برچسب: need

  • Jumping off rocks: Why kids need outdoor play to thrive

    Jumping off rocks: Why kids need outdoor play to thrive


    Nature is a kind of therapy at TimberNook ,where children play in the woods to heal behavorial issues.

    credit: TimberNook

    Jumping off rocks. Climbing trees. Hanging upside down. Spinning so fast it would make an adult dizzy.

    Meet Angela Hanscom, an occupational therapist who has come to the conclusion that children need adventurous activities to develop a healthy sense of body and mind. Not only do children need way more movement than our sedentary society allows them, she suggests, but they need precisely the kinds of movements that make adults gasp, if they are going to thrive. 

    Angela Hanscom, an occupational therapist who founded TimberNook.
    credit: TimberNook

    Often brought into classrooms to solve behavioral issues, Hanscom realized that children today do not get enough free play, exploration and exercise to allow them to focus properly in school. She began using movement as therapy, helping kids heal through spinning too fast on the merry-go-round and flying too high on the swings. 

    Hanscom, a mother of three, founded TimberNook in 2013. It began as an experimental therapy program in her own backyard before expanding to three woodland sites in Maine and spreading to franchises nationally.

    She recently discussed her philosophy of child development, which is also the theme of her book, “Balanced and Barefoot: How Unrestricted Outdoor Play Makes for Strong, Confident, and Capable Children.”

    How dangerous is it for children to be too sedentary?

    The current research is that kids sit in chairs for about nine hours a day. Being driven to school, being driven home from school, sitting for hours. And then they go home and they have homework. They might have some sports, but a lot of times they’re still in an upright position.

    What really needs to happen is kids need to spin in circles. They need to go upside down because inside the inner ear are these little hair cells, and when we move in rapid ways, the fluid in the ears moves back and forth, stimulating those hair cells and developing what we call the vestibular sense. If that’s underdeveloped because kids are not moving enough, then what happens is it can affect what we call sensory integration, which is basically organization of the brain so they can learn.

    Why is it important for kids to climb trees and jump off rocks?

    It helps you know where your body is in space so you can stay in your seat without falling out. That’s actually an issue. Kids are literally falling out of the chairs in school now. The way we treat that as occupational therapists is that we have kids spin in circles, and that helps them gain more body awareness so they can navigate their environments effectively. 

    Sometimes I’ll see a kid spinning in circles and I’ll hear an adult say, don’t spin. You’re going to get dizzy or get off that rock, you’re going to get hurt. But if we, as adults, keep them from moving in those ways, we have actually become the barrier to the neurological development that needs to happen so they can become safe in their environment. 

    credit: TimberNook

    Some may call your style of outdoor therapy radical and progressive, others might see it as common sense. How do you describe it? 

    I think of it more like a restoration. I don’t think this is a progressive idea. As an occupational therapist, for me, the true occupation of a child is play. And outdoor play is a really meaningful one for most of us. Most of us have fond memories of it, but it’s also really at risk. … That’s why it’s so therapeutic. That’s why a lot of therapists will train in this, because they see how healing it is. It’s giving children what you had, what they were always meant to have.

    It’s actually a very traditional approach, as opposed to something radical.

    Yes, we’re just trying to protect a tradition. We’re saying you can’t touch this. For instance, when we go into schools, teachers aren’t allowed to go into playtime and do teachable moments. We save that for later. This is their time where they have to figure things out. The children need that time. 

    Have you sort of recreated your own childhood?

    Growing up in Vermont, it was a bunch of kids, we’d have like five or six of us. But at TimberNook, it’s like 25 children out in the woods creating societies with natural materials. It’s a dream come true for kids. It’s outdoor play for hours. It challenges them to think creatively. 

    When did you start collaborating with schools?

    We started going to schools with TimberNook in 2017. That was a fascinating process. We’re in 10 schools now, but one in particular, Laconia Christian Academy, is really doing it right.  They started it five years ago, and they did it once a week for two hours, TimberNook time at school, and immediately saw benefits. So they increased it to four hours of woodland time. 

    It’s a very academic school. So when they saw the benefits, they took their half an hour of recess and went to an hour, on top of their four hours of TimberNook time. 

    Did increasing play time have an impact on academic performance?

