برچسب: climate

California climate initiative could unlock new opportunities for community college students
Courtesy: California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

With each passing year, we learn how a changing climate can affect our lives. For most Californians, two things stand out: bigger, more destructive wildfires and long-term threats to our precious water supply.

There are proven solutions to these challenges, enabling us to shift to prevention instead of simply responding to growing natural disasters fueled by climate change. The longer we wait to make this change, the greater the consequences and the costs.

Proposition 4, on the Nov. 5 ballot, represents a strategic investment in California’s environment, its economy and its people. The $10 billion bond measure dedicates $1.5 billion to preventing wildfires and smoke by creating fire breaks near communities, improving forest health to reduce wildfire intensity, supporting specialized firefighting equipment, and deploying early detection and response systems. To protect safe drinking water supplies, it provides $3.8 billion to treat groundwater contaminants, recharge aquifers, rebuild crumbling water infrastructure, and restore watersheds.

It also provides an important opportunity for California’s community colleges and the students we serve.

Proposition 4 will create important jobs in an evolving green economy. The question is how we build the workforce needed to do the work ahead.

California’s Community Colleges are uniquely positioned to ensure Proposition 4 dollars are leveraged to usher in this new workforce. If it passes, students will see new opportunities in career technical education programs that align with industry needs, including:
- Expansion of clean energy training programs: Proposition 4 could support programs in solar energy installation, wind turbine maintenance and battery storage technology. By equipping students with these skills, community colleges can prepare them for high-demand jobs in the renewable energy sector, which is projected to grow as California expands its clean energy infrastructure.
- Green construction and sustainable building techniques: The bond could provide resources to expand programs in sustainable construction, teaching students energy-efficient building methods and retrofitting techniques. These skills are crucial as California ramps up efforts to build climate-resilient infrastructure, creating jobs for students in green construction.
- Water management and conservation technology: As the state faces ongoing water challenges, Proposition 4 could help community colleges develop programs focused on water conservation and management. Students trained in operating water technologies and wastewater treatment would be in high demand across various sectors, especially agriculture and public utilities.
- Electric vehicle (EV) maintenance and infrastructure: With the rapid shift toward electric vehicles, funding from Proposition 4 could be used to expand EV technology programs, preparing students to service EVs and maintain charging stations. This would align with the state’s push to phase out gasoline-powered vehicles, creating opportunities for students in a growing market.
- Work-based learning and internships in climate projects: Proposition 4 could enable partnerships between community colleges and green industry employers to provide internships and hands-on experience. Students could work on real-world projects in renewable energy, water management, or green construction, giving them practical skills and a competitive edge in the job market.
By dedicating at least 40% of its investment to disadvantaged communities, Proposition 4 ensures that these communities must be part of the work ahead, not witnesses to it.

As an educator, I see opportunity. California’s 116 community colleges are distributed across the state and are deeply embedded in their communities, particularly those in rural areas. When natural disasters strike, these communities find shelter at their community college campuses. Proposition 4 is a chance for California to build out its climate infrastructure efficiently by leaning on its community colleges in two ways: (1) sites for infrastructure deployment and (2) for workforce development. By expanding access to green job training programs, Proposition 4 will enable Californians from all backgrounds to participate in climate jobs of the future.

The students in our community colleges today will be the innovators, technicians and leaders of tomorrow. Proposition 4, through its focus on climate resilience, offers the chance to support these students in gaining the skills they need to succeed in an evolving job market while preventing wildfires, providing safe drinking water, protecting California’s iconic natural heritage, and contributing to the state’s clean energy transition. If we invest in them now, we invest in California’s future.

•••

Sonya Christian is the chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the largest system of higher education in the United States.

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Source link
05/05/2025
Playing the long game in an uncertain education policy climate

Credit: RDNE stock project

As California emerges from a divisive national election, it is crucial to remain clear-eyed about the risks ahead while pursuing bold strategies to address them. There are many domains in which state and local leaders can still work to improve the lives of Californians, and education offers one of the clearest examples. Historically, education policy has been shaped at the state and local levels, and California has the tools to lead the nation by championing sensible, evidence-based policies that create better outcomes for children and families.

