اینترنت

برچسب: Must

  • We must do more to prepare California students to confront climate change

    We must do more to prepare California students to confront climate change


    Piedmont seventh graders participate in the global strike for climate change in San Francisco in 2019.

    Credit: Andrew Reed/EdSource

    I live on the coast of California, near the Point Reyes National Seashore. In February 2023, we endured an abnormally violent storm with 60 mph wind gusts that brought down a large redwood tree onto two cars parked in my driveway. I was shaken but grateful to be alive. I was also grateful for the generosity of my neighbor who allowed me to borrow her car for the next two weeks as I sorted things out.

    When the time came to return the borrowed car, I made sure to wash it, clean it out and return it with a full gas tank. I recalled hearing my father’s voice telling me to always return something you borrowed in better shape than when you got it.

    I realize that my generation of baby boomers has essentially “borrowed” and used the planet for our own purposes for the past 50 years. And now it is time for us to return what we borrowed — and turn it over to the next generation.

    Fifty years of population growth, industrial expansion, carbon burning and general lack of care has initiated a process of climate change that is generating a multitude of physical, economic and social crises. We are trying to mitigate these changes, but no matter how well we do that, we will nonetheless be turning over the planet to the next generation with irreparable damage done and in a state of accelerating decline.

    So what else can my generation do? 

    I think our generation owes it to the next generation to prepare them as well as we can for the world they will face. If we cannot return the earth to them in good shape, we can at least give them a powerful education so that they can survive — and do better than we have done — when it is their turn to assume stewardship of the planet.

    Preparing our children for the world they will inherit is the right thing to do — for them and for us.  But it also could be very good for the California education system. Preparing students for the world they will inherit could help schools find renewed purpose and achieve the relevance that students are demanding.

    In 2015, California published its Blueprint for Environmental Literacy. The document points out that K-12 students in California do not currently have “consistent access to adequately funded, high-quality learning experiences, in and out of the classroom, that build environmental literacy.” Many receive only a limited introduction to environmental content, and some have no access at all.

    Why has so little changed in our schools over the nine years since the blueprint was published? 

    One answer is that the state has not made environmental or climate change education a priority, nor has it invested in long-term, well-crafted initiatives to develop the capacity and propensity of the educational system to change itself. The state does relatively little to develop the curriculum, assessments and professional development that is required to create learning opportunities that can help students prepare for a world dominated by climate change. 

    Over the next five years, California is planning to invest about $10 billion a year to combat the effects of climate change. By contrast, the state presently invests less than 0.1% of this amount to support the development of climate change education.

    This means that for every $100 the state spends fighting climate change, it spends less than 1 cent on educating its students to understand the need for those efforts.

    For every student in California, we spend over $20,000 a year on their school education. Of this amount, we devote less than $2 per student annually to develop our capacity to promote climate change literacy.

    The Covid pandemic provides a clear example of what happens when investment in science and investment in education are not well-balanced. The nation succeeded in creating vaccines that were successful at fending off the worst effects of this new Covid virus. However, the lack of public understanding of vaccines, and in the science behind them, severely limited their timely adoption and success. 

    The same is true with climate change. In the long term, we will not be able address climate change without an equal emphasis on climate change education.  

    California is taking the lead in the nation in supporting policies and research that fight climate change. It could do the same with climate change education. 

    We very much need the next generation to be smarter and wiser than mine. This is not just my generation’s idea of what is good for our youth. They are already demanding of us that we do better in terms of mitigation, adaptation and education. Can we look them in the eye and honestly say to them that we are doing everything we can do to prepare them for what is coming?

    •••

    Mark St. John is founder of Inverness Research, a nonprofit organization that studies education initiatives, and a consultant to Ten Strands, a nonprofit organization promoting environmental literacy for California students.

    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

  • Legislature must tackle sex discrimination and harassment on college campuses

    Legislature must tackle sex discrimination and harassment on college campuses


    Yin Yang /iStock

    Addressing and preventing sex discrimination and sexual harassment on college campuses continues to be one of the most foundational challenges to improving campus climate at higher education institutions in our country.

    In the fall of 2021, as the Biden-Harris administration began its reexamination of Title IX, the federal regulation that prohibits discrimination based on sex in education, the Assembly Higher Education Committee also began its own reexamination of California’s policies to address and prevent sex discrimination and sexual harassment in higher education.

    Three years later, the Higher Education Committee released a 30-plus page report that revealed we are not doing nearly enough to support our public higher education institutions to create an inclusive and safe campus culture for our students, faculty and staff.

    While each public higher education institution does have a nondiscrimination policy in place, it is clear that our campus communities do not trust these institutions to prevent nor properly handle sex discrimination and sexual harassment on campus. According to interviews conducted by the committee and various surveys of students and faculty, campus communities feel that current policy focuses on protecting higher education institutions and not survivors of sexual discrimination and harassment.

    It is the responsibility of campus leadership to provide our students with a safe and inclusive environment; however, the Legislature also has a responsibility to support our institutions in that mission, and to hold them accountable if they fall short.

    My bills, Assembly Bill (AB) 2047 and AB 2048 are a necessary step that the Legislature must take in order to support California’s higher education institutions and its campus communities.

