برچسب: How

  • How Artificial Intelligence Benefits Education

    How Artificial Intelligence Benefits Education


    How Artificial Intelligence Benefits Education—Infographic

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming education in some exciting ways. This infographic highlights three key benefits of using AI in learning: personalized learning, intelligent tutoring, and enhanced motivation.

    The Role Artificial Intelligence Plays In Education

    1. Personalized Learning

    Imagine having a tutor who knows exactly how you learn best. AI can analyze your learning habits and recommend tailored resources that match your interests and needs. Whether you struggle with math or love history, AI can help create a customized experience just for you.

    2. Intelligent Tutoring

    Gone are the days of waiting for a teacher to grade your work or answer your questions. AI-powered tutoring provides real-time guidance and feedback, helping students learn more effectively. This means instant explanations, step-by-step solutions, and even suggestions on how to improve.

    3. Enhanced Motivation

    Let’s be honest—learning can sometimes feel dull. AI makes it more exciting through gamification. This means incorporating challenges, rewards, and interactive activities that engage students. Imagine earning points or unlocking achievements as you learn—pretty cool, right?

    Final Thoughts

    AI is already reshaping how students learn. From personalized lessons to interactive tutoring and motivation-boosting features, AI is making education more fun and effective. As technology continues to evolve, we can expect even more innovative learning tools in the future.



    Source link

  • How AI Solutions Drive Business Growth


    How AI Solutions Drive Business Growth And Ensure A Competitive Advantage—Infographic

    In today’s fast-paced digital economy, businesses must innovate continuously to stay ahead. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer just a buzzword—it’s a strategic asset that drives meaningful growth and long-term competitiveness. Let’s see how AI solutions can transform businesses.

    6 Ways AI Solutions Make Your Business Stand Out

    1. Streamlining Operations

    AI automates repetitive and time-consuming tasks, improving operational efficiency and reducing human error. From intelligent process automation to predictive maintenance, AI helps businesses cut costs and optimize workflows, freeing up resources to focus on core activities.

    2. Enhancing Customer Experience

    AI-powered chatbots, recommendation engines, and sentiment analysis tools enable personalized, real-time interactions. Through data-driven engagement strategies, businesses can better understand customer needs, improve satisfaction, and build loyalty.

    3. Enabling Smarter Decision-Making

    AI analyzes massive amounts of data at speed and scale, offering actionable insights and predictions. With machine learning algorithms and advanced analytics, companies can make faster, smarter, and more informed decisions, transforming data into a strategic asset.

    4. Accelerating Innovation

    AI solutions unlock new possibilities for product development and market expansion. From designing smart products to enabling faster R&D, AI empowers businesses to innovate faster, adapt to changing market demands, and stay ahead of the curve.

    5. Gaining Competitive Intelligence

    AI solutions can monitor market trends, competitor strategies, and consumer behavior in real time. With these insights, companies can anticipate shifts, seize opportunities, and make proactive moves to outpace competitors.

    6. Scaling with Agility

    AI solutions grow with your business. Cloud-based AI platforms and scalable models ensure you can expand capabilities without heavy infrastructure costs. Whether you’re a startup or an enterprise, AI allows you to scale with confidence.



    Source link

  • Let’s carefully think about how we use AI in education

    Let’s carefully think about how we use AI in education


    Credit: Sanket Mishra / Pexels

    Could you navigate the roads without GPS? What about writing an essay error-free? Could you complete that task without spell check? Although many media reports describe artificial intelligence (AI) as a new innovation, it has been around for decades. GPS and spell check are just two examples of how AI is an integral part of the technologies we use on a daily basis.

    However, the introduction of ChatGPT shook the world. Possibilities for using generative AI to create content and deliver innovations in many fields and aspects of modern life are being developed and introduced quickly, and they are dramatically changing the way we use information. This is especially true in education.

    Students are using AI to complete assignments, teachers are using it to develop lesson plans, and schools are using it to provide individualized support to children. However, there is a lack of clear guidance on the use of AI, which could create new challenges far beyond concerns about cheating, plagiarism and data privacy. 

    One concern is what we refer to as digital amnesia. People tend to forget information that is easily obtained through search engines. Typically, people search for the same word, concept or fact several times, because for many, the brain does not register the information. This dilemma is known as the “Google effect,” and research shows that this often has a negative impact on one’s ability to retain critical information. 

    AI could amplify the amnesia of knowledge and skills on a new level. When an artificial intelligence tool is used to complete homework, the knowledge and skills that would have been developed by completing those activities are no longer acquired. Similarly, when AI is used to make problem-solving decisions, the development of critical cognitive skills and intellectual creativity may be put at risk. 

    The availability of a wide range of AI tools is also raising fundamental questions about what should be taught and emphasized in schools. When calculators were adopted, certain tasks, such as the multiplication and division of large numbers, could be completed efficiently to save time for developing other skills. However, it is still important for students to learn essential arithmetic skills because we know it is foundational to learning more complex math.  

    For this reason, policymakers and educators must know how the use of AI will affect long-term learning outcomes before it is utilized in the classroom. Without carefully thinking through the consequences of using AI in ways that short-circuit learning, it could produce adverse educational effects that we are presently unable to envision, and it could exacerbate existing inequities. 

    Responsible integration of AI requires creating opportunities for users to actively engage in learning activities. AI tools can be used to promote creative thinking and problem-solving skills, giving users learning opportunities that deepen engagement and empower them.   

    We recently documented the possibility of using AI in this way. Through an AI-supported professional development program, we asked math teachers to complete an activity related to their daily teaching tasks and then used an AI tool to analyze their work. The tool identified areas where teachers needed additional support and provided them with activities to acquire the skills needed by asking targeted questions. Teachers learned by doing rather than by simply using AI to show them how to do it. This approach not only improved teachers’ knowledge and skills, it also improved their students’ performance. 

    This research showed that AI can be used as a teacher’s aide. It can analyze students’ work and identify which students need additional help. It can also suggest evidence-based strategies teachers can use to modify subsequent instruction to meet students’ needs. 

    As AI tools become more widely available, it is essential that state and district leaders pay close attention to what vendors are selling. Will new AI tools enhance and empower teachers and learners, or will they contribute to passivity? To answer this important question, teachers must be given an opportunity to investigate how these tools will be used to support students before decisions are made. 

    The second major concern is that teachers and students may begin to over rely on the information provided by AI. Generative AI is based on the data it is trained to assimilate and distill. As we now know, AI makes mistakes that only a well-trained user can identify. The rubrics and data used in AI tools to grade student work, provide guidance on how to address gaps in learning, or to improve student skills, may not be adequate. It could easily reproduce biases and inequities that exist in our schools and society. 

    To avoid these potential problems, content experts from diverse backgrounds must be involved in the development of AI tools in education. These tools must be vetted carefully by subject matter and pedagogical experts who can provide feedback before they are introduced into classrooms. No AI tool should be used unless protocols for data privacy are well documented and there is real evidence that it will improve teaching and learning 

    We are not wary or opposed to using AI to enhance learning. In fact, we believe it has tremendous potential to support teachers and empower learners if used correctly. However, policymakers and educators must ask the right questions about its use and take precautionary steps to determine which tools will be helpful and which may harm teaching and learning. 