That work has never been more important. California’s education system faces four pressing challenges in the wake of COVID-19. Student achievement continues to lag behind other states, with performance gaps remaining unacceptably wide. Chronic absenteeism is also hindering recovery efforts, as many children and families remain disengaged from schools. Additionally, schools are falling short in equipping students with the skills needed for career readiness, real-world success, and active participation in a complex democracy. Meanwhile, brutal culture wars are consuming vital attention and resources from addressing these critical issues. Tackling these challenges head-on and developing targeted solutions is essential for driving meaningful progress.

Parents care deeply about how their children are learning, and California urgently needs a comprehensive strategy to improve student achievement. Even before Covid-19, the state’s overall performance—and outcomes for students from historically underserved racial and ethnic groups—lagged behind the national average.

Any improvement strategy must start with every teacher having high quality, comprehensive instructional materials and the training to use them effectively. One clear model for this kind of reform is the “science of reading” movement, which has been adopted by many states but not yet embraced by California.

One need not agree with every element of the science of reading to recognize that Mississippi’s suite of reforms pushed the state from nearly last in national rankings to above the national average. Their approach offers a model of a state that had a clear instructional point of view, supported that vision with a well-crafted policy, and saw impressive outcomes as a result. California would do well to embrace the idea that state policy can meaningfully shape teaching and learning when implemented with purpose and precision.

However, students cannot learn if they are not at school in the first place. Chronic absenteeism in California more than doubled after the pandemic, rising from 10% to 24% in the 2022-23 school year, affecting over 1.4 million students. It’s a pervasive issue that cuts across all types of schools and students. While the causes of this crisis are not fully understood, several ideas merit policy responses.

Access to school-based mental health services remains inadequate and disproportionately limited for students of color and those from low-income families. Districts must collaborate across systems to expand these services and ensure they reach those most in need. Additionally, the school violence and bullying epidemic causes parents to question whether sending a child to school is safe. Therefore, efforts should be made to eradicate violence and bullying on school campuses.

California ranks near the bottom of all states in terms of access to school-site physical health services, making greater access to affordable, quality healthcare for low-income students critical. To tackle this crisis effectively, districts need localized strategies that identify the specific drivers of absenteeism in their communities and implement targeted interventions to support affected students.

The goal is not to simply get students to school, but to ensure that their determination to stay translates to strong job opportunities and overall well-being — whether they enroll in college or go directly into the workforce. For districts, paving the way begins well before high school.

Encouraging progress is being made in the region to expand student access to high-wage, high-interest careers. Public-private partnerships can help districts better equip students with well-paying jobs by developing career pathways in fields like technology and healthcare, progressing from foundational skills to advanced competencies. District administrators can join forces with local colleges to build cross-sector strategies to better prepare students for college success. These efforts should include paid internships in high-demand professions, such as health care, allied health professions, high technology, or green technology. Notably, several organizations (UniteLA, Growing Inland Achievement) and others are already driving this important work in Southern California, providing a model for other regions to follow.

To gain traction on these meaningful issues, advocates, parents, and policymakers must lower the temperature around divisive “culture war” issues that are currently sucking up too much of the air in the room. Where there are areas of sharp moral disagreement, we must demand civil discussion and respect differing viewpoints. California’s public schools must remain spaces where all parents feel comfortable sending their children. While debates about the goals of education are inevitable — and even vital to a healthy democratic process — allowing school boards and education leaders to be overtaken by partisan, nationalized politics only hinders progress. By focusing efforts on the pressing challenges, we all recognize we can move forward and create solutions to improve our children’s lives.

We don’t yet know what the national election portends for California’s schools, and some federal actions could escalate with serious potential consequences for the state’s students and families. In times of uncertainty, it is prudent to focus on local education improvements rooted in strong evidence. By prioritizing proven strategies that advance long-term goals, California can continue to strengthen student learning across the region’s schools and colleges, regardless of broader political shifts.

•••

Patricia Burch is a professor of education at USC Rossier School of Education and faculty co-director of the USC Education Policy Hub.