    These two bills are a part of an ambitious, 12-bill legislative package, authored by myself and seven of my legislative colleagues, and predominantly based on recommendations from the committee’s report.

    The package as a whole is imperative in order to foster cultural change, accountability and trust at our higher education institutions. AB 2047 and AB 2048 focus on shifting campus culture and renewing trust.

    AB 2047 will establish an independent systemwide Title IX office to assist with monitoring compliance throughout all three of California’s higher education segments, and AB 2048 will establish an independent Title IX office on each California State University and University of California campus, and in each community college district.

    These offices, both on campus and at the systemwide level, will provide supportive measures to survivors of sexual harassment and discrimination and adjudicate cases in a clear and transparent manner. Furthermore, these bills will work in tandem with the overall legislative package to provide reporting measures to ensure the higher education institutions are preventing and addressing cases of sex discrimination.

    The importance of creating an identifiable authority that will properly adjudicate cases of sex discrimination and implement preventative measures cannot be minimized. These bills will renew community trust in our public institutions and establish a campus culture primed to detect, prevent and address all forms of sex discrimination and harassment with supportive measures and restorative justice. 

    AB 2047 and AB 2048 will provide substantial change for survivors of sexual harassment, but they will also result in substantial monetary cost from the state’s general fund, possibly costing millions of dollars, in order to establish and staff these offices.

    As we are confronted with a significant budget deficit this year, difficult policy decisions will be made, but these bills should be a priority for the Legislature.

    Fundamental change is costly, and as we assess the true costs of these bills and the impact they will have on our state, we must also not forget to consider the cost of doing nothing: the human cost of students who do not feel safe at these institutions and may not be able to experience all that higher education has to offer. The cost of those who carry invisible wounds and do not achieve their full educational potential.

    I am a firm believer in the power and promise of higher education and its ability to transform lives and communities. No student should be deprived of that power and promise due to sex discrimination or sexual harassment.

    We are falling short of our responsibility to these campus communities by further allowing this status quo of handling complaints through costly monetary settlements and lawsuits to remain.

    We cannot let this continue.

    •••

    Mike Fong (D-Alhambra) represents California’s 49th Assembly District and serves as chair of the Assembly Higher Education Committee.

    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

  • To teach math effectively, California must focus on deep, conceptual learning

    To teach math effectively, California must focus on deep, conceptual learning


    Third graders discuss possible ways to solve a new math problem.

    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Fierce wars continue to rage around math instruction, but there are many practical changes we should make for mathematics students upon which most of us can probably agree, that could transform their ability to achieve. 

    A promising new initiative for California that we have both been involved with tackles two of the most pressing flaws of traditional math instruction with elegant solutions that should be appealing to many, no matter which camp they occupy in the debates. Ask any teacher of math what they wish they did not have to deal with, and they will tell you the excessive amount of content they need to teach, which leads to the second problem — the shallow coverage of hundreds of methods that students do not learn in meaningful ways.

    U.S. math textbooks are massive and heavy tomes. By contrast, math textbooks in Japan and China are small and slim. The reason for this is that U.S. curriculum repeats content every year. In China and Japan, content is taught less frequently but more deeply and conceptually. As teachers in the U.S. are forced to “cover” an extensive amount of content in every year of school, students only gain a shallow experience of mathematical methods and rules.

    The second problem, linked to the first, is that students are taught hundreds of methods as though they are all equally important, without experiencing the more foundational concepts deeply and conceptually. Some concepts are much more central than others because they link to other areas of content, and they deserve to be learned deeply, over multiple lessons, through applied tasks that relate to students’ lives.  An example of a central concept in grade four is “factors and groups.” Instead of learning about these through short questions and answers, students can learn them through rich tasks in which they are more deeply engaged, as can be seen here.

    Students can learn all foundational concepts, such as fractions or functions, by drawing, building and learning about them through real-world examples. Every important idea in mathematics can be learned visually, physically and conceptually, including algebra and calculus. Instead, most students work through pages of numerical calculations, absent of any connection to the world, and spend hours of algebra class manipulating X’s on a page.

    A solution to both of these problems is to teach the “big ideas in mathematics” for every grade, as set out in the California Mathematics Framework,  such as “being flexible within 10” (kindergarten) or “unit rates in the world” (grade seven), making sure that for each of the eight or so big ideas in every grade, students have a deep and rich experience of their underlying concepts: by drawing them, building them and talking about them. Even if it is only these eight or so ideas that are experienced in this way each year, they will serve as a foundation for everything else students learn as they progress.

    Many California school districts are now waiting for funding to be devoted to the training of teachers to move to the approaches set out in the framework. But in Kern County, leaders have been sharing these ideas for the past three years. Semitropic Elementary school, which serves mainly Latinx, English learners and socioeconomically disadvantaged students, is one example of a school that has moved to the approach of the framework. In the 2018-19 school year, before Covid-19 and the implementation of the new framework, only 5.6% of Semitropic students met or exceeded standards on math Smarter Balanced tests in grades 3-8, with less than 5% in grades four and five, and no students in grades 6 or 8. After the leaders in Kern County supported teachers in learning and implementing the ideas of the framework, through a series of professional development sessions to build capacity, with classroom demonstration lessons to model the new strategies, in action with their students, and coaching to meet teachers where they were, proficiency levels shot up, increasing to 16.3% overall, with the fourth grade showing the most significant increase, to 36.8%. There is more work to be done in this and other districts, but the demonstrable positive changes already unfolding are impressive.