    •••

    Yasemin Copur-Gencturk is an associate professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and a leading researcher on AI in education. 

    Pedro Noguera is dean of USC’s Rossier School of Education and a newly appointed member of the U.S. Department of Education’s committee on the use of AI in education.

    The opinions expressed in this piece 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

  • How local districts and universities responded to storms pounding Southern California

    How local districts and universities responded to storms pounding Southern California


    The San Joaquin River has swollen beyond its usual riverbanks thanks to record rainfall. Melting snowfall threatens to flood the city of Firebaugh and six of its seven schools.

    Credit: Emma Gallegos / EdSource

    As severe weather conditions continue to pound the state, some school districts and university campuses throughout Southern California closed or made adjustments to instruction Monday — while others have opted to remain open.

    On Sunday, Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency in eight counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura. 

    “California: this is a serious storm with dangerous and potentially life-threatening impacts. Please pay attention to any emergency orders or alerts from local officials,” the governor said in a news release. “California is ready with a record number of emergency assets on the ground to respond to the impacts of this storm.”

    As a result, several Cal State campuses moved classes online Monday, including Cal State Fullerton, Cal State Long Beach, Cal State San Bernardino, Cal Poly Pomona, Cal State Dominguez Hills, Cal State Los Angeles and Cal State Northridge. 

    Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brownaid also announced that county schools will be closed Monday, including Santa Barbara Unified School District— which will announce any closures beyond Monday later today. 

    The Los Angeles Unified School District, however, announced they would keep the vast majority of their campuses open — with the exception of Vinedale College Preparatory Academy and the Topanga Elementary Charter School. 

    District maintenance teams were instructed to arrive at school sites at 5 a.m. Monday to assess their safety and accessibility, according to a district post on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Sunday. The district also said in an X post it they would closely monitor campuses that are most likely to be asffected by the storm and that guidance from the city and county would determine any additional closures. 

    “We recognize the severity this storm can cause, especially in certain communities, and urge everyone to be careful and cautious,” read a district statement released at about 6:15 a.m. Monday. 

    “Please use your best judgment based on the conditions where you live and your ability to safely travel to your school/work location.” 

    LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho also said in a letter to staff and families on Sunday that district leaders “remain confident” in their ability to provide “the necessary instructional and operational support to students,” especially those who rely on their school-provided meals.

    A statement by SEIU Local 99, the union representing classified school employees, emphasized the importance of safe working conditions and constant communication with the district. 

    “Regardless of where you work, safety is the priority. Please give yourself extra time for your commute and use extreme caution. No one should lose pay due to the unsafe conditions created by the storm,” the statement read. 

    The Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, however, has taken a split approach, with campuses in Santa Monica remaining open and those in Malibu closing

    Farther south, the San Diego County of Office of Education’s Project Rest has helped nearly 100 San Diego Unified School District families affected by the storms secure motel vouchers, CBS8 reported

    Kristy Drake, who works at the district’s Office of Children and Youth in Transition, told CBS8: “We are not going to leave any of our families outdoors or in their cars, so we are extending and hopeful that some more stable housing relief will show up very, very soon.” 





    Source link

  • Setting aside local control, legislation would mandate how to teach reading in California

    Setting aside local control, legislation would mandate how to teach reading in California


    Credit: Pexels

    On Feb. 8, the article was updated to clarify and elaborate on details of AB 2222.

    A veteran legislator who taught elementary school for 16 years introduced comprehensive early-literacy legislation Wednesday that would impose requirements on reading instruction and add urgency to the state’s patchwork of reading reforms.

    Evidence-based practices, collectively known as “the science of reading,” would become the mandated approach to reading instruction for TK-5, if Assembly Bill 2222, authored by Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, becomes law.

    The bill would shift the state’s decade-old policy of encouraging districts to incorporate fundamental reading skills in the early grades, including phonics, to demanding that they do so. This would depart from the state policy of giving school districts discretion to choose curriculums and teaching methods that meet state academic standards.

    By 2028, all TK to fifth-grade teachers, literacy coaches and specialists would be required to take a 30-hour-minium course in reading instruction from an approved list.

    School districts and charter schools purchasing textbooks would select from approved materials endorsed by the State Board of Education in a new round of textbook adoption.  

    The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing would receive money to add several experts for accreditation of teacher preparation programs in the science of reading. The bill would strengthen accountability for those programs that have not taught effective reading strategies, as required under recent state law.

    Rubio and the advocacy nonprofits EdVoiceDecoding Dyslexia CA, and Families in Schools, the bill’s co-sponsors, argue that another generation of California children cannot wait for districts teaching ineffective techniques using inadequate materials to come around.

    “California is facing a literacy crisis,” the first sentence of the bill states. “There are far too many children who are not reading on grade level by the end of third grade and who will not complete elementary school with the literacy skills and language development they need to be successful academically in middle school and high school.”

    Only 43% of California third graders met the academic standards in the state’s standardized test in 2023. Only 27.2% of Black students, 32% of Hispanic students, and 35% of low-income children were proficient, compared with 57.5% of white, 69% of Asian and 66% of non-low-income students.

    “There’s always this delicate balance between local control versus let’s move forward collectively,” said Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice and former candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. “But when we have an issue that the vast majority of lower-income kids, who are disproportionately Black and Latino, are not reading at grade level, it requires urgency to do what we know works as fast as possible.”

    Rubio, who recalled being handed coloring books instead of reading lessons in first grade as a non-English-speaking Mexican immigrant, said that data on the effectiveness of the science of reading convinced her to author the bill. However, her own experience as a fourth-grade teacher who previously taught kindergarten and first grade reinforced it. 

    “When I have fourth graders that are at first- or second-grade reading, something’s wrong. I can tell you right then and there, if a kid doesn’t know phonics in the fourth grade, we screwed them up somewhere. If they’re not reading in the third grade, they may never recover,” said Rubio, who was first elected to the Assembly in 2016.

    A piecemeal approach to literacy changes

    The science of reading refers to research from neurology, psychology, and the cognitive and developmental sciences about how children learn to read. In the last decade, 47 states and Washington, D.C., have enacted laws to incorporate elements of the science of reading strategies. Fewer — Mississippi, Connecticut, Tennessee, and Virginia among them — have adopted and funded policies that coordinate multiple key elements: preparing and training teachers, supplying them with aligned instructional materials, testing for learning difficulties like dyslexia and engaging parents.

    California is among the 47 states. Within the past three years, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature enacted discrete pieces of a state policy.

    They funded $40 million to the University of California San Francisco to create a screening test for the risk of dyslexia and other learning difficulties; universal screening of K-2 students will begin in 2025-26.