    During the pandemic they saw no change in academics. If anything, they saw an increase. The headmaster said, we’re seeing joy, we’re seeing kids more resilient, stronger, able to figure out their own problems. So that’s been really interesting. We’re researching that now with the University of New Hampshire on how it’s changing the culture of schools. That study is just starting, but it’s really going to be fascinating, because I think it’s time to rethink what we’re doing in schools. 

    What lured kids away from playing outside? Screens? Or parental fear of dangers outside?

    One of the biggest factors is due to fear. Fear is something that we cannot see, but it is one of the major reasons why parents and schools aren’t providing enough outdoor play time. Fear that there isn’t enough time for play in school settings. The tendency to feel schools need to push more academics. Fear that children will miss out if not playing enough sports at a very really early age. This leads to overscheduling of children for sports. … Screen time is also another major factor. It is highly addictive and is replacing a lot of good old-fashioned playtime. The kind where children are digging in the dirt for hours, rolling down hills, developing the muscles and senses for healthy child development.

    For a lot of families, the pandemic meant forcing your kid to stare at a screen for hours for remote learning, and now it’s hard to walk that back.

    We’re in a bigger hole than we were before. I think the pandemic unveiled a lot of the issues and then just made it worse, unfortunately. 

    Are you optimistic that we can try to make that change as a society? 

    I really think people are waking up. I think the time is now, there’s so much interest, and everyone you talk to now knows that this is an issue.





    Source link

  • Stop shortchanging charters serving the highest need communities

    Stop shortchanging charters serving the highest need communities


    Students at Lodestar Charter School in Oakland.

    Courtesy: Lighthouse Community Public Schools

    While we wait for the governor’s budget — and a much leaner projection for public education funding — many district and charter school officials have started making significant cuts in preparation for the upcoming school year.

    Unfortunately, at a time when every dollar matters, charter schools serving some of California’s highest-need students are getting shortchanged.

    Critical dollars following each and every student is a fundamental construct in our state’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Schools and districts that serve a higher number of high-need students — English learners, low-income students, and foster youth — get additional funding in the form of supplemental grants for each student, along with concentration grants for schools where more than 55% of the student body is from at least one of those student groups. These funds are meant to follow the students and be invested in their programmatic needs.

    Unfortunately, the only exception is if these students attend a public charter school. 

    Current law caps the concentration grant funding for charter schools at the unduplicated pupil percentage of high-need students in the school district in which they are physically located. This restriction disproportionately affects students and families who attend charter schools in districts where the percentage of high-need students is lower than that of individual charter schools. For example, 82% of Oakland Unified’s students are eligible for the additional funding, but many charter schools in East Oakland serve student populations with unduplicated high-need student percentages ranging from 85% to 99%. Yet concentration funding for these charter schools is capped at 82% despite their serving a higher percentage of high-need students. This is also true for many charter schools in the LA area, in the wider Bay Area, as well as across the state. 

    A new bill seeks to correct this inequity by ensuring that dollars actually follow students to their schools.  

    Assembly Bill 1062 would enable charter schools serving greater percentages of high-need students than their district to apply for a waiver to receive concentration grant funding based on their actual student population, rather than being capped at the local district average. 

    Take for example Lodestar: A Lighthouse Community Public School in the Sobrante Park community in deep East Oakland. Like many communities impacted by the pandemic, the school’s demographics have shifted over the last five years. Today, Lodestar serves a student population where 98% of the students have high needs, including 47% English learners, 8% newcomers to our country, 17% qualifying for special education services, and 5% homeless. Should they be expected to meet their community’s needs at “82 on the dollar” while still being expected to meet the state’s stringent charter renewal criteria brought on by Assembly Bill 1505? (This 2019 law requires charters to outperform state averages on standardized tests and other measures to qualify for streamlined approval.) 

    Shouldn’t dollars that are directly tied to students and families follow them regardless of the school a family chooses for their child? 

    Many charter schools and charter management organizations that serve East Oakland exist to provide strong school choice options to students and families in historically under-resourced communities. It’s not surprising that one-third of Oakland students have selected charter schools. Over the last three years, Oakland’s charter high schools have had college readiness A-G completion rates for African American and Latino students that are significantly higher than at district high schools.

    Despite Oakland’s rich history of political activism for historically marginalized and under-resourced families, this clause in the funding formula prohibiting charter schools from fully accessing these funds has not been studied nor evaluated.