    What changed in the classrooms of the schools in Kern County? The teachers focused on big ideas, such as “being flexible within 10” which starts in kindergarten and extends through the elementary grades. Instead of students learning 10 as a fixed number that they use to calculate, they now spend time learning how 10 is made up, and all the ways they can make 10. A powerful strategy teachers started to use was “number talks,” in which teachers pose a number problem and collect the different ways students approach the problem, representing them visually. They also started using richer, deeper tasks, encouraging students to discuss ideas and learn with visuals and manipulatives. The superintendent and county math coaches were thrilled with the high levels of engagement they saw in the classrooms, as well as the significant changes in state test scores.

    There are several problems with the systems of mathematics education in many states, and proposed solutions often spark disagreement. But perhaps we should all agree on one thing: Students need to learn important mathematical concepts deeply and well. They should not be working through sets of procedural questions that mean nothing to them, but rather should experience rich applied mathematics that inspires them, helps them learn effectively, and shows them that mathematics is important to their lives.

    •••

    Jo Boaler is a Stanford professor and author of “Math-ish: Finding Creativity, Diversity & Meaning in Mathematics.” She was one of the writers of California’s new mathematics framework.

    Cole Sampson is the administrator of professional learning for the Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office.

    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

  • To improve how California students read, we must get past confusion and misinformation

    To improve how California students read, we must get past confusion and misinformation


    A student holds a flash card with the sight word ‘friend’ during a class at Nystrom Elementary in the West Contra Costa Unified School District in 2022.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    The “science of reading” confuses and confounds many of us. It’s understandable. There is much misleading and outright false information floating around.

    On one hand, too many science of reading advocates claim an unwarranted degree of certainty, for example, that we know from the science how to get 95% of all students on grade level. Vague and unhelpful definitions make matters worse. I’ve even heard advocates say we should treat all children as if they were dyslexic, a claim for which there is zero evidence.

    On the other hand, science of reading skeptics spread mischaracterizations and outright fictions. An egregious example was a recent California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) webinar intended to “debunk” the brain science behind the science of reading by claiming that a key tool used to study the brain (functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI) could not detect brain activity that involved meaning or comprehension. The world’s foremost reading neuroscientist debunked the would-be debunker by pointing out that 20 years of research have shown that writing and speaking “activate extremely similar brain circuits for meaning.“

    How can we ever make progress when we’re locked in an eternal game of whack-a-false-mole?

    We can all agree learning to read is complicated, and so is the teaching. But there are also a few straightforward and irrefutable findings from research that should constitute the foundations for reading policies. This is particularly important for the students who are most harmed when we fail to use the best knowledge available: low-income students and students who have difficulty learning to read.

    • Learning to speak and understand oral language is fundamentally different from learning to read and write. A first language is typically acquired effortlessly if we’re with people who speak it. Learning to read requires explicit teaching to one degree or another.
    • Oral language is foundational to reading, because reading requires visually accessing the oral language centers in our brains. Our brain is prepared from birth to make sense of what we hear when people talk, but to read we must learn how to see written language (print), connect it to oral language, and then make sense of it. Neuroscientists have identified the transformation of brain centers and the development of neural pathways that enable an individual to connect print to speech and speech to print.
    • Without those connections, literacy is difficult, if not impossible. Foundational literacy skills — usually called “phonics” or “decoding” — are essential for connecting spoken English to written English. Teaching these skills is “nonnegotiable,” and explicit, systematic instruction in how the sounds of the language (“phonemes”) are represented by letters is the approach most likely to lead to individuals’ learning to read.
    • In contrast, “balanced literacy” (sometimes called “3-cueing”) is far less effective and even counterproductive — particularly for students who benefit most from direct and clear instruction — because it does not clearly and systematically teach the necessary reading skills described above. (“Balanced literacy” is a misappropriation of the National Reading Panel’s use of “balanced” to mean phonics instruction balanced with language and comprehension-oriented instruction.)
    • After acquiring decoding skills, word recognition must become automatic. Decoding a word each time it’s encountered is an obstacle to comprehension. Individuals must know and apply spelling (orthographic) rules, including the exceptions, then practice and apply the rules to words they know orally as they encounter words in print. This creates a growing bank of words that are instantly recognizable once readers have connected each word’s sounds, spelling and meaning several times. This is very different from memorizing whole words. Connecting (“binding”) individual sounds to corresponding letters, then to the word’s meaning is critical. Once readers can read words they didn’t already know, reading becomes a way to learn new words.
    • The importance of language development, comprehension, knowledge and other skills is widely acknowledged by those who actually understand the research into how people learn to read. These skills and attributes must be a focus of attention even before reading instruction commences and should continue as children develop foundational literacy skills and throughout their school careers.  (See Scarborough’s iconic “Reading Rope” depicting much more than phonics and decoding, and including background knowledge, vocabulary, language structures, verbal reasoning and literacy knowledge.)
    • Language, vocabulary, knowledge and other skills must merge with automatic word recognition skills to produce fluent reading and comprehension, which then must be continuously supported and improved as students progress through school. Continued practice and development of skilled fluent reading is particularly critical for students most dependent on schools for successful literacy development. Neither word recognition nor language comprehension alone is sufficient for successful reading development. Both are essential.
    • All of the above is true for students in general, and especially true for vulnerable populations. Some students require additional consideration. For example, English learners in all-English instruction must receive additional instruction in English language development, such as vocabulary, since they are learning to read in English as they simultaneously learn to speak and understand it. 
    • English learners fortunate enough to be in long-term bilingual programs can become bilingual and biliterate. The processes involved in becoming biliterate are essentially the same in each language: Building on spoken language skills, foundational literacy skills link print to the sounds of the language, then to the oral language centers in the brain. Ongoing development of language, vocabulary, knowledge, and other skills and dispositions is essential for continued biliteracy development, as it is for literacy development in a single language or in any language.

