.

    The misinformation largely centers on families being unsure of whether to send a child to school when they are sick, not knowing they can rely on independent study if the family is going on a lengthy vacation, or not understanding the importance of enrolling in pre-kindergarten known as TK.

    Roseville City School District’s attendance roadmap for parents.

    This misinformation is part of what Dee and other researchers are calling “norm erosion.”

    “The learning experiences of families and students during the pandemic, in particular the experience of remote schooling, may have reduced the perceived value of regular school attendance among students and parents,” said Dee.

    He cautioned against blaming parents for the erosion, saying that “we’re in a crisis now that merits immediate attention and perhaps a little less finger-pointing.”

    The struggles that Hull, from Roseville, said families face are often mental health challenges, particularly with middle schoolers, or families with unmet basic needs, such as unstable housing.

    One of their solutions to both barriers has been constant check-ins with those chronically absent students in order to offer resources, such as access to mental health specialists, gas cards to families facing transportation issues, and offering families bags of food from the local food bank.

    Another help is clearly explaining the notices behind their child being absent. “Schools are all about the acronym and all about words that no one else understands, so we start sending letters home and talking about truancy and chronically truant and excused absence and unexcused absence — all of that’s a mess,” Hull said.

    Instead, parents can expect to see at schools half-sheets of card stock paper explaining the terms and printed in five languages from English to Ukrainian to Pashto.

    “It’s really trying to remove that language barrier when we are talking jargon, and they’re just saying, ‘my kid needs help, we need help figuring out how to get them to school,’” Hull said.

    In Oakland, districtwide efforts include creating a sense of belonging. Oakland’s African American Male Achievement project, for example, pairs Black students with Black teachers who offer support.

    Kids who identify with their educators are more likely to attend school, said Michael Gottfried, a University of Pennsylvania professor. According to one study led by Gottfried, California students felt “it’s important for me to see someone who’s like me early on, first thing in the day,” he said.

    The Associated Press contributed to this story.





    Source link

  • Stefan Bean’s remarkable journey: Q&A with Orange County’s new superintendent

    Stefan Bean’s remarkable journey: Q&A with Orange County’s new superintendent


    Stefan Bean is sworn in as Orange County’s 12th superintendent of schools on July 3, 2024.

    Credit: Orange County Department of Education

    Families of English learners and students with disabilities in Orange County can find inspiration and an ally in Stefan Bean. Supporters of school choice can find an advocate. In June, the five-member Orange County school board unanimously decided Bean has the perspective and skills they were looking for in a superintendent of the Orange County Department of Education.

    Two years from now, voters will decide if the board made the right choice.

    Bean, 53, was sworn in last month as superintendent to fill out the remaining two years of the term of former Supterintendent Al Mijares, who resigned because of a lengthy battle with cancer. First elected in 2012, Mijares, a past member of the EdSource board of directors, had battled the politically conservative board majority in court and at board meetings. So the board turned to Bean, who lost to Mijares by nearly 10 percentage points in 2022 but promised to consult with them over policies and control of the office’s $380 million budget.

    Stefan Bean is the superintendent of the Orange County Department of Education.
    Credit: Orange County Department of Education.

    Bean has lived a remarkable life and has an unusual resume for a county superintendent. Paralyzed from the waist down from polio as an infant, he was abandoned on the streets of Saigon before being taken in by an orphanage and then airlifted in 1975 to the United States as part of the Operation Babylift rescue during the chaotic end of the Vietnam War.

    Judy and Gregory Bean took him and dozens of other foster children into their San Diego home and later adopted him. A scholarship recipient to USC, Bean became a public elementary school teacher in Fresno and Long Beach, and has spent the last 25 years as a charter school administrator — as the principal, then associate superintendent and superintendent for 11 Aspire Public Schools in Los Angeles.

    Most recently, he served as the executive director of the Irvine International Academy, a Mandarin language immersion charter school.

    Since his wife died of breast cancer in 2020, Bean has raised their four children, ranging from a daughter who has just graduated from USC, to the youngest daughter, who is in middle school.

    EdSource interviewed Bean about his childhood, his perspective on education, and his priorities as county superintendent for two years before an election contest in 2026. His remarks have been edited for length and clarity.

    Superintendent, talk about your upbringing and experiences in school.

    Judy Bean really taught her family to have compassion for the most vulnerable in our community. She and Dad decided they would care for children who were abused, had issues or disabilities. They had two of their own children and adopted 10, several with disabilities. I had three Black sisters, two Latino brothers, and a Latino brother who passed away at 2 because he had suffered so much brain trauma.

    I went to public school in San Diego, where I struggled in elementary school because English was my second language and because IDEA (the landmark federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) just came out in the ‘70s, and schools were still trying to figure out how to educate students with disabilities. I often found myself in small groups out of the classroom. It didn’t really help with my education to isolate me, and it shaped my drive to be inclusive in education.

    I didn’t do very well until I met Donald Geisinger, my sixth-grade teacher. I remain friends with him 43 years later. He saw right through the challenges that I had and said, “Stefan, you’re just going to give oral presentations and skits on the things that you’ve learned — no need to write.” That whole year I just worked on my verbal skills. I spoke Vietnamese quite a bit, and by the end of that year, I began to speak pretty fluent English. From sixth grade on, I began to get straight A’s and (earned) a scholarship to USC.

    His heart for students and his seeing my strengths was a springboard to do other things, such as speaking in front of 15,000 people in Washington, D.C., on behalf of the disabled.

    How did your experiences shape your perspective on education? 

    Mr. Geisinger and my father saw people and students through an asset lens. Whether they’re on the autism spectrum or have a physical disability or emotional disability — sure, these are deficits, but we as educators must see the assets in those students, and then lift them up and empower students.

    Leading from the heart

    When you say lead from the heart again, how does that translate into action?

    You lead with empathy. My mantra has been you involve those who are most affected by decisions. It’s not top-down directed. Obviously there are certain legal and personnel decisions that would have to be made without input. But a lot of decisions that impact educational programming can involve the community and can involve the stakeholders that are impacted by it.

    I assume that would be a particular strength in dealing with parents of English learners and parents of students with disabilities.

    Absolutely. I now represent many students who have traditionally been left behind. I certainly identify with those students, and I hope that they will look to me as a voice for them.

    Your predecessor had a contentious relationship with the board.  Since the board chose you, I assume you are more philosophically in tune with them.  

    I can’t speak on behalf of Dr. Mijares, but I certainly have the utmost respect for his leadership. If I can lead in a collaborative, transparent manner, then I think we can resolve any dispute between the board and the County Department of Education. In my appointment process, I shared my commitment to building collaboration, transparency, and trust and continuing to support our 28 school districts.

    How will you do this?

    It is common for school districts to have committees in which two (out of five members), sometimes three if you have a larger board, can serve on these committees to really give input (without violating the Brown Act governing open meetings) and receive feedback.  

    You have been quoted as saying you want to “further expand” the board’s work supporting charters and open up more parental options for education, including charter schools and home schools.  Is this a matter of using the bully pulpit?  What can and will you do?

    As people have been learning about me and meeting me and hearing my vision, they would say that I’m far from using this as a bullying pulpit. It’s the complete opposite, actually. My vision is to lead from the heart in which we serve our principals and serve our schools in this work. But to answer your question, this board certainly believes in alternative education models and therefore charter schools. I believe that most of the superintendents that I’ve met believe that our students have different needs. Therefore, in the name of equity, we must provide what our students need. 

    How does that work with homeschooling, though?