Morgan Polikoff is a professor of education at USC Rossier School of Education and faculty co-director of the USC EdPolicy Hub.

Jon Fullerton is a research professor and executive director of the USC EdPolicy Hub.

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.

Source link

01/05/2025
Memo Leaked about Cuts to State Department, Slashing Africa Offices, Climate and Human Rights Agencies

The New York Times published a leaked plan to reorganize the Trump State Department; Rubio disowned it. Its goal is to align the State Department and foreign policy with Trump’s “America First” agenda. It’s a very scary vision of Fortress America, cut off from the rest of the world, with no concern for democracy, climate change, human rights, or Africa.

The Times reported:

A draft of a Trump administration executive order proposes a drastic restructuring of the State Department, including eliminating almost all of its Africa operations and shutting down embassies and consulates across the continent.

The draft also calls for cutting offices at State Department headquarters that address climate change and refugee issues, as well as democracy and human rights concerns.

The purpose of the executive order, which could be signed soon by President Trump, is to impose “a disciplined reorganization” of the State Department and “streamline mission delivery” while cutting “waste, fraud and abuse,” according to a copy of the 16-page draft order obtained by The New York Times. The department is supposed to make the changes by Oct. 1.

Some of the proposed changes outlined in the draft document would require congressional notification and no doubt be challenged by lawmakers, including mass closures of diplomatic missions and headquarters bureaus, as well as an overhaul of the diplomatic corps. Substantial parts of it, if officials tried to enact them, would likely face lawsuits.

Elements of the executive order could change before final White House review or before Mr. Trump signs it, if he decides to do so. Neither the State Department nor the White House National Security Council had immediate comment on the draft order early Sunday.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote a short comment on social media after this article was published calling it “fake news…”

Major structural changes to the State Department would be accompanied by efforts to lay off both career diplomats, known as foreign service officers, and civil service employees, who usually work in the department’s headquarters in Washington, said current and former U.S. officials familiar with the plans. The department would begin putting large numbers of workers on paid leave and sending out notices of termination, they said.

The draft executive order calls for ending the foreign service exam for aspiring diplomats, and it lays out new criteria for hiring, including “alignment with the president’s foreign policy vision.”

The draft says the department must greatly expand its use of artificial intelligence to help draft documents, and to undertake “policy development and review” and “operational planning.”

The proposed reorganization would get rid of regional bureaus that help make and enact policy in large parts of the globe.

Instead, the draft says, those functions would fall under four “corps”: Eurasia Corps, consisting of Europe, Russia and Central Asia; Mid-East Corps, consisting of Arab nations, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan; Latin America Corps, consisting of Central America, South America and the Caribbean; and Indo-Pacific Corps, consisting of East Asia, Southeast Asia, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and the Maldives.

One of the most drastic proposed changes would be eliminating the bureau of African affairs, which oversees policy in sub-Saharan Africa. It would be replaced by a much smaller special envoy office for African affairs that would report to the White House National Security Council. The office would focus on a handful of issues, including “coordinated counterterrorism operations” and “strategic extraction and trade of critical natural resources.”

The draft also said all “nonessential” embassies and consulates in sub-Saharan Africa would be closed by Oct. 1. Diplomats would be sent to Africa on “targeted, mission-driven deployments,” the document said.

Canada operations would be put into a new North American affairs office under Mr. Rubio’s authority, and it would be run by a “significantly reduced team,” the draft said. The department would also severely shrink the U.S. embassy in Ottawa.

Source link

23/04/2025
Los Angeles’s climate crisis offers a blueprint for California’s schools
Freestyle Academy in Mountain View, California uses energy-efficient lighting, water-saving fixtures, solar panels, and eco-friendly materials. Native plants are also incorporated into the outdoor environments.

Credit: Tim Maloney, Technical Imagery Studios and Quattrocchi Kwok Architects
Top Takeaways

Climate disasters already impacting schools will continue to worsen.

LAUSD is investing in fire-resistant building materials, schoolyard greening projects, and modern heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems.