    The Assembly Education Committee has an opportunity to consider and address this funding inquiry. This committee, which includes progressive assembly members from the Bay Area and greater Los Angeles area, can advocate for public dollars following each student for their education and future impact.

    It’s time to ensure that state funding follows students equitably, so they are not penalized for choosing to attend a public charter school.

    •••

    Rich Harrison is CEO of Lighthouse Community Public Schools, which operates two K-12 public charter schools serving more than 1,600 students in East Oakland.

    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

  • What parents and students need to know about LAUSD’s cellphone ban

    What parents and students need to know about LAUSD’s cellphone ban


    Credit: Pexels

    The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) voted 5-2 to develop its new cellphone ban last August — placing the district more than a year ahead of the state’s requirement for districts to limit the use of smartphones by July 1, 2026.  Students should expect to have their cellphones off and tucked away starting on Tuesday. 

    District officials hope that keeping students away from their phones will both boost academic performance and support their mental health. 

    “Kids no longer have the opportunity to just be kids,” said school board member Nick Melvoin, who authored the initial resolution, in a statement released by the district. “I’m hoping this resolution will help students not only focus in class, but also give them a chance to interact and engage more with each other — and just be kids.” 

    Here’s what parents and students need to know about what lies ahead. 

    Where will students’ phones be kept?

    It depends on how each campus plans to implement the district policy. 

    In some schools or classrooms, students might simply have to turn off their phones and put them into their backpacks. In other schools, students will have to place their phones into a storage unit, including pouches that are sealed magnetically. 

    Are there any exceptions to the rule?

    Yes, students who need access to their phones for health-based reasons — or because they have an individualized education program or 504 plan — will be able to hold on to their devices. Students who need help with language translation will also be excused from the policy, along with students who have any other local needs. 

    What about cases where there is an emergency? 

    Whether students can access their devices during emergencies has been one of the larger concerns of parents and other community members.

    In short, if there is an emergency, students will be granted access to their devices if staff members decide it is safe for them to have them. 

    But, if a student asks to use their cellphone because they believe there is a potential threat, they won’t immediately be able to do so. Instead, the school will have to complete a threat assessment and develop a safety plan; depending on what they find, students may be granted access. 

    Can my child have devices other than cellphones? 

    No. The ban also applies to other devices that “provide similar smartphone functionality,” according to a district presentation. These devices include earbuds, smartwatches and smart glasses. 

    Will phones have to be tucked away all day — or just when learning is taking place?

    Yes, cellphones and similar devices will have to be tucked off and away throughout the school day, including during lunch and any other breaks. 

    Students will be allowed to use their phones on campus before and after school hours, however. 

    What are the ramifications for students if they don’t comply?

    Verbal reminders and referrals to a counselor or other campus designee would be given to students who are seen with a device. School administrators could also contact a student’s parent or guardian. 

    Will individual campuses be able to tweak things as they see fit? 

    Local School Leadership Councils throughout the district — composed of school personnel, parents, students and community members — will work to determine how best to implement the policy at their sites. 

    LAUSD’s policy requires each school to hold a Local School Leadership Council meeting while the cellphone policies are being implemented. 





    Source link

  • In the age of AI, students urgently need access to computer science

    In the age of AI, students urgently need access to computer science


    Credit: Alison Yin for EdSource

    For school leaders, artificial intelligence (AI) might feel like the latest shiny new thing to tackle in education. 

    With ethical questions to reflect on, it may be shiny, but computer science teachers will tell you it’s not new — it’s been part of computer science education for 60 years. 

    Computer science is foundational to learning about artificial intelligence, including thinking critically about AI’s ethics and impacts, data and algorithms, and equipping students to use technology responsibly. Like learning to drive a car, it’s good to know what’s under the hood, and be aware of the dangers, troubleshoot problems, know where you’re going and how to get there safely.  If technology is driving the future, how can we prepare students to do the steering if they do not learn computer science in school?

    Yet, only 5% of California students take computer science in high school­, something we need urgent action to change.

    A high-quality computer science education offers a new way of teaching in the currency students understand best: with their technological devices. Learning to think computationally — using algorithms to construct learning — can be a tool for engaging students to think critically about technology’s influence in making meaning of their world. Whether we like it or not, the choice facing us now is: either we teach students how to use technology safely and be justice-minded creators of it, or risk students’ harm of getting used and manipulated by it.