    Many home schools now are charters, and charters are heavily regulated in all aspects. We support charter schools that do the independent study model, which is a lot like home school. We don’t support the private home school models. We do have within the department an independent study model in which students learn from home.

    County offices can approve countywide charters but don’t charter proposals go through their individual districts for approval?

    A charter school’s initial application goes to a local school district, and then if it’s denied there, they can bring it to their county as a county charter school. That’s one pathway. And then usually, those county charter schools can then later submit to be a countywide charter school. We have over 30 charter schools.

    But don’t county boards have restrictions on when they can overturn a local decision?

    If a district has denied a charter, they of course have to explain the reasons why. Then that charter can take it to the county board of education and say, “OK, this district denied us for A, B and C. And here’s how we have responded to A, B, and C. So now we would like you to authorize the charter.” There are few restrictions. Our county can certainly do that. 

    The importance of social-emotional learning

    What is your view of social-emotional learning (SEL)?

    Social-emotional learning is very important in schools when we do it as a team in a collaborative way. That includes our parents. Social emotional learning is simply helping our students navigate through the challenges of their lives. Helping them to become resilient. That’s exactly what I grew up with. I’ve had many adversities that our students experience. To overcome those, adults, including my parents, teachers, counselors, speech pathologists, special education providers, all of these people helped me to overcome my challenges to become resilient and competent. And that’s what SEL should be doing.

    I have cautioned educators (not) to use it as a political tool to push forward something that may not be protecting our students. For instance, I believe 100% that parental involvement is absolutely critical in our education system. And so, if SEL is being used to exclude some of our parents, then we’ve missed the mark. That’s where I’m critical.

    What are your priorities for the next two years?

    The first priority is just to continue understanding the assets and the values of the department of education throughout Orange County.

    My second vision is to remain at the forefront of 21st century competencies and skills and lead the way for our students through our OC Pathways partnerships with districts and ACCESS (Alternative, Communit​y, and Correctional Education Schools and Services) what we call our 29th school district. We serve thousands of students across our county in an alternative education setting and model.

    Assuming you do want to run in two years, what will you point to and say, “I’ve made this change, and it’s visible and it affects the way students succeed or not.”

    It will be in the areas of where we will lead the nation, in college and career readiness. I wholeheartedly believe in that vision. One of my pushes will be to use some of our reserves to provide grants to our school districts in order to create and promote innovative programming. Three groups I spoke with recently were focused on artificial intelligence, different technical skills and student leadership. Our districts will come up with great ideas, and we will honor them with resources to implement them.





    Source link

  • Too many California students are struggling to afford community college

    Too many California students are struggling to afford community college


    Los Angeles City College, one of the state’s 116 community colleges.

    Larry Gordon/EdSource Today

    Thousands of current and prospective California Community College (CCC) students are being crushed by unmanageable college and living expenses and hefty student loans. 

    That’s the finding of a new report from The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) and Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC). Our researchers analyzed data from state and federal officials to shine a light on the complex financial challenges plaguing community college students, particularly students of color. 

    The conclusion is clear: We must make community college more affordable and accessible. 

    Before diving into the findings, it’s important to understand the unique challenges of community college students. Many come from low-income backgrounds and experience food and housing insecurity while pursuing their postsecondary dreams. Many also financially support a child or other family members. 

    Unfortunately, the report found that community college can quickly become too expensive for these students to manage, and could even be more costly than public universities. Our researchers analyzed the price of various community colleges — including tuition, food, housing, textbooks and materials, and transportation — for a student whose family made less than $30,000 annually. We found that, including potential grant aid, Butte College still had an annual net price of $14,600. Cuesta College cost $18,900, and Long Beach City College came in at $20,200. 

    Furthermore, community college students often struggle to access grant aid. Prospective students may be unaware of their aid eligibility or lack the support to navigate the full application process. In 2019-20, only 51% of community college students in California applied for federal financial aid, compared with 75% of students attending public four-year universities. 

    All in all, 54% of students attending the state’s community colleges did not receive a single drop of grant aid in 2019-20. 

    Public university students, meanwhile, often fare better with financial aid because they are eligible for more generous and robust financial support from the state and their institutions. For example, unlike California community college students, they are eligible for funds from the Middle Class Scholarship for individuals pursuing a teaching credential.

    As a result, thousands of community college students, particularly students of color, take out student loans. Alarmingly, while Black students made up just 5% of the California community college enrollment in 2021-22, they accounted for 20% of student borrowers. 

    Community college students also try to make ends meet by working while taking classes. More than 3 in 4 community college students surveyed in the 2021-22 Student Expenses and Resources Survey (SEARS) reported working at least 21 hours a week, compared with just half of their peers at California State University, University of California, and private, nonprofit institutions. And almost half of community college respondents worked at least 36 hours — nearly a full-time job.

    Unfortunately, research shows that excessive work hours can negatively impact students’ academic success by slashing the time they have to learn and study. 

    California must do better.

    It is critical to expand access to aid opportunities for community college students. First and foremost, policymakers can follow through on their commitment to reform the Cal Grant program. After years of advocacy, legislators agreed in the 2022-23 California state budget to expand eligibility to more low-income students, ensure student awards kept pace with inflation, and more. But they still haven’t provided the funding needed to complete these reforms — and the 2024-25 state budget doesn’t include it. We simply can’t keep putting this on the back burner. 

    In the meantime, state leaders should pursue other routes to increase aid opportunities. California just submitted a proposal to the U.S. Department of Education to enable students without a high school diploma — or the equivalent — to access federal assistance for higher education, known as Title IV financial aid. This could be a big step forward in supporting community college students if allowed. 

    Policymakers and community colleges should also explore innovative ways to ensure that incoming students complete the Free Application For Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) or California Dream Act Application (CADAA). While high school students are required to submit a FAFSA or CADAA, many prospective community college students take years off between high school and postsecondary education. Increasing completion rates can maximize access to aid for those students. 

    Additionally, we urge policymakers to make the Student Success Completion Grant — which helps community college students cover their education and living expenses — more equitable. The grant is currently only available to those who attend full-time — generally, students with fewer external work and family responsibilities. And the amount of aid varies significantly. Students taking 12 -14.999 credits can only receive $1,298 per semester. However, once they hit 15 credits, that amount jumps to $4,000 per semester. 

    California Community Colleges are designed to serve all communities and uplift students from every walk of life. With intentional reforms that support the whole student, we ensure that all Californians have equitable and affordable access to a quality education at their local community college.

    Manny Rodriguez is California director of policy and advocacy at The Institute for College Access and Success (TICAS).

    Ivan Hernandez is a student at Diablo Valley College and the president of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC).

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the authors. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Fresno Unified adopts weekly early release schedule, joining other large California districts

    Fresno Unified adopts weekly early release schedule, joining other large California districts


    Credit: Fresno Unified / Flickr

    Starting this school year, Fresno Unified is adopting an early release schedule, joining a dozen of the state’s other largest school districts as well as its neighbors in Fresno County who’ve embraced the practice for years. 

    Now, students enrolled in the state’s third-largest district with nearly 70,000 students will be released about an hour early every Tuesday of a five-day school week. The district’s schools began notifying families in the weeks leading up to the first day this coming Monday. 

    Many districts utilize early release days each week for teacher and staff professional development, such as training and/or planning. 

    In Long Beach Unified, the state’s fourth-largest district with around 65,000 students, the early dismissal days are known as “prep days.” The 49,000-student San Bernardino City Unified dubs its days “Collaboration Day” while others such as Elk Grove and Kern High School District simply classify them as “early out” days. 