    They included $500 million in the last two state budgets for hiring and training of literacy coaches in the 5% of schools with the most low-income students. The Sacramento and Napa county offices of education, strong advocates of the science of reading, are overseeing the effort.   They passed legislation to create a teaching credential for PK-3 that includes new literacy standards grounded in the science of reading; teacher preparation programs must introduce them starting next fall, and teachers will take a performance assessment as part of their new credential.

    The Commission on Teacher Credentialing created a pre-kindergarten to grade 3 credential and passed new literacy standards grounded in the science of reading; those new standards will apply to the PK-3 credential as well as existing multiple subject, single subject, and education specialist teacher preparation programs. Teachers will take a performance assessment as part of their new credential.

    At the encouragement of State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond, a professor emerita at the Stanford University School of Education, Newsom included $1 million in the current budget for a “literacy road map,” which will serve as a guide, with online resources, for districts to implement evidence-based reading strategies. Leading that effort are two respected literacy experts, Bonnie Garcia and Nancy Brynelson, whom State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond named the state’s first state literacy co-directors.

    Tuck credits the steps taken by the Legislature and Newsom, “who has been an anchor on early education.” But guidelines won’t ensure that students in all districts will receive effective reading instruction —especially high-poverty schools that may be “slower to make adjustments when they’re dealing with so many challenges and so much complexity.”

    Megan Potente, co-state director of Decoding Dyslexia CA, points to her 20 years as a teacher, who, as a new teacher frustrated by the ineffectiveness of her reading training, took a course on phonics and fundamental reading skills. “You feel like you’re not good at your job, and you weren’t equipped. And that’s a terrible feeling for new teachers,” she said. “So I went back to school, and I learned what I needed.”

    Years later, she became a coach, supporting teachers in districts using balanced literacy that de-emphasizes evidence-based practices. She found it difficult to apply what she knew, she said, “because the curriculum materials didn’t follow the science; the teaching methods didn’t follow the science.”

    A piecemeal approach to reading reforms inevitably leads to a game of “whack-a-mole,” former Tennessee Education Commissioner Penny Schwinn, who is credited with implementing successful comprehensive policies in her state during the pandemic, told EdSource.

    Newsom did not require nor explicitly encourage districts to use the $20-plus billion they received in federal and state Covid-relief funding on teaching training in the science of reading nor on updating reading texts and materials. Now that the state is heading into a lean budget year, a scarcity of funding, particularly for teacher training, could set back a timeline to implement the bill. Newsom’s proposed budget for 2024-25 includes no significant money for new TK-12 programs.

    A spokesperson for the Newsom administration, which usually declines to discuss pending legislation, offered no further comment.

    What’s in Assembly Bill 2222

    AB 2222 would define evidence-based literacy instruction as “evidence-based explicit and systematic instruction in phonological and phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary and oral language development, fluency, comprehension, and writing …  that adheres to the science of reading.” (Phonics are rules that relate letters in words to the sounds of spoken language. A phoneme is the smallest element of a sound within spoken language. Phonemic awareness reflects the ability to understand that words combine multiple phonemes when pronounced.)

    The bill sets requirements for three principal elements of literacy instruction:

    Teacher training

    Starting in March 2026 and no later than June 30, 2028, all teachers in grades TK to 5 must complete an approved professional development and training program satisfactorily. The California Department of Education would appoint one or more county offices of education with expertise in the science of reading and evidence-based literacy instruction to serve as the state literacy expert lead that would select the list of eligible training programs. Districts would have to notify parents if fewer than 90% of the required teachers failed to complete the course. 

    Instructional materials

    The last state textbook adoption for English language arts and English language development was 2015. The bill would require the State Board of Education to complete the next adoption cycle by Jan. 1, 2026, for TK through eighth grade. The materials would have to adhere to the science of reading. School districts would not be required to replace materials they’re currently using, but they would need a waiver to buy basic instructional materials that aren’t approved. A district whose waiver is denied for existing instructional materials that they are using will be required to adopt materials from the state-approved list. For the first time, all districts would have to report which textbooks they are using to the Department of Education.

    Textbooks like “Units of Study,” by noted literacy author Lucy Calkins, whose instruction relies on visual cues, including the three-cuing method of reading, would not be eligible for the approved list.

    Teacher preparation

    The bill would strengthen the accountability requirements of landmark Senate Bill 488, the 2022 law that requires candidates for a PK-3, elementary, or multiple subject credential to receive evidence-based reading instruction. 

    It would require the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to establish a probationary accreditation process for teacher prep programs that aren’t meeting the literacy instruction requirements. Faculty in those programs would have to complete professional development in the science of reading for the program to avoid a loss of accreditation.  

    The bill would provide funding for the credentialing commission to hire experts in the science of reading to help with program accreditation. One of the dozen members of the Committee of Accreditation would have to be an expert in the science of reading.  





    Source link

  • Closing schools: How much money does it save, and is it worth it?

    Closing schools: How much money does it save, and is it worth it?


    Protesters rally against school closures outside the Oakland Unified School District office in September 2019.

    Andrew Reed/EdSource

    It makes intuitive sense: Smaller districts with fewer kids need fewer schools. A district with 40,000 students operates many more school buildings than a district with 20,000, which in turn runs more than a district with 10,000. With widespread enrollment declines (for example, California’s school-age population is forecast to drop by 15% over the next decade), many districts are now grappling with whether to close one or more schools.

    What’s the forcing factor for school closure decisions? Money, of course.

    District revenues, for the most part, are tied to the number of students a district serves. Enrollment has fallen in many districts, but during the last three or four years, federal pandemic dollars more than made up for the reductions in funding associated with those declines. Many districts have had plenty of cash on hand to keep running a fleet of under-enrolled schools. But federal relief dollars will dry up this fall, and it’s increasingly unlikely that the state will fill the gaps. That’s prompting shrinking districts to grapple with whether they can still afford to operate all their schools.

    Mostly what a district saves when closing a school is in staffing costs. Closing three schools can save the costs of three principals, three librarians, three nurses, and so on, and even some teaching positions where students can fill empty seats elsewhere in the district.

    At Edunomics Lab, our rule of thumb is that when a district has under-enrolled schools, closing 1 of every 15 schools saves about 4% of a district’s budget, mostly in labor costs. There may also be nominal savings in facilities, but labor is far and away the largest portion (85-95%) of the budget, and savings there will be more consequential over the long term.

    But not every closure brings layoffs. Where are the savings if the district isn’t issuing pink slips?

    Typically, the savings come from downsizing the district’s overall staffing counts with attrition. Often, the district can move staff from the closing school to fill vacancies emerging in other schools as staff leave on their own (thus avoiding layoffs). When a principal retires in one school, the district may move a principal from the closing school over to fill that spot. The cost reduction comes from not rehiring to fill those vacancies. If the leaders choose instead to keep all schools open, then the district has little choice but to rehire to fill each departing principal, nurse, librarian and so on to keep the larger number of schools running.

    Maintaining under-enrolled schools drains funds from all the district’s schools, not just the under-enrolled ones. Each district operates on a fixed revenue pool. Spending on principals, librarians and nurses in one or more half-empty schools means spending less on something else. It’s like having a fixed amount of frosting while trying to cover too many cupcakes. In the end, all the cupcakes end up with less frosting. For schools, that means they’ll start to see cutbacks to music, electives, AP courses, athletics and other supports as the district uses its limited funds to prop up the under-enrolled campuses.