    Despite widespread use of technology, school leaders are overwhelmed with decisions about teaching with AI tools and teaching about artificial intelligence in the classroom. Research conducted by the UCLA Computer Science Equity Project affirms that administrators struggle to juggle their overflowing plate of responsibilities. But instead of seeing AI as yet another thing to fit into the school schedule — one of the main reasons more schools aren’t offering computer science — understanding how it’s part of a high-quality computer science education can help expand access to this foundational learning.

    California’s computer science (CS) strategic implementation plan serves as a road map to realizing the state’s vision that all schools offer computer science education and all teachers are prepared to teach it. To make good on that plan, the Legislature funded the Educator Workforce Investment Grant, to provide professional learning in computer science for thousands of California’s educators. This comprehensive model of professional development, Seasons of CS, equips educators with knowledge and skills to engage students with culturally responsive curriculum and pedagogy aligned with the state’s computer science standards (which classifies AI as a sub-discipline of computer science).

    California, a hub of innovation across industries, has made significant efforts to prioritize equity, access and engagement in computer science education, but remarkably, California lags behind the national average and 38 other states in the percentage of high schools offering at least one computer science course. As of 2021, just 34% of schools serving high proportions of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and Pacific Islander students offered computer science courses, compared with 52% of schools serving a greater proportion of white and Asian students. Despite student interest in computer science, not enough schools prioritize it because they are not held accountable for it by the state.

    Yet, exposure to computer science can impact college majors and increase earnings, especially for students of color who are underrepresented in computer science. 

    Educators need support bringing computer science to every student, regardless of their background, and school leaders have a role to play in bridging this gap. District and county-level supervisors can leverage state-level initiatives like the Math, Science, Computer Science Partnership Grant to build a pathway with more computer science class offerings that are integrated into other subjects.

    To ensure every student has access to this foundational knowledge that prepares them for college, careers and community engagement, every school should offer computer science education. This year, Assemblymember Marc Berman is re-introducing legislation that will add California to the list of states whose schools are required to offer CS. Assembly Bill 887 would require every high school to offer at least one course in computer science by the 2028-29 school year, with support for schools in rural and urban areas.

    Regardless of a student’s post-high school plan, computer science can help students grapple with the good and bad of technology, including effects of social media, biased algorithms that lead to inequitable outcomes, and controversial issues around privacy and disinformation that influences our democracy. All students should have access to the foundational learning computer science provides, building critical skills for our students’ future, no matter whether their future career is in tech or not.

    It’s not easy keeping up with the rapid change of technology’s newest tools, but one thing is clear: Computer science education can inspire students to become competent and confident navigating online life. Expanding access to opportunities to teach and learn computer science and ensuring all schools offer it, will help respond to the ever-changing landscape of technology and prepare students for our digital future.

    •••

    Julie Flapan is a researcher, educator and the director of the Computer Science Equity Project at UCLA Center X, School of Education and Information Studies and co-lead of the CSforCA coalition.

    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

  • California teachers urgently need training in how to respond to, and cope with, trauma

    California teachers urgently need training in how to respond to, and cope with, trauma


    Child care providers discuss trauma at a training at BANANAS in Oakland.

    Credit: Zaidee Stavely/EdSource

    We live in stressful times. This, coupled with the high rate (80.5%) of children experiencing at least one adverse childhood experience by adolescence, necessitates that schools use trauma-informed practices in their daily routines.

    Trauma-informed practices, or TIPS, involve understanding the potential impact of trauma exposure on a child, recognizing signs and symptoms of trauma exposure and responding in a way that supports healing and may build resilience. I

    nteractive trainings help educators know how to respond to students with adverse childhood experiences, as well as what to do when a collective crisis happens, such as a natural disaster or school shooting. Educators learn and practice trauma-informed discipline, how to help regulate a stressed child, and build systemwide practices supporting student and teacher well-being.

    The California Office of the Surgeon General recognized the need for trauma-informed practices training and created an interactive online program for teachers and schools called Safe Spaces. However, it is not clear how many school districts and educators have accessed the program.

    A large majority of teachers (64%) want to learn how to better support students affected by trauma, according to a survey of nearly 15,000 educators by the American Psychological Association (APA). They also need support for coping with their own exposures to trauma. Teachers are often affected by the same events as their students — the pandemic, natural disasters, school shootings. And the APA survey shows educators must also contend with violence by students and parents.