    No matter the name, the practice provides “much-needed time for our teachers to plan, work together on professional learning and engage with our parents and families,” said Misty Her, Fresno Unified interim superintendent at a Wednesday press conference about the 2024-25 school year. 

    That’s not the only reason for the shift. 

    Based on the district’s Frequently Asked Questions page about early release, the change also stemmed from 2023 contract negotiations with teachers which brought more than a year of negotiating to an end and prevented a divisive strike that would’ve harmed the Fresno community and the district’s students. 

    “In October 2023 when the Fresno Teachers Association and the district reached a new contract agreement, the agreement included more time for teachers to engage in professional learning during their workday,” according to the FAQ page. “Early release every Tuesday provides this time for meetings and other forms of professional learning.”

    What does it mean for students, staff?  

    Districts bordering Fresno Unified employ early release days as well, including Clovis and Central Unified located in Fresno County. 

    Clovis Unified, for instance, has used the early release days for at least 25 years. 

    According to the district’s FAQ page, while each campus will follow the Tuesday early-release schedule, the actual time of dismissal may vary, depending on a school’s bell schedule. Students attending Design Science Middle College High School who take classes at Fresno City College will get their early-release day on Friday, and the district’s child development and preschool programs will continue to follow a schedule outlined by the state. 

    Parents in the Bakersfield City School District have long been accustomed to their children getting out an hour early on Wednesdays. 

    “As a stay-at-home mom, it doesn’t affect me,” said Vicki Ramos, a mother of three students who attend Evergreen Elementary in Bakersfield. “For people that have jobs, it’s kind of inconvenient because they have to get childcare.”

    After-school programs usually provide that care for enrolled students. 

    The after-school programs throughout Fresno Unified will still start immediately after dismissal on Tuesdays to offer extended learning and support to students.  Buses will also run early. 

    Even though early release means students are spending one less hour in the classroom on Tuesday, Her said they will not be missing out on instruction because the time subtracted is made up every other day of the school year. She added that the opportunities to involve families and collaboration among teachers will improve the way educators serve their students. 

    Teachers can connect and engage with parents more often, especially if their students are struggling, Her said. For example, rather than waiting until parent-teacher conferences weeks or even months into the school year, the early release provides the opportunity for intervention on a weekly basis. 

    Superintendent Her’s No. 1 goal for Fresno Unified is to improve student outcomes by decreasing the distance from standards by 15% in the next two years. Distance from standards measures how far students are from meeting proficiency. So as part of the professional development offered during early-release schedules, teachers will work together and with school administration to target the goal of bettering student academic gains, she said. 

    “We’re really hoping that with teachers working closely together, planning together, coming up with their lessons together, it starts to impact what we … get for students.” 





    Source link

  • State bailout for California school districts comes with long strings attached

    State bailout for California school districts comes with long strings attached


    Credit: Andrew Reed/EdSource

    Top Takeaways
    •  Plumas Unified in northeast California, with an enrollment of about 2,000 students, will be the first district in over a dozen years to seek a state bailout.  
    • California’s system of financial oversight of school districts has mostly worked, having kept all but nine of them from seeking a state bailout loan to avert insolvency.  
    • The key to keeping school districts from financial disaster has been close oversight by county offices of education and monitoring by the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team. 

    Plumas Unified, a small school district in the Sierra Nevada in far northeast California, is on track to become the first district in over a dozen years to join nine others that have had to get a bailout loan from the state to avert bankruptcy.

    In the last week of April, its school board voted to request an emergency state loan of up to $20 million, explaining that it has “exhausted all of its sources of alternative liquidity and any external sources of short-term cash.”

    The district joins a select group of districts that no one wants to belong to.    

    A state bailout is accompanied by rigorous state and county oversight, loss of local control, extra expenses in paying off the loan, and other conditions that last for years. 

    “Manage your finances because you don’t want this,” said James Morris, the administrator appointed to oversee Inglewood Unified in Los Angeles County, which has been in state receivership for 13 years. 

    Carl Cohn, a leading educator who was superintendent in Long Beach Unified and San Diego Unified, and a former member of the State Board of Education, says getting a state bailout is a fate to be avoided at all costs.  

    “It’s really important to maintain that sense of an empowered community through locally elected officials,” he said. 

    From the state’s perspective, “There’s no way the state is itching to get its hands on these districts either,” said Richard Whitmore, the first state-appointed administrator at Compton Unified after it got an emergency bailout loan in 1993.  

    “It’s bad for public education to have these districts fall into what is essentially bankruptcy,” said Whitmore. “It costs the state a ton of money to intervene and do all this work, which they are not well-prepared to execute, so they have to go into crisis mode when it happens.”

    On the face of it, however, it is remarkable that fewer than 10 school districts, out of close to a thousand in California, have had to submit to state receivership in return for getting a bailout. 

    It suggests that the state’s system of oversight is mostly working as planned.   

    Districts Placed Under State Receivership

    West Contra Costa Unified, 1990* 
    Loan amount: $28.5 million.
    Low-income students:  63%**

    Coachella Valley Unified, 1992
    Loan amount: $7.3 million. 
    Low-income students:  92.4%

    Compton Unified, 1995  
    Loan amount: $19.9 million  
    Low-income students: 93% 

    Emery Unified, 2001
    Loan amount $1.3 million.  
    Low-income students: 52% 

    Oakland Unified, 2003 
    Loan amount: $100 million  
    Low-income students:  80%

    West Fresno Elementary:  2003***
    Loan amount: $1.3 million 
    Low-income students: 86%

    South Monterey County Joint Union High, 2009
    Loan Amount: $13 million 

    Low-income students:  85%

    Vallejo City Unified 2004
    Loan amount: $60 million 
    Low-income students: 85% 

    Inglewood Unified, 2012
    Loan amount: $29 million  
    Low-income students:  87 pct. 

    *Date refers to the year the loan was awarded.

    **Low-income refers to the percentage of students qualifying for free and reduced price meals.

    ***District merged with Washington Unified; low-income figure is for Washington Unified. 

    That system came into existence in response to West Contra Costa Unified’s insolvency in 1990, when it became the first district to get a bailout from the state. 

    Assembly Bill 1200 in 1991 decreed that, as a condition of receiving a loan, the state superintendent of public instruction must appoint an administrator to oversee the district. Under 2018 legislation (AB 1840), it is now the county superintendent of schools who appoints the administrator. 

    The 1991 legislation also established an independent fiscal oversight agency, the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, or FCMAT (universally pronounced “Fickmat” in education circles).

    One reason only a small number of districts have had to turn to the state for a bailout has been the effectiveness of FCMAT, and the stability of its leadership. Since its founding, it has had only two CEOs, Joel Montero and Michael Fine, its current leader. Both are highly regarded in education circles. 

    Another factor is that school districts must submit their budgets to county superintendents for review at least three times during the year, known as the first and second interim budgets, and the final budget, which must be approved by July 1. 

    “They’re the early warning system,” said Karen Stapf Walters, executive director of California County Superintendents, referring to the school superintendents in all 58 counties. “When they see a district going south, they jump in with body and soul and give a district whatever it needs to get back on track.” 

    Fine said FCMAT’s role is to steer school boards to the point that they ultimately sit down and do what they need to do when they need to do it.”

    But getting out of receivership is an arduous process. Districts have to meet over 150 standards set by FCMAT, in areas such as financial management, pupil achievement, personnel and facilities management, governance and community relations. 

    Even after it meets those standards, and the administrator leaves, the district is likely to be paying off its loan still. The county superintendent then appoints a trustee with fewer powers than the administrator, but who can still veto financial decisions made by the elected school board until the last loan payment is made.  