    Take the Los Angeles Unified School District, for example, where the district spends an average of about $23,000 per elementary student at each of its higher-poverty schools. As the graph below shows, a few of its tiniest schools are drawing down over $34,000 per student from LAUSD’s fixed pool of funds. The higher price tag means less cash available for all the other schools in the district. (This information is available for all districts here.)

    Of course, closure decisions shouldn’t focus on money alone. For instance, districts may consider whether there are other nearby schools for displaced students to attend. Also relevant is whether the school is effective in its core mission. In the graphic above, some of the higher-priced under-enrolled schools are below the average performance line for higher-poverty schools. Not only are these schools expensive, but it also matters if that money isn’t delivering value for students.

    It’s also important to remember that not every small school has an outsize price tag. If a small school is able to operate cost-efficiently (meaning it has the same per-pupil costs as other similar schools), then closing it won’t likely save much at all. For a small school to be cost-efficient, it probably isn’t staffed in the same way as other schools. Maybe the principal also teaches a class, or the counselor is also the Spanish teacher. Or maybe the school uses some online options for electives or it operates as a multi-age Montessori model, or something else. And if it is demonstrating higher results for kids (meaning it is in that upper left quadrant on the graph), there’s even more of a case to leave it alone. What’s relevant here is that the small school isn’t draining funds from other schools, and is providing good value for the dollar.

    School closure decisions are never easy for any community, regardless of what the numbers say. But it’s the leaders’ responsibility to be good stewards of funds and ensure all students are served well. Assessing which schools are most able to leverage their money to maximize student outcomes can help leaders bring transparency to that difficult process.

    •••

    Marguerite Roza is director of Edunomics Lab and research professor at Georgetown University.
    Aashish Dhammani is a research fellow at Edunomics Lab.

    (For more on per-pupil spending and outcomes by school in California districts, explore Edunomics’ interactive data here.)

    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

  • UC professors’ math problem: How does data science fit in?

    UC professors’ math problem: How does data science fit in?


    In data science classes, students write computer programs to help analyze large sets of data.

    Credit: Alison Yin/EdSource

    The article was updated March 5 to include the letter from high-tech executives supporting the Algebra II requirement. It also clarifies that AP Statistics is for students who have completed Algebra II.

    An influential committee of the UC Academic Senate weighed in again last month on the contentious issue of how much math high school students must take to qualify to attend a four-year California state university. 

    It ruled that high school students taking an introductory data science course or AP Statistics cannot substitute it for Algebra II for admission to the University of California and California State University, starting in the fall of 2025.

    The Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools or BOARS reaffirmed its position by accepting the recommendations of a workgroup of math and statistics professors who examined the issue. That workgroup determined that none of these courses labeled as data science “even come close” to qualifying as a more advanced algebra course. 

    Robert Gould, a teaching professor and vice chair of undergraduate studies in the statistics department at UCLA and lead author of Introduction to Data Science, said that he disagrees with BOARS’ decision. The course was created under the auspices of the National Science Foundation through a math and science partnership grant.

    “We are disappointed, of course,” he said. “We believe our course is rigorous and challenging and, most importantly, contains knowledge and skills that all students need for both career and academic success.”

    But how, then, will UC and CSU ultimately fit popular data science courses like CourseKata, Introduction to Data Science, and YouCubed’s Explorations in Data Science into course requirements for admission? That bigger question won’t be determined until May when the math workgroup will issue its next report.

    Data science advocates are worried that BOARS, which commissioned the review, may disqualify data science and possibly statistics under the category of math courses meeting the criteria for admissions. Increasing numbers of high school students are turning to introductory data courses in a world shaped by artificial intelligence and other data-driven opportunities and careers. They see them as approachable alternatives to trigonometry, pre-calculus and other rigorous courses students must take to major in science, technology engineering or math (STEM) in college.

    Dozens of high school math teachers and administrators have signed a letter being circulated that will go to the UC regents. It reiterates support for data science and statistics courses and criticizes BOARS for not consulting high school teachers and data science experts for their perspectives.

    “Our schools and districts have adopted such courses because they provide an innovative 21st-century experience that excites and engages students, impart tangible quantitative skills needed for a wide variety of today’s careers and academic fields, and offer new ways for students to interact with and learn mathematics,” the letter states.

    Pamela Burdman, executive director of the nonprofit Just Equations, agreed in a blog post titled “The Latest in the Inexplicable War on High School Data Science Courses.” “The bottom line is that districts are increasingly offering these courses because they are relevant and engaging for many students who otherwise would be turned off by mathematics,” she wrote.

    Will it help or hinder equity?

    Critics of substituting introductory data sciences courses for advanced algebra include STEM professors at UC and CSU. Many say they support data science, but not courses lacking the full range of math topics in high schools that students need for STEM or any major requiring quantitative skills. Skipping foundational math in high school will set back the cause of equity for underserved students of color, not advance it, they argue, by creating the illusion that students are ready for statistics, computer science and data science majors when they aren’t. That may force them to take catch-up courses in community college.

    “The only way we’re going to diversify STEM fields is to keep historically excluded young students on the algebraic thinking pathway just a little bit longer,” Elizabeth Statmore, a math teacher at Lowell High in San Francisco and former software executive, wrote to EdSource last year. “That will give them the mathematical competencies they will need to make their own decisions about whether or not they want to pursue rigorous quantitative majors and careers.”

    Proponents of holding the line on Algebra II and encouraging more students to pursue STEM majors are circulating their own attention-grabbing letter titled Strong Math Foundations are Important for AI. The signers, including Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, his nemesis Elon Musk, founder of Tesla, SpaceX and CEO of X, and executives from Apple, NVIDIA, Microsoft and Google, “applaud” UC for maintaining the math requirements.

    “While today’s advances might suggest classic mathematical topics like calculus or algebra are outdated, nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, modern AI systems are rooted in mathematics, making a strong command over math necessary for careers in this field,” it reads. “Failure to maintain standards in the mathematical curriculum in public education will increase the gap between public schools — especially those of under-resourced districts — and private schools, hampering efforts to diversify STEM.”

    Surprise actions by UC Office of President

    For decades, UC and CSU have required that students complete three years of math with at least a “C” — usually in the sequence Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II, also called Advanced Algebra – as the math component of A-G, the 15 courses needed for admission. For students taking integrated math, it is Math I, II and III. Both university systems recommend a fourth year of math, and most students take at least that; aspiring STEM majors take two or more additional courses leading to Calculus.

    BOARS establishes policies on admissions, but a small office in the UC President’s Office, the High School Articulation Unit, vets tens of thousands of courses that developers and high school teachers submit for approval. Starting in 2014, the unit began authorizing AP statistics and new data science courses as “validating” or satisfying Algebra II or Integrated Math III content requirements. That meant they either built on the content standards that students had covered or would cover in the course. 