    California has a long way to go if we are to develop useful policies around reading education for every student. All relevant parties, including teachers and parents, must have a voice in formulating such policies.

    But those voices must be well-informed. Misinformation and falsehoods must be eliminated from the conversation, replaced by clear understandings of the best knowledge we have.

    With fewer than half of California’s students — and even fewer English-learners, low-income students, and students with disabilities — able to read at grade level, can we afford to waste another day?

    •••

    Claude Goldenberg is Nomellini & Olivier Professor of Education, emeritus, in the Graduate School of Education at Stanford University and a former first grade and junior high teacher.

    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

  • Governor must OK expanded Cal Grant access for struggling students

    Governor must OK expanded Cal Grant access for struggling students


    The University of California, Riverside sign on University Avenue.

    Credit: UC Riverside / Stan Lim

    What does a Cal Grant signify for students embarking on their college journeys? For individuals like me, it embodies an unparalleled opportunity to traverse the realms of academia and pursue aspirations that once seemed shrouded in uncertainty due to the lack of financial resources. 

    Raised in a first-generation household where the prospect of higher education was esteemed but financially not realistic, attending college initially appeared impossible for me. When my parents discussed college, they explained that despite their desire for me to focus solely on my studies, it wasn’t financially feasible. My parents immigrated when they were 16 years old from a small Zapotec town in Oaxaca, Mexico. My dad works as a fry cook and my mom cleans houses; yet even with their long hours, they struggle to cover their own bills. They could only contribute about $20 every two weeks toward my education. 

    Qualifying for a Cal Grant made college feel like a possibility.

    Unfortunately, we know my situation is not unique. In my work in the financial aid office, where I field countless calls about Cal Grant eligibility, I have heard many students with similar predicaments voice their challenges. Many callers are desperate for assistance with steep tuition fees, housing fees and basic expenses such as food. Some students, even though their parents’ income surpasses the threshold to receive financial assistance, still struggle to afford tuition and rent and must work full time, which often results in missed classes and lower grades. There were numerous occasions where, after I had outlined the annual costs for a student, they opted to withdraw from the university due to the overwhelming expenses.

    But there is a beacon of hope for countless aspiring scholars who have long grappled with financial barriers: the Cal Grant Equity Framework, California’s commitment to reforming the Cal Grant to expand access to higher education. Approved in 2022, the framework is a set of strategies to promote equal access to grants for all eligible students, regardless of background or socioeconomic status. It does so by making it easier for students and families to understand what aid they’re eligible for, reducing eligibility barriers, aiming to cover the total cost of college, and more.

    But making this happen requires a dedicated push by California’s policymakers to fulfill their promise and fund the framework, communicate to students and families about this opportunity, and monitor its long-term effects.

    On May 30, the Legislature included funding in the budget plan to phase in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework — and thereby begin comprehensive Cal Grant reform. The Legislature’s proposal would restructure and streamline the Cal Grant program, aligning eligibility with federal standards; include a cost-of-living adjustment for the new Cal Grant 2 award that would go to community college students, and remove several barriers to access the new Cal Grant 2 and Cal Grant 4 (four-year college) award. The current 2.0 grade point average (GPA) requirement for community college students would still be in effect, but will be phased out over a four-year period. The current Students With Dependent Children grant would start at $3,000 for these newly eligible students, climbing up to $6,000 over the same four-year period as the GPA phase-out. All current Cal Grant and Students With Dependent Children recipients would see no reduction to their financial aid as they will all be grandfathered in during the Cal Grant reform phase-in period. Taken together, this proposal presents a low-cost option to begin the implementation of Cal Grant reform and expands crucial financial aid to students who need it. 

    By keeping Cal Grant reform in the final state budget this year, California is on a path to opening the doors of opportunity for an additional 137,000 students once fully implemented, further extending the transformative power of higher education to communities that have historically been marginalized. Among these beneficiaries, 11,000 Black students and 95,000 Latino students stand poised to embark on their academic journeys, armed with the tools and resources necessary to thrive in an ever-evolving world.

    These reforms come at a critical juncture when California students’ basic needs insecurity has reached alarming levels. While Cal Grants provide substantial assistance, it’s imperative to recognize that covering tuition alone falls short of addressing the needs of many students, who often struggle to secure housing and may lack sufficient access to food. Our universities also have a role to play by leveraging their institutional aid to cover non-tuition costs.