    Many school leaders say the funds and years that districts spent paying off a loan could have supported current education programs. “The children sitting in classrooms in Inglewood today are paying for mistakes made, many of them before they were even born, by folks who are not here any longer,” said Inglewood’s Morris. 

    In West Contra Costa’s case, it took 21 years to pay off its bailout loan of $28.5 million, plus $19 million in interest and fees. 

    When the district paid its final installment in 2012, then-board member Madeline Kronenberg called it “Independence Day” for the district. But she regretted that years of loan payments meant “thousands and thousands of children were unable to get what other districts provide.”

    And yet, enduring years of state receivership doesn’t necessarily translate into a district’s long-term financial health. 

    Just the opposite. Of the nine school districts that have been through state receivership — all serving mostly low-income students — at least five are still experiencing severe financial difficulties.  

    Coachella Valley Unified, which got a bailout loan in 1992, is cutting hundreds of jobs as it tries to close a $6 million shortfall. Inglewood Unified is about to close five schools, including its storied Morningside High School. 

    In what should be cause for celebration in Vallejo and Oakland, both will pay off their state loans next month and regain full control of their districts for the first time in 20 years. 

    But both districts still face major financial challenges. Vallejo City Unified, dealing with a budget shortfall of $36 million, is on the verge of closing two schools. Oakland is similarly struggling, with considerations of another insolvency not yet off the table.   

    West Contra Costa, whose budget just received a “positive certification” from the county office of education, is still operating with a structural deficit and will rely on reserves to get through the next two years. 

    At times, the underlying conditions that got districts into trouble persist, such as declining enrollments and the absence of strong fiscal leadership by subsequent school boards or superintendents. Too often, the lessons learned from earlier financial meltdowns are forgotten or ignored. 

    One district that has turned around is Compton Unified, which, under the leadership of Superintendent Darin Brawley, has made significant improvements not only on the academic front but also in achieving financial stability. 

    Brawley said he only calculates his budgets based on funds actually in district coffers, not on funds it is slated to receive. In addition, he made cuts gradually over the years as conditions warranted, and did not wait until the district was in crisis.   

    He says district officials are too often “conflict-averse,” and “rather than make the tough choices, and what may be the right decisions to remain fiscally stable, they will oftentimes not make decisions, and then the problem balloons into a much bigger issue.” 

    Now it’s Plumas Unified’s turn to cede control to the state. In late April, facing an $8 million deficit on its $42 million budget, Plumas Unified’s board called a special meeting to request a state bailout loan. 

    The district covers 2,600 square miles, a vast area in the Sierra Nevada, providing schooling for about 2,000 students with few other options. 

    How did it escape the oversight system that has, over the past dozen years, kept every other district but nine from having to turn to the state to bail them out? 

    “Plumas unfortunately came up on the radar too late for us to help them,” said FCMAT’s Fine. One reason, he said, is because “I don’t think they were being 100% honest about their numbers.”

    For example, the district awarded staff a 14% pay increase, without having a viable way to calculate its costs, he said. “Without reliable numbers, it is difficult to know the condition of a district and thus to get in early enough to assist.”

    Editor’s note: Richard Whitmore is a member of the EdSource board of directors.

    Next Week: Inglewood Unified’s unfinished journey to get out of state receivership





    Source link

  • Communities demand transparency after Ed, LAUSD’s AI chatbot, fails 

    Communities demand transparency after Ed, LAUSD’s AI chatbot, fails 


    An LAUSD student tries out Ed, the district’s new AI assistant for students.

    Credit: Los Angeles Unified / X

    Roughly a month after the Los Angeles Unified School District revoked its AI chatbot, Ed, communities of parents, teachers and experts are demanding that the school district respond to their concern that the short-lived association with AllHere, the company that built and supported the program, has potentially compromised data on the district’s larger educational priorities. 

    “While we welcome technological advancements, it’s crucial to engage in transparent discussions with educators, educational staff, parents, and policymakers about the risks and impacts of AI in schools,” said Cecily Myart-Cruz, president of United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), in a statement. 

    UTLA also encouraged the district to engage outside counsel and move forward with an investigation. Myart-Cruz also emphasized in the statement that any AI tools moving forward are part of collective bargaining. 

    School board member Rocío Rivas said in a July 31 Facebook post that the district has “initiated investigations” to look into allegations of compromised data. 

    A spokesperson for LAUSD said on July 15 that regardless of what happens to AllHere, student data will be protected by security measures that forbid the company from storing student data outside the U.S., unless the district grants the company permission to do so. 

    The lead-up

    In March, LAUSD rolled out the red carpet to introduce Ed, a smiling sun chatbot designed to serve as a personal assistant for students — capable of connecting them to mental health resources, informing them of cafeteria menus and waking them up in the morning. 

    The district has repeatedly justified its decision to use AllHere.

    “Los Angeles Unified launched a rigorous and competitive RFP (request for proposal) process and adhered to the District’s procurement process,” a district spokesperson told EdSource. “What we intended to develop did not readily exist as an off-the-shelf product, and we needed to build this from the ground up.” 

    The district considered three entities — AllHere, Afirma and Kokomo 24/7, which LAUSD collaborated with to provide telehealth services — and paid AllHere roughly $3 million for the product. 

    Carvalho said the bot was also designed to nudge students who are falling behind and allow them to click on resources for help. He also reassured the March event’s attendees that agencies at various levels — local, state and national — would help monitor any cybersecurity concerns. 

    At the time, he acknowledged that Ed might endure some challenges but that the district was committed to its success. 

    “Just like humans are not perfect — although sometimes, in certain political circles, some say they are — the technology produced by humans isn’t perfect either,” Carvalho said at the March event. 

    “With all of the protections against the vulnerabilities, there is always a concern. That’s why we are over vigilant,” he said.

    Ed was supposed to be rolled out in phases — beginning with the district’s 100 priority schools. 

    Three months later, on June 14, alarms began to sound, and AllHere had furloughed the bulk of its staff due to financial challenges, The 74 reported. Meanwhile, the CEO left. 

    In response — and because AllHere staff were unable to supervise it — the district removed the chatbot feature. LAUSD, however, still owns Ed, the district spokesperson confirmed, and the resource is still largely available to families. 

    The LAUSD spokesperson said Ed’s chatbot will return to families when the “human-in-the-loop aspect is re-established.” 

    “Los Angeles Unified was surprised by the financial disruption to AllHere. We were not made aware of any red flags concerning the organization, its solvency, or any financial issues,” the district spokesperson said. 

    “We had every confidence in their ability to develop a solid product. We, like other districts, were notified of their financial collapse and immediately ceased payment for a pending invoice.”

    The spokesperson also said that the district has not found a connection between what happened at AllHere and a data breach known as the Snowflake incident, adding that AllHere “does not maintain data on Snowflake.”

    Concerns over potentially compromised data have remained in the LAUSD community since, leading the district to begin investigating. 

    The pushback 

    While Los Angeles Unified remains committed to Ed, community members and experts at the University of Southern California (USC) Rossier School of Education continue to express their concern about student safety and the district’s priorities.

    “All we want are smaller class sizes and happy teachers. Basic stuff,” said Joanna Belson, the parent of a senior at North Hollywood High School, whose sister teaches in the district. “We don’t want Ed. We don’t want AI.”

    She added that the district should instead spend its money on expanding music and arts education — and extending sports programs to middle schools. 

    Echoing Belson, Alicia Baltazar, another LAUSD parent, voiced concerns about any potential data compromise, saying the district’s newfound emphasis on AI contradicts its new decision to ban cellphones in school. She added that the district should instead spend the money on bolstering its staff. 