    Although AP Statistics doesn’t cover most Algebra II topics, the rationale for validating it and data science courses — mistakenly so, BOARS determined in retrospect — was that Algebra II includes some statistics, and most teachers never get around to teaching it. That was problematic for introductory data science courses, because the state hasn’t set standards for what should be covered in the courses.  The College Board, the creator of AP Statistics, states that the course is designed for students who have completed Algebra II.

    During the last few years, the staff in the review office approved the three most popular data science courses in more than 400 high schools. After analyzing the three courses, the UC workgroup professors concluded, “We find these current courses labeled as ‘data science’ are more akin to data literacy courses.”

    UC academic committee meetings, including BOARS, are closed to the public. But minutes from the July 2023 meeting indicated that some faculty members were dismayed that the articulation office had validated so many data science courses without their knowledge. “At least one member repeatedly suggested that UCOP has misinterpreted/misapplied the advanced math standard for years — and absent correction, will continue to do so — and so review of all current courses potentially implicated is needed,” the minutes state.

    BOARS hasn’t ruled out approving future data science courses that include more advanced algebra as a substitute for Algebra II; the articulation office has validated Financial Algebra for that purpose. BOARS invited course alternatives in a June 2020 statement, saying it saw the expanded options “as both a college preparation and equity issue.”

    But data science proponents are concerned that the math workgroup will take the opposite position and recommend that the three introductory data science courses be treated as elective courses for A-G but not fourth-year math courses. Ruling that way, they argue, would discourage future non-STEM majors from taking an alternative quantitative reasoning course as seniors. Such a position would reinforce a narrow view that only courses leading to Calculus are legitimate math offerings in the senior year.

    “Revocation of Area C (math) status will significantly reduce our ability to foster students’ statistical and data competency or incentivize enrollment in these programs, at a time when such quantitative abilities are increasingly necessary for functioning personally and professionally in the 21st Century,” the letter to the UC regents says.

    Lai Bui, a veteran math teacher at Mills High School in the San Mateo Union High School District, said there’s no justification for treating CourseKata, an introduction to data science course, differently from AP Statistics, which BOARS has qualified as a fourth-year math course. Students in CourseKata use coding to analyze datasets, while AP Stats students use graphing calculators, which have limitations, she said.

    UCLA and CSU Los Angeles created CourseKata in 2017 as a semester course for college and as a two-semester course for high schools; otherwise, they are similar, said Bui, who has taught it for four years.

    “CourseKata is definitely not data literacy,” she said. “It’s a math course, like AP Statistics, only more real-world connected. I see students succeeding in math instead of thinking, ‘I am not a math person.’”

    In 2023, the CSU Academic Senate expressed frustration that UC was approving courses in data science in lieu of Algebra II without consulting it and urged more joint decision-making involving A-G decisions. In January, three CSU professors were added to the 10-member UC math workgroup.

    Mark Van Selst, a psychology professor at San Jose State and member of the Academic Preparation and Education Programs Committee, considered CSU’s counterpart of BOARS, said this week he fully supports the decision not to retreat from Algebra II as a base of knowledge. But he also favors qualifying non-traditional fourth-year math courses that strengthen quantitative reasoning. He said he hopes the UC math workgroup drafts standards or learning outcomes for data science to distinguish between electives and advanced math courses.

    Gould said he would need to review the possible criteria before deciding whether to revise the content of Introduction to Data Science.

    “A data science education is essential for all students, and all students deserve a relevant and useful math education,” he said. “Despite the committee’s decision, we think it’s important that data science and statistics courses continue to qualify as fourth-year math courses.”





    Source link

  • How the House Budget Threatens Student-Athletes – Edu Alliance Journal

    How the House Budget Threatens Student-Athletes – Edu Alliance Journal


    A Uniquely American Model Under Threat

    June 8, 2025, by Dean Hoke: Intercollegiate athletics occupy a powerful and unique place in American higher education—something unmatched in any other country. From the massive media contracts of Division I football to the community pride surrounding NAIA and NJCAA basketball, college sports are a defining feature of the American academic landscape. Unlike most nations, where elite athletic development happens in clubs or academies, the U.S. integrates competitive sports directly into its college campuses.

    This model is more than tradition; it’s an engine of opportunity. For many high school students—especially those from underserved backgrounds—the chance to play college sports shapes where they apply, enroll, and succeed. According to the NCAA, 35% of high school athletes say the ability to participate in athletics is a key factor in their college decision [1]. It’s not just about scholarships; it’s about identity, community, and believing their talents matter.

    At smaller colleges and two-year institutions, athletics often serves as a key enrollment driver and differentiator in a crowded marketplace. International students, too, are drawn to the American system for its academic-athletic fusion, contributing tuition revenue and global prestige. Undermining this model through sweeping changes to federal financial aid, without considering the downstream effects, risks more than athletic participation. It threatens a distinctively American approach to education, access, and aspiration.

    A New Threshold with Big Impacts

    Currently, students taking 12 credit hours per semester are considered full-time and eligible for the maximum Pell Grant, which stands at $7,395 for 2024-25 [2]. The proposed House budget raises this threshold to 15 credit hours per semester. For student-athletes, whose schedules are already packed with training, competition, and travel, this shift could be devastating.

    NCAA academic standards require student-athletes to maintain full-time enrollment (typically 12 hours) and make satisfactory academic progress [3]. Adding another three credit hours per term may force many to choose between academic integrity, athletic eligibility, and physical well-being. In sports like basketball, where teams frequently travel for games, or in demanding STEM majors, completing 15 credit hours consistently can be a formidable challenge.

    Financial Impact on Student-Athletes

    Key Proposed Changes Affecting Student-Athletes:

    • Pell Grant Reductions: The proposed budget aims to cut the maximum Pell Grant by $1,685, reducing it to $5,710 for the 2026–27 academic year. Additionally, eligibility criteria would become more stringent, requiring students to enroll in at least 15 credit hours per semester to qualify for full-time awards. These changes could result in approximately 700,000 students losing Pell Grant eligibility [4].
    • Elimination of Subsidized Loans: The budget proposes eliminating subsidized federal student loans, which currently do not accrue interest while a student is in school. This change would force students to rely more on unsubsidized loans or private lending options, potentially increasing their debt burden [5].
    • Cuts to Work-Study and SEOG Programs: The Federal Work-Study program and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG) are slated for significant reductions or elimination. These programs provide essential financial support to low-income students, and their removal could affect over 1.6 million students [6].
    • Institutional Risk-Sharing: A new provision would require colleges to repay a portion of defaulted student loans, introducing a financial penalty for institutions with high default rates. This could strain budgets, especially at smaller colleges with limited resources [7].

    Figure 1: Total student-athletes by national athletic organization (NCAA, NAIA, NJCAA).

    While Figure 1 highlights the total number of student-athletes in each organization, Figure 2 illustrates how deeply athletics is embedded in different types of institutions. NAIA colleges have the highest ratio, with student-athletes comprising 39% of undergraduate enrollment. Division III institutions follow at approximately 8.42%, and the NJCAA—serving mostly commuter and low-income students—relies on athletics for 8.58% of its total student base [8].