California needs a state master plan for climate-resilient schools.
When Los Angeles teachers welcomed students back to school in January, they couldn’t have imagined what lay ahead. Within days, climate-fueled wildfires would tear through Altadena, Pasadena and the Palisades, destroying or damaging twelve schools and disrupting education for more than 600,000 students across the region.

Unfortunately, in the years to come, the climate disasters that are already impacting our schools will worsen. In California, our leaders have the power to chart our own path to healthier, more climate-resilient school buildings — with or without federal support.

The LA fires provide a stark reminder of how unprepared many of California’s schools are for climate change. Beyond lacking fire-resistant building materials that could have mitigated damage, schools also lack necessities: cooling systems for heat waves and air filtration systems for smoke. Lack of cooling is a statewide challenge — between 15% and 20% of California’s K-12 public schools have no functioning air conditioning at all, and another 10% need major repairs to or replacement of their heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems.

But out of this crisis, solutions are emerging. Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), our nation’s second-biggest school district, is turning crisis into opportunity. Instead of simply rebuilding damaged schools, the district is creating a blueprint for climate resilience that should inspire educational leaders across California.

The district is investing in fire-resistant building materials, schoolyard greening projects, and modern HVAC systems to combat increasingly frequent heat waves and filter wildfire smoke and pollutants. While some initiatives were already underway prior to the fires, new investments will be supported by the district’s $9 billion bond that Los Angeles voters approved in November and Proposition 2, the state school infrastructure bond also approved by voters last year. For the first time, the Legislature explicitly allowed districts to use this funding to create safer outdoor learning environments, strengthen vulnerable infrastructure, and advance state energy goals.

LAUSD’s progress is encouraging, but California can’t afford to wait for a district-by-district approach to climate resilience. California needs immediate statewide action to protect all students. Two key steps are essential:

First, we need better state planning and coordination. California currently spends billions annually on school infrastructure, but much of this funding isn’t aligned with climate resilience, indoor air quality, or emissions reduction goals. By allocating $10 million to the California Department of Education to build local capacity and provide regional support through county offices of education, we will build necessary support systems to assist school districts in planning for climate-resilient campuses.

California has already wasted precious time. For two years, we’ve worked with the Legislature on a proposal for a state master plan for climate-resilient schools, only to face Gov. Gavin Newsom’s veto twice over cost concerns, despite strong bipartisan support and a moderate cost of $10 million. This delay puts our children’s safety at risk. This year, we must finally get it done.

Second, districts need comprehensive facilities master plans that address indoor air quality, climate resilience, and cost-effective electrification. Students need a California where every school district is armed with a detailed blueprint for creating climate-resilient facilities, and has the support and funding they need to implement these plans. Implementation guidelines for Proposition 2 are being developed now and should include guidance for school districts to develop these plans with climate readiness at the core. State leaders could also prioritize and leverage Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds administered by the California Air Resources Board, a program that collects money from the state’s cap-and-trade initiative to invest in projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to support much-needed HVAC upgrades and nudge districts to choose modern electric technologies.

A previous generation of state leaders made sure schools could keep our children safe in an earthquake — it’s time to do the same for the threats posed by extreme heat and weather. No school district should be investing state or local dollars in their facilities without considering current and long-term local climate impacts.

•••

Jonathan Klein is the CEO and co-founder of UndauntedK12, a national nonprofit working to ensure that every student has the opportunity to attend a safe, healthy and resilient school.
Andra Yeghoian is the chief innovation officer of Ten Strands, a San Francisco-based nonprofit whose mission is to build and strengthen the partnerships and strategies that bring environmental literacy to all California’s students.

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Source link
17/04/2025
Make climate literacy a gen ed requirement across higher ed — before it’s too late

Local and state officials in mid-March piled 50,000 sandbags along the low-lying banks of the San Joaquin River when rising levels threatened to overtake Firebaugh.

Emma Gallegos/EdSource

Earlier this year, students across the country watched as wildfires devastated large parts of southern California. Yet even as they watched — and, in some cases, lived through — a very real example of what climate change can look like, many students don’t have a good understanding of why events like these are happening more frequently and with greater intensity. Without that foundational knowledge, they are ill-equipped to help mitigate the problem that is impacting their generation so significantly. Lack of climate literacy is a crisis — one that higher education has a responsibility to address.