    “I don’t know … how I’m going to tell my kid: ‘Stay off your cellphone. Don’t touch that at all. But here, use your laptop all day long. Use your chatbot,’” she said. 

    For Yasemin Copur-Gencturk, a professor at USC, the concerns lie in the technology itself. 

    Copur-Gencturk said there’s no evidence that the tool can accomplish what the district said it can do: promote academic recovery. 

    “AI has incredible potential to transform education and improve educational outcomes. There is no doubt about that. But there is a big ‘if,’” Copur-Gencturk said. “And I think many are ignoring that part. Most of the AI-based tools are not designed based on what we have learned from research on teaching and learning.”

    She said, for example, that AI tends to take each learning goal separately, without considering how concepts build on or connect to one another. This is particularly common in subjects like mathematics and could negatively impact students’ learning experience. 

    School districts, she said, should not spend large sums of money on AI unless they are certain the necessary security measures are in place and will have the positive academic impact they are seeking. 

    “There’s a notion that as long as artificial intelligence is involved, or a newer technology is involved, it will solve the problems,” Copur-Gencturk said. “Unfortunately, life is not that simple. We really need to, as educators, as administrators, we really need to be more cautious.”

    Beyond Los Angeles Unified

    While LAUSD has struggled with its rollout of Ed, districts across the nation that are contemplating incorporating AI could feel the effects, said Robin Lake, the director of the nonprofit Center for Reinventing Public Education. 

    “We never want to see things like that happen, and it’s obviously a setback for LAUSD in their goals for that tool,” Lake said. “But it’s also potentially a setback for other districts around the country who might look to LAUSD and think, ‘Oh, no, I don’t want to take any risks at all around AI, because I don’t want to end up in the newspaper.’” 

    She also said LAUSD’s story could serve as a reminder for other districts to roll out any AI features more slowly and more carefully, especially amid a “gold rush of providers” and a desire to remain ahead of the curve. 

    Lake also emphasized the importance of the education communities coming together to communicate their needs to education technology companies — and stressed the need for state and federal governments to provide better guidance to help ensure AI is woven into education equitably. 

    Despite the challenges, however, Lake maintained that AI has incredible potential to transform education — and that a “couple blowups” experienced by one district should not deter others from pursuing AI tools. 

    “Could AI help transform the teaching profession? Could AI help address student mental health crises? Could AI help improve assessments in education?” Lake said. 

    “There’s so many, so many possibilities. There’s still big questions around all of them, but as times get tighter around money, as federal funding goes away, we really must look to all potential solutions, and AI should be one of those.” 





    Source link

  • The rise of microschools: A wake-up call for public education

    The rise of microschools: A wake-up call for public education


    Superintendent Michael Matsuda speaks with students in a technology classroom in Anaheim Union High School District.

    Courtesy: Anaheim Union High School District

    The demise of great corporations like Kodak, Sears and others serves as a stark reminder of the perils of failing to innovate and evolve with consumer demands. Kodak famously ignored the rise of digital cameras despite inventing the technology itself. Similarly, Sears, once a retail giant, failed to adapt to the changing landscape of e-commerce. These cases highlight a common theme: success breeds complacency, whereby nimble competitors can quickly exploit new technologies and consumer trends. 

    Will public education, ensconced in outdated brick-and-mortar buildings and traditions, be next? 

    The pandemic forced schools to close but did not necessarily stifle learning. New models of teaching, such as neighborhood learning pods run informally by local parents, called “microschools,” were created. These microschools, many now monetized for profit, have grown exponentially, serving over 1.5 million K-12 students, mostly unregulated and taught by noncertified, noncertificated “teachers.”  The jury is still out on this new model, but, in the meantime, microschools are gaining momentum with parents who want more choices for their children.

    Arguably, the rise of microschools poses a significant threat to the traditional public school system, challenging its long-standing dominance in the American educational landscape. While California doesn’t specifically track homeschools or microschools, the number of private schools with fewer than five students has more than doubled to nearly 30,000 from prepandemic 2018-19 to 2023-24.

    Microschools, with their aggressive marketing to adapt quickly to the evolving needs of students and families, offer a “fresh” approach to education that starkly contrasts with the bureaucratic, often stagnant nature of public schools. As microschools grow in popularity, they expose the deep-rooted issues within the public education system, particularly its resistance to change and reliance on traditions tethered to a “teach to the test” culture making schools mostly unengaging and irrelevant to students’ lives. 

    According to a recent article in Politico, startup companies backed by investors like Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, act as the support system for teachers running microschools by handling issues like leasing classrooms, getting state approval and recruiting students. One such startup, Primer, recruits the “top 1 percent” of teachers and pays them 25% more than they would make on a school district salary. The company also offers teachers a revenue share for bringing in more students, treating them as “entrepreneurs.” It doesn’t currently operate in California, but is planning on expanding to more states. 

    Microschools, which typically serve small groups of students in personalized learning environments, have gained traction as families seek more flexible and tailored educational options. This flexibility is particularly appealing in an era when traditional education models are increasingly seen as one-size-fits-all, leaving many students either unchallenged or overwhelmed.

    One strength of microschools is their ability to innovate rapidly. Unlike public schools, which are often bogged down by layers of bureaucracy, microschools can implement new teaching methods, curricula and integrate technologies quickly. This agility allows them to meet the needs of students who may not thrive in a traditional classroom setting, such as those with learning disabilities, gifted students or children who simply learn better outside the confines of a traditional school day.

    However, without regulation or oversight, uninformed parents and students may be shortchanged in that classes are often not taught by well-prepared certificated teachers (who are more likely to be steeped in the science of learning and development) and schools may exclude students who do not “fit” into the model, thereby leading to more segregation and “otherness” — not a good outcome for society. Unfortunately, because of a lack of accountability, it is unknown whether microschools are meeting their student learning outcomes or preparing students for college and career readiness.

    In stark contrast to the nimble nature of microschools, public schools are often viewed as educational behemoths — large, slow-moving institutions that struggle to adapt to the changing needs of students and society. This inflexibility is rooted in the very structure of the public education system, which is designed to serve large numbers of students in a standardized manner, which is seen as outdated in a world that demands more personalized and flexible approaches to education.

    Furthermore, the bureaucratic and compliance-driven nature of public schools often stifles innovation. This makes it difficult for schools to implement new ideas or respond quickly to the needs of their students. In contrast, microschools, which are often run by small teams of educators or even parents, can make decisions quickly and adapt to new challenges as they arise.

    The growing popularity of microschools represents a significant threat to the traditional public school system. As more families opt for microschools, public schools may find themselves facing declining enrollment, which could lead to reduced funding and resources. This, in turn, could exacerbate the challenges that public schools already face, such as overcrowded classrooms, insufficient funding, and a lack of access to modern educational tools and technologies.

    Moreover, the growth of microschools highlights the shortcomings of public schools and puts pressure on them to reform. As parents and policymakers become increasingly aware of microschools, they may demand more flexibility, choice, and innovation from the public education system. 

    The threat posed by microschools is not just a challenge to the public education system, but also an opportunity for redesign and reform. If public schools are to remain relevant in the face of growing competition from microschools, they must find ways to become more flexible, innovative and responsive to the needs of their students. This may involve rethinking traditional methods of instruction, reducing bureaucratic obstacles, and placing a greater emphasis on personalized learning augmented by technology. 