    Even Division I, with its large student populations, includes a meaningful share (2.49%) of student-athletes. These proportions underscore how vital athletics are to institutional identity, especially in small colleges and two-year schools where athletes often make up a significant portion of campus life, retention strategy, and tuition revenue.

    Figure 2: Percentage of student-athletes among total undergraduate enrollment by organization (NCAA Divisions I–III, NAIA, NJCAA).

    The Pell Grant Profile: Who’s Affected

    Pell Grants support students with the greatest financial need. According to a 2018 report, approximately 31.3% of Division I scholarship athletes receive Pell Grants. At individual institutions like Ohio State, the share is even higher: 47% of football players and over 50% of women’s basketball players. In the broader NCAA system, over 48% of athletes received some form of federal need-based aid in recent years [9].

    There are approximately 665,000 student-athletes attending college. The NCAA reports that more than 520,000 student-athletes currently participate in championship-level intercollegiate athletics across Divisions I, II, and III [10]. The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) oversees approximately 83,000 student-athletes [11], while the National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) supports around 60,000 student-athletes at two-year colleges [12].

    The NAIA and NJCAA systems, which serve many first-generation, low-income, and minority students, also have a high reliance on Pell Grant support. However, exact figures are less widely published.

    The proposed redefinition of “full-time” means many of these students could lose up to $1,479 per year in aid, based on projections from policy experts [13]. For low-income students, this gap often determines whether they can afford to continue their education.

    Fewer Credits, Fewer Dollars: Academic and Athletic Risks

    Another major concern is how aid calculations based on “completed” credit hours will penalize students who drop a class mid-semester or fail a course. Even if a student-athlete enrolls in 15 credits, failing or withdrawing from a single 3-credit course could drop their award amount [14]. This adds pressure to persist in academically unsuitable courses, potentially hurting long-term academic outcomes.

    Athletic departments, already burdened by compliance and recruitment pressures, may face added strain. Advisors will need to help students navigate increasingly complex eligibility and aid requirements, shifting focus from performance and development to credit-hour management.

    Disproportionate Effects on Small Colleges and Non-Revenue Sports

    The brunt of these changes will fall hardest on small, tuition-dependent institutions in the NCAA Division II, Division III, NAIA, and NJCAA. These colleges often use intercollegiate athletics as a strategic enrollment tool. At some NAIA schools, student-athletes comprise 40% to 60% of the undergraduate population [8].

    Unlike large Division I schools that benefit from lucrative media contracts and booster networks, these institutions rely on a patchwork of tuition, modest athletic scholarships, and federal aid to keep programs running. A reduction in Pell eligibility could drive enrollment declines, lead to cuts in athletic offerings, and even force some colleges to close sports programs or entire campuses.

    Already, schools like San Francisco State University, Cleveland State, and Mississippi College have recently announced program eliminations, citing budgetary constraints [15]. NJCAA institutions—the two-year colleges serving over 85,000 student-athletes—also face a precarious future under this proposed budget.

    Economic Importance by Division

    Division I: Athletics departments generated nearly $17.5 billion in total revenue in 2022, with $11.2 billion self-generated and $6.3 billion subsidized by institutional/government support or student fees [16]. Many Power Five schools are financially resilient, with revenue from TV contracts, merchandise, and ticket sales.

    Division II: Median revenue for schools with football was around $6.9 million, but generated athletic revenue averaged only $528,000, leading to significant deficits subsidized by institutional funds [17].

    Division III: Division III schools operate on leaner budgets, with no athletic scholarships and total athletics budgets often under $3 million per school. These programs are typically funded like other academic departments [18].

    NAIA and NJCAA: These schools rely heavily on student-athlete enrollment to sustain their institutions. Athletics are not profit centers but recruitment and retention tools. Without Pell Grants, many of these athletes cannot afford to enroll [11][12].

    Figure 3: Estimated number of NAIA, Division III, and NJCAA programs by state.

    Unintended Tradeoffs: Equity and Resource Redistribution

    Attempting to offset lost federal aid by reallocating institutional grants could result in aid being shifted away from non-athletes. This risks eroding equity goals, as well as provoking internal tension on campuses where athletes are perceived to receive preferential treatment.

    Without new revenue sources, institutions may also raise tuition or increase tuition discounting, potentially compromising their financial stability. In essence, colleges may be forced to choose who gets to stay in school.

    The High-Stakes Gamble for Student-Athletes

    Figure 4: Estimated impact of Pell Grant changes on student-athletes, including projected dropouts and loan default rates.

    For many student-athletes, especially those from low-income backgrounds, the Pell Grant is not just helpful—it’s essential. It makes the dream of attending college, competing in athletics, and earning a degree financially feasible. If the proposed changes to Pell eligibility become law, an estimated 50,000 student-athletes could be forced to drop out, unable to meet the new credit-hour requirements or fill the funding gap [19]. Those who remain may have no choice but to take on additional loans, risking long-term debt for a degree they may never complete. The reality is sobering: Pell recipients already face long-term student loan default rates as high as 27%, and for those who drop out, that figure climbs above 40% [20]. Stripping away vital support will almost certainly drive those numbers higher. The consequences won’t stop with individual students. Colleges—particularly smaller, tuition-dependent institutions where athletes make up a significant share of enrollment—stand to lose not just revenue, but the very programs and communities that give purpose to their campuses.

    Colleges, athletic associations, policymakers, and communities must work together to safeguard opportunity. Student-athletes should never be forced to choose between academic success and financial survival. Preserving access to both education and athletics isn’t just about individual futures—it’s about upholding a uniquely American pathway to achievement and equity.


    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean is the Executive Producer and co-host for the podcast series Small College America. 