Acknowledging the problem is no longer enough. Although 72% of U.S. adults recognize that our climate is changing, only 58% acknowledge that it is human-caused and even fewer understand the scientific consensus — that over 97% of climate scientists affirm our role in the ever-warming planet. We need a climate-literate electorate if we want to drive effective climate action because the solutions we choose to support are based on our individual understanding of the problem. To do this, we need to make climate education part of general education. And we must move quickly.

Many students know what is coming. Rising climate anxiety among 16–25 year-olds is telling but disempowering if they aren’t prepared to meet the moment because they hold misconceptions about the root causes. In a 2021 survey, students 14-18 years old overwhelmingly reported that climate change was real and human-caused, but follow-up questions showed large gaps between their conceptualization of Earth’s interrelated systems and reality. They also vastly underestimated the scientific consensus.

These gaps in knowledge make sense: when climate change is taught in middle and high school classrooms, nearly one-third of science teachers are sending mixed messages about the cause, often because they themselves were never introduced to the subject during their higher education experience. Prioritizing climate literacy as part of general education at colleges and universities would reduce the perpetuation of these false narratives.

Ideally, institutions would offer multi-dimensional climate education for all students; realistically, the pace of climate change far outstrips the pace of change in higher education. However, a general education requirement for climate literacy is possible — and necessary. These central concepts do not rely on additional college-level coursework, making a first- or second-year course on the topic accessible to students in any major.

Given the monumental challenge before us and what the best physical science tells us we are headed toward (e.g. heat waves, sea level rise, drought and more), it would be easy to put together a fairly depressing curriculum. A solutions-focused approach to climate education is not only kinder to our young people, but also cuts against the temptation to spread anxiety. It’s easy to miss out on the momentum building in the clean energy sector, the climate leadership of local communities, and international efforts to build climate resilience. Resources like Project Drawdown and the Solutions Journalism Network can provide curricular materials that remind students that they are not alone, and that they are not starting from square one.

Additionally, we need students to understand that policy, psychology, and art are just as important at shifting our trajectory as atmospheric science and clean energy technology. In this way, we make room for every student in the climate movement, no matter their professional aspirations. At Harvey Mudd College, we have developed a course to help students think critically about the impact of their work on society through an interdisciplinary look at the climate-fueled challenge of fire in the North American west. Our teaching team is intentionally broad, so we can cover California’s legacy of fire suppression, the depictions of nature in media, and the religious roots of environmental attitudes, as well as fire ecology and the greenhouse effect. While we do lay the groundwork for understanding the problem, fully 50% of the course is dedicated to analyzing proposed or current interventions.

In addition to a solutions-focused curriculum, basic climate education also needs to prepare students emotionally and mentally to keep engaging in the work. Nearly 60% of respondents in a recent global survey of youth indicated “extreme worry” about climate change. Considering students’ emotions doesn’t mean we shy away from hard truths — that would not serve our students well and undermine their trust in faculty. In fact, those hard truths can tap into students’ deeper motivations for learning, so long as we also help them build emotional resilience through reflection. Programs like the All We Can Save Project can offer resources and even course materials. And efforts to wrap this “affective approach” into climate education are already underway, as with the Faculty Learning Community in Teaching Climate Change and Resilience at California State University in Chico.

The world is currently on track for nearly twice the rise in global average temperature that leading climate experts warn is safe. The kind of climate education we need is appearing, but not at the scale or speed required. Higher education leaders must prioritize climate literacy by integrating climate education into the general curriculum. Institutions must ensure students are prepared academically, socially, and emotionally to address climate change. We need empowered graduates who have both climate knowledge and a solutions-focused mindset in uncertain times. Their world literally depends on it.

•••

Lelia Hawkins is a professor of chemistry and the Hixon Professor of Climate Studies at Harvey Mudd College. She is currently serving as the Director of the Hixon Center for Climate and the Environment, a new program expanding climate education for Mudd’s scientists and engineers.

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

Source link

16/04/2025