    There are a number of obstacles to innovation. One is the difficulty in shifting from a traditional “seat based” instruction, tethered to the old Carnegie unit of attendance, to more “work-based” instruction to support internships, mastery grading and flexible scheduling. Another requires a mind shift beyond a top-down standardized test culture to teaching to the “whole child” with a focus on relevance and engagement. 

    As microschools continue to grow in popularity, public schools must either find ways to innovate and meet the demands of today’s students or risk becoming increasingly irrelevant in the rapidly evolving educational landscape.

    •••

    Michael Matsuda is superintendent of Anaheim Union High School District.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the authors. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Cal State, University of California ban encampments, impose protest rules

    Cal State, University of California ban encampments, impose protest rules


    Hundreds of San Diego State students protest in support of Palestinians on April 30, 2024.

    Credit: Jazlyn Dieguez / EdSource

    California State University and the University of California are welcoming student activists back to campus this fall with revamped protest rules that signal a harder line on encampments, barriers and, under certain circumstances, the wearing of face masks.

    Cal State, the nation’s largest public university system, was first to issue its policy Thursday, a bundle of restrictions that govern public assemblies on university campuses. UC President Michael Drake followed Monday with a letter outlining his expectations for campus chancellors to impose restrictions on how students could engage in protests this fall.

    The two systems join a wave of colleges that have revisited rules about how and where people can demonstrate on their campuses in the wake of pro-Palestinian protests last spring. Critics say some strengthened restrictions could limit free speech rights.

    The Cal State policy bars tent encampments and overnight demonstrations, a signature of the spring’s protest movements both within CSU and across higher education institutions. Erecting unauthorized barricades, fencing and furniture is also prohibited.

    “Encampments are prohibited by the policy, and those who attempt to start an encampment may be disciplined or sanctioned,” CSU spokesperson Hazel Kelly said in a written statement to EdSource. “Campus presidents and their designated officials will enforce this prohibition and take appropriate steps to stop encampments, including giving clear notice to those in violation that they must discontinue their encampment activities immediately.”

    Kelly said the encampments “are disruptive and can cause a hostile environment for some community members. We have an obligation to ensure that all community members can access University Property and University programs.”

    UC campuses similarly will ban encampments or other “unauthorized structures,” Drake said in a letter to campus chancellors Monday morning directing them to enforce those rules. He also said they must prohibit anything that restricts movement on campus, which could include protests that block walkways and roadways or deny access by anyone on campus to UC facilities.

    “I hope that the direction provided in this letter will help you achieve an inclusive and welcoming environment at our campuses that protects and enables free expression while ensuring the safety of all community members by providing greater clarity and consistency in our policies and policy application,” Drake added. 

    UC faces Oct. 1 deadline

    As part of this year’s state budget agreement, lawmakers directed Drake’s office to create a “systemwide framework” for consistently enforcing protest rules across UC’s campuses. Lawmakers are withholding $25 million from UC until Drake submits a report to the Legislature by Oct. 1 detailing those plans.  

    A variety of higher education institutions have bolstered policies that constrain demonstrations and similar gatherings in reaction to protests over the Israel-Hamas war last school year.

    The University of Pennsylvania’s “temporary guidelines” include a ban on bullhorns and speakers after 5 p.m. on school days as well as a two-week limit on the display of posters and banners, according to The Associated Press. Indiana University’s policy allows “expressive activities” like protests from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. only and requires prior approval to hang or place signs on university property. The University of South Florida rules stipulate that no protests are allowed in the final two weeks of a semester, AP reported, among other restrictions. 

    Tyler Valeska, an assistant professor of law at Loyola University Chicago, said that even if a university has not seemed keen to enforce protest rules strictly in the past, many are now telegraphing a more forceful approach in the future.  

    “For years, maybe even decades, it did seem to be the case that university officials had a policy on paper and then another policy in their actual approach to enforcement,” he said. “And we saw a major change from that status quo in the spring, where universities around the country started suddenly enforcing policies that had been on the books for years or decades, but had never really been enforced against relatively nondisruptive student speech.” 

    “It may be the case that the universities are hyping up their policies with no actual intent to enforce them stringently, but based on what we saw in the spring, that would surprise me,” he added.

    Applies to all Cal State campuses

    The interim policy at Cal State applies to all 23 of the system’s campuses, replacing rules at each school. University leaders still have discretion on specifics, such as determining which buildings and spaces on campus are considered to be public areas and which hours of the day those spaces can be accessed, which they will spell out in addition to the systemwide policy.

    Drake’s letter to the campus chancellors is not a systemwide policy. Instead, his letter directs each campus to come up with its own policies. Those policies must meet certain requirements, including the banning of encampments. 

    Some campuses likely already have the necessary policies, Drake said in his letter. If they don’t, they should develop or amend existing policies as soon as possible, he added. In either case, each campus must provide a document or webpage that describes those policies. 

    Both of California’s four-year university systems have come under fire for how they responded to protests in solidarity with Palestine this spring. Some campus leaders approached student activists with a light touch, allowing students to camp overnight in quads peacefully and negotiating with representatives until they voluntarily disassembled encampments. But as conflicts between protesters, counterprotesters and administrators flared on some campuses, university leaders called in law enforcement agencies to break up encampments and arrest students who did not comply with orders to disperse.

    Highlights for both systems

    The new protest guidance suggests that Cal State and UC are now headed in roughly the same direction, taking a stronger stance against practices that featured frequently in spring protests. 

    Highlights of the policies include:

    • Camping: Cal State’s policy bans “encampments of any kind, overnight demonstrations … and overnight loitering.” It outlaws the use of camping paraphernalia, including recreational vehicles and tents. Bringing “copious amounts of personal belongings” to campus without permission is also a no-go, except as allowed in student housing and university work spaces. Drake’s letter instructs UC chancellors to clarify their policies to make clear that setting up a camp, tent or temporary housing structure is not allowed without prior approval.
    • Barricades and other structures: Drake requests campuses make sure their policies prohibit building unauthorized structures on campus. Cal State’s interim policy additionally lists a range of temporary and permanent structures — “tent, platform, booth, bench, building, building materials (such as bricks, pallets, etc.), wall, barrier, barricade, fencing, structure, sculpture, bicycle rack or furniture” — that aren’t allowed without permission.
    • Masking and refusing to self-identify: Cal State and Drake’s letter invoke the same policy on face coverings almost to the word. Both warn that masks and other attempts to conceal one’s identity are not allowed “with the intent of intimidating and harassing any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violations” of relevant laws or policies. Cal State’s language, additionally, notes that face masks are “permissible for all persons who are complying with University policies and applicable laws.” Similarly, both systems bar people from refusing to identify themselves to a university official acting in their official capacity on campus.
    • Restricting free movement: Drake’s letter emphasizes that campus policies should prohibit restricting another person’s movement by, for example, blocking walkways, windows or doors in a way that denies people access to the university’s facilities. The guidance comes days after a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that barred UCLA from “knowingly allowing or facilitating the exclusion of Jewish students” on its campus. Cal State’s interim policy includes blanket advisories against actions that “impede or restrict the free movement of any person” and block streets, walkways, parking lots or other pedestrian and vehicle paths. 

    Kelly, the CSU spokesperson, said sections of the policy about encampments, the use of barricades and face coverings “are not new and are already in place for the most part at each university and at the Chancellor’s Office.” 

    In the spring, students built encampments at UC campuses including UCLA and UC San Diego as well as Cal State campuses including Sacramento State and San Francisco State. Bobby King, a spokesperson for San Francisco State, said the school granted students last spring an exception to the campus time, place and manner policy. 