    Embracing the principles outlined in the framework, California is taking steps toward realizing the state’s vision of an educational system that is accessible and equitable for all. By actively addressing systemic inequities and providing robust support for underserved communities, California is paving the way for a brighter, more inclusive future in which the transformative power of education is fully harnessed.

    The Legislature has now made clear their commitment to putting a down payment on Cal Grant reform in the 2024-25 state budget and the final decision is in the hands of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

    Governor, we are counting on you to approve the Legislature’s path forward for Cal Grant reform and the futures of thousands of students.

    •••

    Carmen Abigail Juan Reyes is a 3rd-year Political Science, Law and Society major at the University of California, Riverside and the UC Student Association’s Fund the UC Vice Chair for the 2023-2024 academic year.

    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

  • We must champion our student parents

    We must champion our student parents


    San Diego State University, Hilltop Way.

    Credit: Jazlyn Dieguez / EdSource

    As we honor the dedication and love of father figures this June, it’s critical to spotlight a demographic in urgent need of support: student parents. Between balancing coursework with child care, these parents are pursuing better opportunities for themselves and creating a foundation to uplift their families. And they are doing so while facing dubious odds as they navigate a higher education system built without their unique needs in mind.

    More than one-fifth of undergraduate students in the U.S. — about 3.7 million — are parents. However, only 37% of student parents graduate within six years, compared with nearly 60% of their peers without children.

    In California, the proposed GAINS for Student Parents Act (Assembly Bill 2458) aims to address this disparity. The bill would adjust student parents’ cost of attendance to account for child care and improve data collection on student parents — two vital pieces of the puzzle for identifying and addressing the unique hurdles faced by students with children. 

    I recently spoke with a student parent on the cusp of graduation about his experience. Larry, 40, is raising nine children, six of whom are still at home. That’s a heroic feat for any father, but Larry also graduated from CSU Bakersfield with degrees in sociology and communications just in time for Father’s Day this year. His story, while inspiring, highlights systemic issues in higher education that make success stories like his much too rare.

    Larry sits at the intersection of many identities: father, veteran and previously incarcerated. Through these identities, he has experienced bias, stigma, and barriers to opportunities that others on campus take for granted. His experience is not unique. A national survey found that 40% of parenting students feel isolated on campus, and 20% feel unwelcome.

    “My children have dealt with a lot. I’ll have my kids on campus while I’m in class, but since I’m older, people think I should have things figured out. If there was someplace for them to be or something for them to do while they were on campus — what am I supposed to do when I don’t have child care?” Larry said.

    According to a New America survey, nearly 40% of student parents who stopped out of college cited caregiving and school work as significant reasons. However, the number of colleges with accessible on-campus child care has declined. When it does exist, long waiting lists and high costs are serious barriers. This exacerbates time poverty, forcing student parents to make sacrifices that impact their academic outcomes and their children’s future opportunities. Passing the GAINS for Student Parents Act is critical to addressing these hurdles. 

    California has made strides with legislation like AB 2881, passed in 2022, granting student parents priority class registration to accommodate their demanding schedules. But there is still much room for improvement. 

    The GAINS for Student Parents Act can help create an education system that uplifts families. The bill aims to standardize the financial aid process across institutions, making automatic adjustments to the cost of attendance for student parents, who are often first-generation students of color facing additional financial burdens not covered by existing aid programs. Since colleges and universities currently lack a systematic approach to identifying student parents, the bill would also improve the collection of data to facilitate more targeted support for these students.

    Co-sponsored by the Michelson Center for Public Policy, along with The California Alliance for Student Parent Success, Cal State Student Association, Generation Hope, and uAspire, this bill made it out of the Assembly and moved on to the Senate where it was passed in the Senate Higher Education Committee. It is now waiting to be heard in Senate Appropriations.

    When asked about graduation, Larry said: “I didn’t think I was going to finish this. I’m blown away. I’m graduating with a degree — what is that? A college degree!”

    Father’s Day graduation success stories like Larry’s should be more common and less fraught with tribulations. Student parents are resilient and strive to do what is best for their children. But as policymakers, leaders, administrators and practitioners, how can we build a more equitable system for parenting college students nationwide?

    By supporting student-parent success, we ensure the success of their children and future generations. So, this Father’s Day, how will you join the movement to ensure every student father and every student parent has the support they need to succeed?

    •••

    Queena Hoang is the senior program manager for Michelson 20MM Foundation’s Student Basic Needs Initiative. The initiative aims to tackle the real cost of college, especially the nontuition costs that place students in positions of housing insecurity, homelessness, food insecurity, and overall financial instability. 

    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

  • Add personal finance to what every California high school graduate must learn

    Add personal finance to what every California high school graduate must learn


    Tim Ranzetta, sponsor of the personal finance initiative and proponent of legislation that Gov. Newsom says he will sign, presents signatures for the initiative at the Secretary of State’s office in March. With him are state Controller Malia Cohen, center, and personal finance teacher Crystal Rigley Janis.

    Credit: Californians for Financial Education

    Soon, all California high school students will learn about college grants and loans, how tax rates work, the benefits of insurance and how interest high rates can blow your budget when you miss a payment on a credit card.

    This week, legislators rushed to pass legislation that would make California the 26th state to require a course in personal finance as a requirement for high school graduation as of 2030-31. A semester of personal finance must be offered in all high schools starting in 2026-27.