    References

    1. NCAA. (n.d.). Estimated probability of competing in college athletics. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/11/4/estimated-probability-of-competing-in-college-athletics.aspx
    2. Federal Student Aid. (2024). Federal Pell Grants. Retrieved from https://studentaid.gov/understand-aid/types/grants/pell
    3. NCAA. (n.d.). Academic Standards and Eligibility. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/6/17/academic-eligibility.aspx
    4. Washington Post. (2025, May 17). Most Pell Grant recipients to get less money under Trump budget bill, CBO finds. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2025/05/17/pell-grants-cbo-analysis/
    5. NASFAA. (2024). Reconciliation Deep Dive: House Committee Proposes Major Overhaul of Federal Student Loans, Repayment, and PSLF. Retrieved from https://www.nasfaa.org/news-item/36202/Reconciliation_Deep_Dive_House_Committee_Proposes_Major_Overhaul_of_Federal_Student_Loans_Repayment_and_PSLF?utm
    6. U.S. Department of Education, FY2025 Budget Summary. (2024). Proposed Cuts to Campus-Based Aid Programs. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html
    7. Congressional Budget Office. (2025). Reconciliation Recommendations of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. Retrieved from https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61412
    8. NJCAA, NAIA, and NCAA. (2023). Student-Athlete Participation Reports.
    9. NCAA. (2018). Pell Grant data and athlete demographics. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org/news/2018/4/24/research-pell-grant-data-shows-diversity-in-division-i.aspx
    10. NCAA. (2023). 2022–23 Sports Sponsorship and Participation Rates Report. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org/research
    11. NAIA. (2023). NAIA Facts and Figures. Retrieved from https://www.naia.org
    12. NJCAA. (2023). About the NJCAA. Retrieved from https://www.njcaa.org
    13. The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS). (2024). Analysis of Proposed Pell Grant Reductions. Retrieved from https://ticas.org
    14. Education Trust. (2024). Consequences of Redefining Full-Time Status for Financial Aid. Retrieved from https://edtrust.org
    15. ESPN. (2024, March); AP News. (2024, November). Athletic program eliminations at Cleveland State and Mississippi College.
    16. Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. (2023). College Athletics Financial Information (CAFI). Retrieved from https://knightnewhousedata.org
    17. NCAA. (2022). Division II Finances: Revenues and Expenses Report. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2022/6/17/finances.aspx
    18. NCAA. (2023). Division III Budget Reports and Trends. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org
    19. Internal projection based on available data from NCAA, NAIA, NJCAA, and CBO Pell Grant impact estimates.
    20. Brookings Institution. (2018). The looming student loan default crisis is worse than we thought. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-looming-student-loan-default-crisis-is-worse-than-we-thought



    Source link

  • Q&A: How the 50-year-old case that transformed English learner education began

    Q&A: How the 50-year-old case that transformed English learner education began


    Children pose on the steps of Immigrants Development Center of San Francisco in the 1970s.

    Credit: San Francisco History Center, San Francisco Public Library

    Fifty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case that would forever change education for English learners in this country.

    In the 1974 case Lau v. Nichols, the court decided that students learning English had a right to fully understand what was being taught in their classrooms, and that schools must take steps to make sure that they could, whether through additional instruction in English as a second language or bilingual education.

    Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had said that San Francisco Unified was not discriminating against students by giving them the same materials and instruction as other students.

    Rather, it said the alleged discrimination was “the result of deficiencies created by the children themselves in failing to learn the English language.”

    Lucinda Lee Katz
    Credit: Courtesy of Lucinda Lee Katz

    The Supreme Court disagreed. “There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education,” wrote Justice William O. Douglas in the majority opinion.

    The Lau v. Nichols case is named for one of the plaintiffs, a little boy named Kinney Lau, who had recently emigrated from Hong Kong. Kinney Lau’s first grade teacher at Jean Parker Elementary School in San Francisco was Lucinda Lee Katz. 

    In an interview, Katz shared how this case marked her life, how it changed education for English learners and what remains to be done to give English learners full access to the same instruction as their peers.

    This interview was edited for clarity and brevity.

    How and why did you get involved with the Lau v. Nichols case?

    When I became a teacher, I had Kinney Lau in my first grade classroom. And Mrs. Lau said to me, “Miss Lee, I come from Hong Kong where all the students are exposed to two languages. We can read, write, speak and learn in English and Cantonese. I don’t understand why we can’t do that in San Francisco. Can you help us? Because Kinney is losing his experience with math learning, and I want him to keep up.” 

    English was the first language of instruction. Sometimes I could interpret or translate, but I knew I was stepping out of my lane when I did that.

    Mrs. Lau wanted formal instruction. She said, “I get it if you have to teach English and writing in English, but he’s losing valuable time not understanding math. So could you just teach math in Chinese?

    So that was the first conversation. I went home and told my roommates. They were all in law school. And I said, “Can we do something about it?” They took it to (the San Francisco) Neighborhood Legal Assistance (Foundation), and the person who took it on was Ed Steinman. And he took it all the way to the Supreme Court.

    What was your own experience in school like as a child, and how did it influence you?

    I went through Washington Irving Elementary School, Francisco Middle School and Lowell High School. I had not one Chinese teacher.

    My kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Thompson, kept saying, “No Chinese! No Chinese here! No Chinese!” All the kids in the classroom were Chinese and Chinese-speaking. As a kindergartner, I noted that, and I said to myself, “What is she talking about? She’s the only one that can’t speak Chinese, and I don’t get this.” So it stayed in my mind for a very long time.

    My father and his father were from China. And in 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was the first significant law that was passed by Congress restricting Chinese immigrants. It’s actually one of the most discriminatory laws in the books. Interestingly, the 1906 earthquake fire destroyed all the records in San Francisco. And as a result of that, and because of the discrimination, the Chinese found a way to come over through the “paper sons and daughters” system. So a Mr. Wong who lived in San Francisco and was a citizen could sell his name to somebody in China, and they would pay a lot of money. My father and grandfather came over as “paper sons,” and each of them were named Mr. Wong when their real family name was Lee. And I was Lucinda Wong from birth through eighth grade. Because in the late 1950s, Eisenhower changed the “paper sons and daughters,” so they could apply for naturalization with their real names. So when I was in eighth grade, my principal called me in, and she said, “Lucinda Wong, tomorrow you are going to be Lucinda Lee.”

    So I really feel that it was unusual circumstances that brought us all together — that I had Kinney Lau, that Mrs. Lau was this kind of representative, that I understood Mrs. Thompson’s shaking finger at us, “No Chinese here,” the Chinese Exclusion Act, my father’s experience coming over to this country as a “paper son.” (All of this) made me think something has to be done. 

    How did you and other teachers push for bilingual education, outside of the courts?

    I became very active, marching and speaking with parent groups and doing sort of the heavy work between 1969 and 1972. I have a photograph of me speaking before the board, speaking to parents to get them educated and riled up. 

    I think I basically said we are harming ourselves when children enter our systems and don’t have access to two languages so that they can keep moving forward. That we’re actually handicapping them by making them try to learn English only, when for two or three years, there could be a gradual transition. Secondly, I want teachers trained to understand that the brain can do two cultures, multi-languages, multicultural, and they should be trained. Three, if you have kids that have any kind of learning difference, we should know how to address that and not assume that they’re lacking in English.

    The other thing I did was, I brought Chinese culture into Jean Parker School because they didn’t celebrate Chinese New Year, Lunar New Year, nothing. And I said, “You can’t do that. Ninety percent of the kids in the school are from Chinese backgrounds, and you have to understand why they’re dressed the way they are during Lunar New Year, and that it’s a big deal. That’s our main holiday.” And the principal allowed me to have an assembly. But I didn’t tell her that I was bringing in lion dancers and drums, and it got the Chinese kids all riled up and excited.

    Do you remember where you were when you heard that the decision finally came down from the Supreme Court?

    I was at (the University of Illinois) Urbana-Champaign getting my doctorate. I was in the middle of classes and doing my dissertation. I read it in the paper. My husband said, “Look, there was a Supreme Court decision. They passed that Lau versus Nichols thing.” I said, “Yes!” Everything that was meant to be actually happened. And you know, they were celebrating like crazy here (in San Francisco.)