    Pro-Palestinian student encampment in front of Royce Hall at UCLA on April 30, 2024.
    Credit: Delilah Brumer / EdSource

    “The new CSU policy will create greater urgency in resolving a situation like the one we had last spring,” he said. “Obviously, with the new policy in place, campus leaders who engage with the students would need to convey that urgency.”

    The interim policy at Cal State takes a comprehensive approach to defining what is and is not allowed during demonstrations, outlawing items like firearms, explosives and body armor as well as actions like shooting arrows, climbing light poles and public urination. The policy outlaws demonstrations in university housing, including the homes of employees living on university property when “no public events are taking place.”

    Drake’s directive describes a tiered system for how campuses should police individuals if they violate any rules. They would first be informed of the violation and asked to stop. If they don’t, the next step would be to warn them of potential consequences. 

    After that, UC police or the local campus fire marshal could issue orders that could include an unlawful assembly announcement, an order to disperse or an order to identify oneself. If the conduct doesn’t change at that point, the individuals involved could be cited for violation of university policy and, if they are breaking a law, they could also be detained and arrested. Police could order them to stay away from campuses for repeat offenses or what they deem more severe violations.

    That response system, however, “is not a rigid prescription that will capture all situations,” the guidance states. 

    Cal State’s interim policy is effective immediately for students and nonunion employees, Kelly said. Unionized employees will work under the previously-negotiated campus policies until a meet-and-confer process for the new policy is complete.

    Each Cal State campus asked to elaborate

    Cal State Dominguez Hills and Stanislaus State were the first two campuses to publish addenda for their schools as of press time.

    The Dominguez Hills addendum, for example, lists areas where protests are permitted without pre-scheduling, including the north lawn in front of the Loker Student Union and a sculpture garden adjacent to the University Theater. But the document limits events in those places to the hoursbetween 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. and allows only “non-amplified speech and expression.”

    The campus-specific policy will also describe any restrictions on signs, banners and chalking. The Dominguez Hills addendum prohibits the use of sticks or poles to support handheld signs, does not allow signs “to be taped to any campus buildings, directory signs, fences, railings, or exterior light poles” and by default limits signs to a two-week posting period. It also includes a list of “designated posting places” on the campus.

    Margaret Russell, an associate professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, said Cal State’s policy is clearly motivated by a desire to minimize disruptions from protests. Russell said that though many of the restrictions target students’ conduct rather than their speech, she is troubled by broad language seeming to require written permission for posters, signs, banners and chalking.

    Russell said such language could create “a chilling effect” because it “is so potentially broad and far-reaching that people don’t know ahead of time what’s allowed and what’s not allowed.”

    “The overall message is, ‘Be careful. Be careful where you express your opinion aloud.’” And so to me, it seems suppressive of freedom of speech, which is probably what they want,” she said.

    Kelly, the Cal State spokesperson, said that the policy overall is meant to describe how the universities’ property can be used without inhibiting free expression.

    “Generally, separate individual written permission is not required for signage unless the person is trying to post on a facility where it is not permitted,” she said. “This rule does not apply to signs and posters people carry or use personally.”

    An Aug. 14 statement from the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) did not name any universities but broadly criticized school administrations for policies it said “severely undermine the academic freedom and freedom of speech and expression that are fundamental to higher education.”

    “Many of the latest expressive activity policies strictly limit the locations where demonstrations may take place, whether amplified sound can be used, and types of postings permitted,” the statement said. “With harsh sanctions for violations, the policies broadly chill students and faculty from engaging in protests and demonstrations.”

    The AAUP statement said some institutions have gone so far as to require protest groups to register in advance. AAUP argued that such provisions effectively block spontaneous protests and may discourage protesters wishing to avoid surveillance. 

    The AAUP statement came a day after the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) released a “guide to preventing encampments and occupations on campus.” The guide encourages universities to ban encampments and to act decisively to punish students who violate those policies.

    “Once an encampment has occupied the campus, the institution has very few options to avoid an ugly spectacle that at best will make the administration look ineffectual and even make the board appear derelict,” the guide says. “Negotiating and making concessions are invitations to more and increasing demands. They embolden others to employ similar coercive tactics in the future and further undermine the university’s mission.”

    Cal State’s interim policy says the university embraces its obligation to support the free exchange of information and ideas, but that such freedom of expression “is allowed and supported as long as it does not violate other laws or University policies and procedures.” 

    Cal State spokesperson Kelly said the university system “places the highest value on fostering healthy discourse and exchange of ideas in a safe and peaceful manner, by sustaining a learning and working environment that supports the free and orderly exchange of ideas, values, and opinions, recognizing that individuals grow and learn when confronted with differing views, alternative ways of thinking, and conflicting values.” 





    Source link

  • Central Valley struggles to produce college grads; key programs are turning that around

    Central Valley struggles to produce college grads; key programs are turning that around


    Daylarlyn Gonzalez organizes a class project among freshmen at Arvin High taking a dual enrollment course through Bakersfield College.

    Credit: Emma Gallegos/EdSource

    A new report delivers bad and good news for the Central Valley.

    The bad news: The vast majority of parents, 79%, want their children to get a bachelor’s degree, but just 26% of students in the region are on pace to achieve that.

    The good news: Central Valley educators in both K-12 and higher education are pioneering strategies that could transform the region’s low college attainment rates. That includes broadly expanding dual enrollment opportunities; increasing the number of students meeting requirements to graduate from high school; and creating regional partnerships to smooth key transitions between high school, community college and four-year universities.

    A sweeping new report, “Pathways to College Completion in the San Joaquin Valley,” by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found a multitude of factors contributing to lower college attainment rate in the region, compared to the rest of the state, including a lack of preparation in high school, low university application rates (especially to the UC system), financial constraints, campus proximity, and a perception of less access. That’s a problem for the state, as well as the region.

    “When we look to the state’s future, the San Joaquin Valley is especially important,” said Hans Johnson, one of the report’s authors.

    That’s because the Central Valley is populous, young and growing rapidly — 4 million and counting — compared with other parts of the state. But it is also a region that requires attention, because, over the last 50 years, it has fallen behind the rest of the state economically. In 1974, residents in the Central Valley made 90% of the state’s per capita income. In 2020, that number had fallen to 68%.

    “When you increase the educational attainment rate here in the Central Valley, it lifts the entire region socioeconomically and culturally as well,” said Benjamin Duran, executive director of the Central Valley Higher Education Consortium.

    He said that too few students obtaining any kind of degree — associate, bachelor’s or advanced — means the valley will continue to have too few people in critical professions, such as nursing, medicine and teaching.

    “It’s way below what our economy in general demands,” said Johnson, a senior fellow with PPIC. “We know the value of a college degree statewide is incredibly strong — and in the Valley as well. So, not everybody has to go (to college), but more people and more students should be going than are going right now.”

    The report finds that students in the Central Valley tend to graduate from high school at nearly the same rate as other students in the state, but show a sharp decline during the critical juncture of transitioning from high school to college and, for students who register at community colleges, which a majority of Valley college students do, transferring to a four-year university or college.

    High school students lack preparation

    According to the PPIC report, students in the Valley have wildly different experiences based simply on which school districts they attend. 

    “That’s both encouraging and kind of discouraging that we have such a wide variation that where you go to school, to not a small extent, is going to determine what kind of possibilities you have for going on to college,” Johnson said.

    School districts that do a good job preparing socioeconomically disadvantaged students tend to also prepare their wealthier peers well, the report shows.