    “It’s often the students who need financial literacy the most that receive it the least. Parents of low-income students are far less likely to be financially literate themselves, which means they can’t pass that knowledge down to their children,” Kayvon Banankhah, a high school junior from Modesto, said June 19 during testimony at a Senate Education Committee hearing on the bill. “I truly believe this bill is one of the most impactful and feasible ways we can combat wealth inequality in our state.”

    Assembly Bill 2927 “will benefit countless future generations of Californians,” said Tim Ranzetta, a Palo Alto marketing and finance entrepreneur and crusader for personal finance instruction. As co-founder of the nonprofit Next Gen Personal Finance, which provides free curriculum and teacher training in personal finance education, he also financed a successful effort to place a nearly identical personal finance initiative on California’s November ballot.

    With a written assurance from Gov. Gavin Newsom that he’d sign the bill, Ranzetta agreed to pull his initiative from the ballot Thursday, the deadline for final changes to initiatives.

    The bill includes one significant difference, which was a response to arguments that imposing more graduation requirements, along with ethnic studies, another coming requirement, will further limit students’ course flexibility and schedules.

    AB 2927 will allow students to substitute personal finance for economics, a semester-long graduation requirement that seniors usually take together with civics, another requirement. The bill also will permit a district to substitute personal finance for another local graduation requirement. The initiative would have added personal finance and left economics intact.

    Economics teachers argued that they, too, support personal finance and often include it in their courses to personalize economic principles, but it should not be added at the expense of economics. They predicted that enrollment would plummet as a result.

    “Economics encourages us to think about our systems and address factors too large for any single individual to address, such as poverty, income, inequality, innovation and generational wealth,” said Joshua Mitton, chief programs officer for the California Council for Economic Education, during testimony on the bill. “Economics prepares students with additional skills that improve all decisions, not simply those that pertain to finance. And it is an integral part of social studies helping prepare a literate and civically engaged electorate.”

    Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, D-Los Angeles, said she felt conflicted because she supports ensuring students are getting individual knowledge that they need as a necessary life skill while also understanding “economic policies and the impacts on communities on a more macro level.”

    Assemblymember Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, compared the dilemma to adding another dish to an already full Thanksgiving table. “Sometimes you have to take something off the plate, right? There’s only so much time during the day, only so many electives. And so that’s one of the trade-offs that we made,” he said, adding that students will be able to take both economics and personal finance.

    The economics teachers council indicated a willingness to revise the economics course framework to include more personal finance content to meet a new requirement. However, Ranzetta insisted on a stand-alone personal finance offering as a condition for pulling his initiative.

    Under the bill, the Instruction Quality Commission, which reports to the State Board of Education, will create a curriculum guide and resources for a personal finance course by May 31, 2026.

    The course will include these topics:

    • Fundamentals of personal banking, including savings and checking accounts
    • Budgeting for independent living
    • Financing college and other career options
    • Understanding taxes and factors that affect net income
    • Credit, including credit scores and the relation of debt to credit
    • Consumer protection skills like identifying scams and preventing identity theft
    • Charitable giving
    • Principles of investing and building wealth, including pensions and IRAs, stocks, bonds, and mutual funds

    “For many of my peers, investing in stocks might as well be as complicated and convoluted as rocket science or calculus in our case,” said Banankhah. “The reality is they’re not being taught about this in school, and a lot of my peers don’t even know what they’re missing out on.”

    The bill will allow several years to train teachers in the new curriculum. Teachers who hold credentials in social science, business, mathematics, or home economics will be authorized to teach personal finance. The Commission on Teacher Credentialing can also establish supplementary authorization to teach the course.

    The bill and the initiative had widespread support in the business community, as well as from State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, the Association of California School Administrators, and the youth activism group GENup. The Legislature passed AB 2927 without opposition.

    At the hearing last week on the bill, Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, said that economic conditions were the driving force behind homelessness annually for 15,000 high school graduates. Those conditions, he said, “can come rather suddenly,” and personal finance education will provide tools for survival.

    “It almost seems like a high school student needs to be ready at any time to be fending for themselves these days,” he said. 





    Source link

  • Why civic engagement must be integrated into the school dashboard

    Why civic engagement must be integrated into the school dashboard


    State Superintendent of Instruction Tony Thurmond and Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero honored Kennedy High in Anaheim for its outstanding civic learning programs.

    Credit: Courtesy Anaheim Union HSD

    The State Seal of Civic Engagement, approved by the State Board of Education in 2020, marked a vital progression in developing students who are not only academically strong but also civically active and socially aware.

    However, the absence of this seal in the College and Career Indicators (CCI) of the California School Dashboard represents a missed opportunity — until now. Recently, the State Board of Education has requested that the California Department of Education incorporate the seal into the CCI. By incorporating it, we can incentivize schools to cultivate civic responsibility, enhance the relevance of education and elevate student voices. This initiative offers a powerful chance to foster active citizenship, connect learning to real-world challenges, and inspire students to engage meaningfully with their communities.

    The Seal of Civic Engagement, which is affixed to a student’s diploma or certificate of completion, should be added alongside other key indicators like the State Seal of Biliteracy, ensuring it receives the attention it deserves. With local criteria including a minimum GPA of 2.0 in all social science courses and the completion of a civic engagement project, schools would now be held accountable to a higher standard of civic instruction. The inclusion of the civic engagement seal on the California School Dashboard is not only a recognition of student accomplishments but also a catalyst for broader shifts in educational practices that prioritize civic education.