    But you know, there are still problems because it didn’t say how you should do it or that they would give it money. They just said, “Yeah, let’s do it.” So it’s up to every school district to do it in their own way.

    Before Lau v. Nichols, San Francisco had some bilingual education, right?

    When I went to Commodore Stockton Elementary School, I was hired as a bilingual, bicultural teacher, because San Francisco was trying something new. I applied for the job, and I was snapped up. There were three classrooms. Each of us had classroom assistants who could speak either Cantonese or English. I happened to have gone to Chinese school for 12 years. So I was Cantonese-speaking. It was also the period of school busing. So, in my first year, I had almost all Chinese kids in this bilingual, bicultural classroom. In my second year, I had kids from Noe Valley and the Mission and Hunter’s Point, who would bravely get on the bus ride for half an hour, 45 minutes to come to Commodore Stockton to be in my classroom. They were exposed to both English and Chinese.

    How did Lau v. Nichols change bilingual education in California?

    Well, what changed in San Francisco specifically was that Gordon Lew, who was the editor of a newspaper in Chinatown, started volunteering to write curriculum for the San Francisco School District in Chinese and in English. That was very amazing.

    When I went back to look at the Chinatown Community Children’s Center (a bilingual preschool where Katz had been the first director), the kids were so happy. Some were still speaking Chinese only, and many of them were speaking clearly in English and so forth, at age 3, 4 and 5. I haven’t had the chance to go into elementary schools, but both my sisters were school principals and they told me stories about how a lot of their kids could transition back and forth between English and Chinese, but likewise, Spanish, Tagalog (and other languages).

    How do you think California is doing with teaching English learners and with bilingual education?

    It’s really a little tough. There’s more curriculum and there are more people who can do it. So that’s a plus. But California really has to codify the approach as a viable program. I know you’re mostly focused on California, and the states that have the most bilingual students, or English language learners (ELL), are California, Texas, Illinois, Florida, New York. But it turns out Wyoming, Nebraska, Indiana, Kentucky and Alabama have growing populations. 

    What they don’t have is the following: They don’t have a clear identification system for who is ELL and what kind of services they need, and how that’s differentiated from a student who has learning disabilities. They can mistake an English language learner as though they are a learning-disabled student. So they need to clean that up.

    They need to provide families with what I call wraparound services so that when they come to school, they can request a translator or request somebody to help guide them through the system. They need to have an English language development program for those that are designated. I think every employee, not just English language learner teachers, should be trained in what the highlights and challenges are for an English language learner and the family that they come from. Second, you can offer bilingual (education). And then I just think that there should be a way to monitor how these programs are doing and how these kids are doing. And we don’t have a monitoring system.

    What do you think that parents and teachers and everyone can learn from the story of Lau v. Nichols?

    They should understand and know that you can be a fully high-functioning person in two languages, three languages. No more Mrs. Thompson, “No Chinese here.” That is so old school. We need to open our minds to the fact that the brain can handle many languages and many cultural shifts. 

    Two, every teacher should be trained to understand, what is ELL? Three, there would be a much better approach if the kids at age 4 or 5 actually had some kind of screening, so that you might have a kid that’s 60% fluent in English, but just needs a little more targeted (instruction), another year, maybe two years of a focused program. So assessing the kids early on would be very important.

    I think the next thing is getting the parents to understand how important these programs are. And they need to support it with their time, their volunteer time, their money, their talent, whatever they do, we need to give it complete focus.

    And the school districts need to understand that there are many gradations of bilingual-bicultural. It’s not just like one or the other. It’s very complicated. So I just think if the state and each school district could do it, we would be way better off. And California is way further ahead than most of these other places.





    Source link

  • We need to track how California’s efforts to increase teacher diversity are working

    We need to track how California’s efforts to increase teacher diversity are working


    Credit: Allison Shelly for American Education

    Updated April 4 to correct demographic information of students and teachers in California.

    I started my professional life as a server at the Marriott. I was looking forward to a career in the hospitality industry, but I also wanted to use my degree in biology and my love of science, so I decided to substitute teach.

    During my first week in the classroom, one of my students said, “Mr. Z, we have learned more from you in the last three days than in the previous two weeks.”

    That’s when I knew I wanted to become an educator. 

    My research into teacher preparation programs left me discouraged. Their cost was a major barrier for me, as it is for many other aspiring teachers of color. Then I found out about the Golden State Teacher Grant (GSTG) program, which provides teachers of color with the opportunity to pursue a career in education tuition-free. I would never have been able to afford my master’s degree and teaching credential had it not been for this program. 

    With this grant, I was able to receive my master’s and credential within one year, allowing me to step into the classroom and diversify the space that much faster. This is important because 20% of California’s students identified as white, while 61% of teachers identified as white. (The comparison is as of 2018-19, the last year that the California Department of Education published statewide teacher demographic data). Research shows that teachers of color have a positive effect on the pupils we serve. I have seen this in my own teaching. My high school chemistry classes are 85% students of color. One of my students, Nayleya, wrote to me, “I hated coming to school and I just felt like there was no point to it. I felt like the other teachers were just trying to control us and, in a way, treat us like robots, but you don’t. You listen to what we are having problems with and try your hardest to help.”

    The Golden State Teacher Grant came with a comprehensive level of support, ensuring my success in the program and in the classroom. When I was working on my final project, a chemistry unit plan, my professors provided ongoing mentorship. I was able to resubmit my assignments until I reached mastery in my content area. This informed my teaching practice; I now give my students multiple opportunities to resubmit their assignments until they too reach mastery of the learning target. This has motivated students like Nayleya to work harder, even if she found the lesson challenging, because she knows I am backing her up every step of the way, in the same way my professors supported me. 

    I know that the Golden State grant worked for me as it has for many of my colleagues. However, to really know how many teachers of color are entering the profession, the programs they graduate from, the districts and schools they are teaching at, we need much more information than just personal experience. This is even more pressing now as the Legislature is considering addressing current budget shortfalls by clawing back funds from some of the teacher training programs, like the Golden State Pathways Program, teacher and counselor residency grants and national board certification grants, without understanding their impact. We need comprehensive data on the effectiveness of programs like the Golden State Teacher Grant to ensure that our investments in them are working, and policymakers have the information they need to make informed budget decisions.  

    Our Legislature is now debating a bill that will do just that. Senate Bill 1391, authored by Sen. Susan Rubio, would require the state to develop a dashboard with information on teacher training pipelines, credentialing, hiring and retention. Having a comprehensive data dashboard would also help us anticipate any challenges that arise from recruiting to preparing and retaining a diverse workforce. Imagine the improvements we could make to how we prepare and support teachers if we knew what programs were effective, and what worked and what didn’t. 

    I love teaching and I love my students. I want other people of color to pursue a career in education and find the passion and rewards that come with mentoring young scholars. Let’s make sure we have the data to help sustain and diversify our workforce, for the benefit of all our students. 

    •••

    Omar Zamarripa is a ninth and 10th grade science teacher at Port of Los Angeles High School in San Pedro. He is a 2023-24 Teach Plus California Policy Fellow.  

    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