    Two of the Valley’s largest districts, for example, demonstrate this. The college-going rate for Fresno Unified’s socioeconomically disadvantaged students is 64%, compared with 67% of their more advantaged peers. Those same rates for the Kern High School District are 48% and 53% respectively.

    The problem is that many Central Valley students are not graduating from high school with the preparation that they need to succeed in college, according to Olga Rodriguez, one of the report’s authors. 

    One important metric is how many students have taken the full college preparatory sequence — known as A-G — required for admission to California’s public universities. In the Central Valley, 4 out of 10 high school graduates met the A-G requirements, compared with 6 out of 10 for Los Angeles and Bay Area students. 

    “If you want to increase the number of college graduates, that’s where we have so much potential,” said Rodriguez, director of the PPIC Higher Education Center.

    Students who do not meet A-G requirements are not able to begin their college career at a CSU or UC school. Additionally, this lack of preparation makes it more challenging for students at community colleges to successfully transfer to a four-year university, Rodriguez said.

    To improve their rates, some school districts have shifted to mandating that students graduate with A-G requirements; others have simply dropped classes that are not A-G eligible. However, many other districts are not prioritizing A-G classes.

    “A-G policies often seemed centered on politics and local industry needs — as opposed to being focused on students’ needs and aspirations,” the report states.

    An analysis by EdSource found that 56% of high school seniors do not complete the A-G requirements. EdSource found that the problem is particularly dire among Black and Latino students, as well as in certain regions, such as Northern California and the Central Valley.

    For many communities in the Central Valley, higher education is considered more “aspirational” than realistic, Duran said, adding that it’s the job of all educators across the spectrum to educate both students and parents about how to make college a reality.

    The default choice for many Central Valley students is to stay at home and attend a local community college, rather than attend a CSU or UC — even for students who have the grades. The perception is that it ends up being cheaper and maybe a safer option, but that’s not always the case.

    “When you look at the net price, it’s actually more affordable to go to a CSU than it is to stay at a community college,” said Rodriguez. “Especially when you think about the likelihood of completion and how long it’s going to take you.”

    Partnerships make the difference

    Because the transitions between institutions is where students tend to fail, the report says that partnerships between high schools, community colleges, CSU campuses and the region’s only UC campus, in Merced, are important for Central Valley students.

    In this area, the region is “ahead of the game,” said Rodriguez.

    The Associate Degree for Transfer (ADT) is a program that guarantees community college students who meet certain requirements a spot at a CSU campus, but the UC system has not joined in. However, UC Merced — the only UC in the Central Valley — is unique in having its own version of an ADT guarantee for regional community colleges, Johnson notes. The university also has a similar guarantee program aimed at high school students in regional districts. 

    There are similar partnerships throughout the Valley that are trying to ease those transitions. For instance, Fresno State has a new Bulldog Bound Program that guarantees admission to high school students in over 40 school districts who meet requirements — and also gives them support during their high school career.

    The region has three K-16 collaboratives that focus on making sure that schools are able to prepare students for college at a young age — whether that is through educating parents or helping high school teachers, particularly in English and math, get master’s degrees so they can teach dual enrollment courses.

    Dual enrollment has thrived in the Central Valley, thanks to partnerships largely between community colleges and K-12 schools in the region. Dual enrollment allows students to take college credit courses during high school, which makes them more likely to continue on to college after high school.

    The work being done in the Central Valley serves as an incubator for what can happen in the rest of the state, said Duran.

    “The work we do is collaborative,” said Duran. “We try to bring projects and initiatives that can not only be replicated here, but in the rest of the state.”

    If these changes lead to a swell of enrollment, the report notes that there is plenty of higher education infrastructure in the region. Few colleges or universities have programs that are impacted — unlike in other parts of the state. Both CSU and UC are banking on growth in this region.





    Source link

  • How California can help all schools harness AI, avoid its pitfalls

    How California can help all schools harness AI, avoid its pitfalls


    Participants at the Think Forward: Learning with AI forum in April were asked to share their hopes and fears for the future of AI in an opening exercise.

    CREDIT: Photo by Ray Mares Photography

    In recent months, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) faced a significant setback when the tech provider it contracted to build personalized report cards for students went out of business. This was both a major financial loss for the district and a significant loss for students. The chatbot dust-up underscores a critical issue in our education system: the need for robust, forward-thinking policies and practices to navigate the integration of technology in our schools. Our school systems must be able to not only withstand disruptions but thrive on them.

    As post-pandemic learning gaps widen, school districts everywhere are at an inflection point when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence (AI). AI offers unprecedented opportunities to tackle complex challenges like widening achievement gaps, teacher shortages, and mental health crises among students — but AI systems must also promote equity and access, particularly for historically marginalized communities. There must be policy guardrails to protect student privacy. And there must be high quality training to empower educators. Achieving this vision requires bold leadership and a clear understanding of each stakeholder’s role.

    While AI can be a powerful tool to address long-standing inequities and improve educational outcomes, it requires strategic and collaborative efforts. The call to action is clear: Educators, policymakers, education technology innovators and community leaders must join forces to create resilient, adaptable education systems.

    With a thriving tech sector, including a broad base of AI startups, California is uniquely positioned to lead the country in the use of AI in education. The state Department of Education has already offered early guidance to schools. The Los Angeles County Office of Education’s cross-sector task force developed guidelines to support responsible AI implementation across 80 school districts. Los Angeles’ Da Vinci Academy piloted the use of AI in project-based learning. Lynwood Unified has been a leader in thinking about how AI can be used responsibly to transform district operations and learning systems. These are steps in the right direction, but more is needed.

    A new report that my organization, the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE), just released, “Wicked Opportunities: Leveraging AI to Transform Education,” presents an action plan for harnessing AI to transform education.

    Here’s what California could do next:

    1. Think big about how AI can transform education. Leaders in the space must have a clear vision for the future of education before technology can help realize that vision. The state should consider fostering partnerships between educators, policymakers, Silicon Valley ed-tech developers, and community leaders to rethink and redesign schools and education systems for a world where generative artificial intelligence is ubiquitous. 
    2. Help districts use AI strategically. Districts face an overwhelming number of AI-enabled tools and “solutions,” and risk spreading limited resources on a random assortment of disconnected products. California’s educational county offices can play a role in helping districts identify priorities and streamline funds to proven AI-enabled tools and strategies designed to solve specific problems. 
    3. Allocate funds to support and test AI initiatives, particularly in low-income and historically marginalized communities. CRPE’s research with the Rand Corp. shows that school districts with more advantaged populations are ahead in training their teachers on AI. Funding and evidence-building initiatives are needed to close, rather than widen, existing learning gaps. 
    4. Provide detailed, actionable implementation strategies to help districts navigate AI adoption effectively. Our report suggests California and other states should be “dogged about implementation,” ensuring schools get technical assistance and research partnerships to support them as they try various approaches. 
    5. Make sure there are effective state policy guardrails. It’s essential for California to provide ongoing policy guidance and rules so that every district need not go it alone. Legislation under consideration in Sacramento calls for policies to be in place by January 2026. While we are glad to see policy attention, protections for kids cannot wait that long. A better approach would be to begin piloting policies immediately and revising them as needed. 

    California, a leader in technological innovation, must ensure that its education systems are future-ready. By embracing these strategies, California can lead the nation in transforming education through AI. The LAUSD incident serves as a stark reminder of what happens when systems are unprepared for technological integration. Let’s use this moment as a catalyst for change, ensuring that our schools are equipped to harness the positive potential of AI for the benefit of all students.

    •••

    Robin Lake is director of the Center for Reinventing Public Education (CRPE) which is housed at Arizona State University’s Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the authors. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link