    Incorporating the California Seal of Civic Engagement into the school dashboard will encourage schools to shift away from traditional instructional models and move toward more student-centered approaches. One of the primary benefits is the emphasis on elevating student voice and agency. Rather than positioning students as passive recipients of knowledge, the seal incentivizes schools to create opportunities for students to take on leadership roles, participate in community-based projects and engage in civic dialogue, and ultimately give students a reason to vote and participate in our democracy.

    Student-driven learning experiences will become a central focus, allowing students to take ownership of their education and the role they play in society. This shift fosters not only a deeper understanding of democratic principles but also a sense of responsibility and empowerment. As students take on active roles in addressing real-world challenges, they develop leadership, critical thinking and problem-solving skills, all while becoming more engaged in their communities.

    The connection between civic engagement and student well-being is becoming increasingly evident through research at UCLA and USC. By embedding service learning into the curriculum, schools can create more holistic learning experiences that connect academic content with community service. Civic engagement projects offer students a sense of purpose and belonging, which can significantly contribute to their mental health.

    When students work on projects that address real-world problems, they not only learn about the issues but also engage emotionally and intellectually with the material. Service learning provides an avenue for students to apply what they’ve learned in the classroom to make a tangible impact in their communities, which can enhance their sense of agency and improve their emotional well-being. Schools will be encouraged to develop instructional models that prioritize these types of experiences, ultimately supporting the mental and emotional health of students in ways that extend beyond traditional academic instruction.

    One of the most exciting opportunities provided by the California Seal of Civic Engagement is the potential to integrate civic engagement with career exploration. Schools can align civic projects with career pathway programs, providing students with hands-on learning experiences that are directly related to potential college majors and career interests.

    For example, students interested in public service, environmental sustainability or health care could engage in civic projects that allow them to explore these fields while still in high school. By linking civic engagement with career pathways, schools not only make learning more relevant but also provide students with early exposure to future career opportunities. This shift in instructional focus ensures that students are better prepared for both post-secondary education and the workforce.

    A key feature of the Seal of Civic Engagement is its potential to drive instructional shifts that address pressing societal issues. With its inclusion in the dashboard, schools will be incentivized to create project-based learning opportunities that tackle local and global challenges such as climate change, affordable housing, health care access and mental health.

    By engaging in civic projects that address these critical issues, students develop the skills necessary to analyze problems, research potential solutions and implement action plans. These hands-on experiences prepare students to think critically and creatively, making their learning more meaningful and applicable to real-world contexts. The seal encourages schools to foster a learning environment where students can connect their education to the challenges facing their communities and the world.

    The Seal of Civic Engagement also promotes active citizenship by encouraging schools to design lessons that emphasize democratic participation, voter registration and civic responsibility. By embedding these democratic practices into the curriculum, schools can ensure that students are not only knowledgeable about the issues but also understand the importance of participating in democratic processes.

    This instructional shift prepares students to be informed and engaged citizens beyond graduation, helping to create a more active and participatory democracy. Students who understand the value of their voice and their vote are more likely to carry those values into adulthood, becoming lifelong advocates for their communities and society at large.

    By nudging schools to prioritize civic education, we can prepare a generation of students who are not only academically accomplished but also socially conscious and ready to engage with the challenges of the modern world. From promoting student well-being to encouraging career exploration and addressing critical societal issues, including the Seal of Civic Engagement in the state’s accountability system is a vital step toward creating a more equitable and empowered future.

    •••

    Michael Matsuda is superintendent of Anaheim Union High School District in Southern California.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • We must dig deeper to see which students are most vulnerable to bullying

    We must dig deeper to see which students are most vulnerable to bullying


    Credit: Pexels

    Bullying against California’s Asian American and Pacific Islander youth remains stubbornly high — affecting nearly 1 in 5 ninth and 11th graders, just above the statewide rate for all students.

    But we’re missing a big part of the problem if we continue to lump all Asian American students into a catch-all group. We’re not seeing which ethnic subgroups are most vulnerable. And what we can’t see, we can’t solve.

    We recently disaggregated statewide bullying data from the California Healthy Kids Survey, collected annually between 2015 and 2021, to see what might be hiding in plain sight within our state’s 10 Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. What we saw in the data was troubling.

    Nearly 1 in 3 Cambodian ninth and 11th graders were bullied based on their identity including race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. This is 1.5 times the overall Asian American and Pacific Islander rate. Hmong, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and Laotian youth experience similarly higher rates. If we aggregated these groups into a catch-all group, their elevated risks would disappear from sight.

    In another concerning trend for each of these ethnic groups, bullying rates initially declined between 2019 and 2020, but rebounded by 2021, often exceeding pre-pandemic levels. However, we don’t see this pattern for Asian American and Pacific Islander students as a whole. These rebounds are all the more critical to address because they may exacerbate the educational impacts of the pandemic. Research shows that bullying can erode academic achievement, increase absences and reduce mental health.

    There is some good news in the data. We saw reductions in bullying if students had supportive adults and stronger connections at school. We also discovered several school districts that provided resources specifically tailored to Asian American and Pacific Islander students and their families. For example, the San Francisco Unified School District’s Asian American and Pacific Islander Resource Guide addresses anti-Asian racism and offers lesson plans and curriculum that uplifts the experiences and contributions of Asian American and Pacific Islanders across the state.

    Based on our work, we recommend two starting points for schools and districts aiming to prevent and address bullying.

    First, schools serving Hmong, Laotian, Cambodian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander youth must figure out what is happening in these groups. If the statewide findings mirror local trends, then schools and districts should assess what kinds of anti-bullying resources are being channeled to these youth. Resources could include specific materials and outreach strategies tailored — culturally and linguistically — to students and families from specific Asian American and Pacific Islander groups.

    Second, schools need to assess how they are creating inclusive and welcoming environments where students can form strong connections with supportive adults. Enhancing the school climate benefits not only Asian American students, but all students.

    We know that schools are continually asked to do more with less. So we recommend that schools take stock of what they are already doing to build stronger connections rather than create something new requiring an entirely new set of resources.

    Many schools strengthen teacher-student connections through existing schoolwide programs, like Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports alongside curricula to support social and emotional well-being. Figuring out where there’s room for improvement within those existing programs is a step in the right direction. Schools should also evaluate how effective they are in intentionally building more positive connections for Asian American and Pacific Islander students.

    Making schools more inclusive so that bullying is an exception, and not the norm, will require dismantling monolithic assumptions we hold of Asian American and Pacific Islander youth, digging deeper into subgroup data, and devising ways to deepen meaningful connections with our students. Such an approach will also help ensure we more fully recognize the diversity and humanity of these young people across our state.

    •••

    Kevin Gee, Ed.D., is professor at the UC Davis School of Education and a faculty research affiliate with the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research. 
    North Cooc, Ed.D., is an associate professor of special education at the University of Texas at Austin.

    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

  • We must dig deeper to see which students are most vulnerable to bullying

    We must dig deeper to see which students are most vulnerable to bullying


    Credit: Pexels

    Bullying against California’s Asian American and Pacific Islander youth remains stubbornly high — affecting nearly 1 in 5 ninth and 11th graders, just above the statewide rate for all students.

    But we’re missing a big part of the problem if we continue to lump all Asian American students into a catch-all group. We’re not seeing which ethnic subgroups are most vulnerable. And what we can’t see, we can’t solve.

    We recently disaggregated statewide bullying data from the California Healthy Kids Survey, collected annually between 2015 and 2021, to see what might be hiding in plain sight within our state’s 10 Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups. What we saw in the data was troubling.

    Nearly 1 in 3 Cambodian ninth and 11th graders were bullied based on their identity including race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. This is 1.5 times the overall Asian American and Pacific Islander rate. Hmong, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and Laotian youth experience similarly higher rates. If we aggregated these groups into a catch-all group, their elevated risks would disappear from sight.

    In another concerning trend for each of these ethnic groups, bullying rates initially declined between 2019 and 2020, but rebounded by 2021, often exceeding pre-pandemic levels. However, we don’t see this pattern for Asian American and Pacific Islander students as a whole. These rebounds are all the more critical to address because they may exacerbate the educational impacts of the pandemic. Research shows that bullying can erode academic achievement, increase absences and reduce mental health.

    There is some good news in the data. We saw reductions in bullying if students had supportive adults and stronger connections at school. We also discovered several school districts that provided resources specifically tailored to Asian American and Pacific Islander students and their families. For example, the San Francisco Unified School District’s Asian American and Pacific Islander Resource Guide addresses anti-Asian racism and offers lesson plans and curriculum that uplifts the experiences and contributions of Asian American and Pacific Islanders across the state.

    Based on our work, we recommend two starting points for schools and districts aiming to prevent and address bullying.

    First, schools serving Hmong, Laotian, Cambodian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander youth must figure out what is happening in these groups. If the statewide findings mirror local trends, then schools and districts should assess what kinds of anti-bullying resources are being channeled to these youth. Resources could include specific materials and outreach strategies tailored — culturally and linguistically — to students and families from specific Asian American and Pacific Islander groups.

    Second, schools need to assess how they are creating inclusive and welcoming environments where students can form strong connections with supportive adults. Enhancing the school climate benefits not only Asian American students, but all students.

    We know that schools are continually asked to do more with less. So we recommend that schools take stock of what they are already doing to build stronger connections rather than create something new requiring an entirely new set of resources.

    Many schools strengthen teacher-student connections through existing schoolwide programs, like Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports alongside curricula to support social and emotional well-being. Figuring out where there’s room for improvement within those existing programs is a step in the right direction. Schools should also evaluate how effective they are in intentionally building more positive connections for Asian American and Pacific Islander students.

    Making schools more inclusive so that bullying is an exception, and not the norm, will require dismantling monolithic assumptions we hold of Asian American and Pacific Islander youth, digging deeper into subgroup data, and devising ways to deepen meaningful connections with our students. Such an approach will also help ensure we more fully recognize the diversity and humanity of these young people across our state.

    •••

    Kevin Gee, Ed.D., is professor at the UC Davis School of Education and a faculty research affiliate with the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research. 
    North Cooc, Ed.D., is an associate professor of special education at the University of Texas at Austin.

    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