    Although numerous online resources exist, including those from the National Center on Safe and Supportive Learning Environments and the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, there are barriers to overcome to get trained.

    Our research team asked 450 of our local educators during the pandemic about why they might not have been using these resources and found that, despite being highly motivated, teachers faced limited energy and time, some perceived a lack of administrator support, and some felt stigma about needing resources to manage their own emotions. 

    California needs to do more to equip teachers and administrators on how to cope with trauma in their students and for themselves.  

    One of the best ways to embed trauma-informed practices into our school systems is to start with the programs that train our future teachers. The National Association of State Boards of Education noted that only 16 states require some form of trauma-informed practices training, although the content and type of training varies.

    In California, this type of training is one way a future teacher can meet professional standards, but it is not required. Perhaps if it were, future teachers would begin their careers recognizing signs of possible trauma reactions in their students and know how to approach it with a mindset of “What happened to you?” instead of “What is wrong with you?” They would have tools to support their students with coping and handling emotions, and know when to refer for additional supports.

    Teachers already in the classroom also need trauma-informed training, but it’s often lost in the many competing demands districts must balance. Some districts can offer professional development days for their teachers where in-person trauma-informed practices training is available. If more districts could offer this, teachers would have dedicated time to learn the current best practices for supporting students with adverse childhood experiences or with the initial aftermath of school crises, such as psychological first aid for students and teachers.

    They would learn how to support the safety of students with disabilities in emergencies through Especially Safe, which was developed by parents and educators who lost students in the Sandy Hook school shooting. Especially Safe offers free resources to help schools better plan, prepare and teach safety in a way that is accessible to all students.

    Training teachers in trauma-informed practices is not enough if they are in a school environment that is not prioritizing this; therefore, training of administrators is essential as well. And administrators have their own questions about how to support the whole school community following crises and other events. Therefore, it is best if everyone in the school community gets this training.

    Although many organizations offer trauma-informed resources and trainings to schools, we need to scale up these programs to reach all schools and teacher education programs. Funding must cover not only program costs, but also dedicated teacher and administrator time to take these programs as part of professional development days.

    Until tragedies make the news, better training in trauma-informed practices may not make the top of the list of priorities, but we need to change this.

    •••

    Erika Felix, Ph.D., is a professor of clinical psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara and a Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project.

    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

  • Teachers need more prep time

    Teachers need more prep time


    Credit: Allison Shelley / American Education

    Yesterday — like every day last week — I had just 27 minutes to plan my lessons and grade my fourth-grade students’ work. In reality, I spent that time signing in to the office, getting my mail, setting up breakfast for my students, and calling a parent about their child who had been absent four days in a row. I had no time left to prepare for my first lesson of the day.

    This isn’t just an occasional bad day — it’s a constant reality. Survey results from recent years found that teachers nationwide identify “more planning time during the school day” as one of the most critical changes districts could make to support their teaching.

    Yet, in my district, Los Angeles Unified, the second-largest school district in the nation, elementary teachers have only 27 minutes of prep time — a staggering 20 minutes less than the national average of 47 minutes, which is still too little. This gap isn’t just a statistic; it’s a crisis that directly impacts our ability to plan, collaborate and provide the essential support our students deserve.

    As a 20-year educator and 2017 Teacher of the Year, meeting the needs of every student is my mission. However, a lack of prep time makes it nearly impossible to fulfill that commitment. Many of my students face behavioral challenges that require additional support — particularly those from our highest-needs neighborhoods. But without time to prepare, access resources or collaborate with colleagues, we are failing students before they even begin their day.

    Beyond the individual toll of teacher prep time, the schedule also isolates educators. Teacher collaboration is essential for strong schools, and while I value learning from my colleagues and offering guidance to new teachers, my district’s prep time policy leaves no space for additional collaboration, like mentoring, sharing best practices, or building a community. Burned-out, unsupported teachers cannot create thriving classrooms.

    The new reading program in LAUSD exemplifies the intense time demands on teachers. Each 90-minute lesson requires 30 to 40 minutes of planning — every day, five days a week — for just one subject I teach. This leaves little time for other critical tasks like grading, providing feedback or planning small group instruction. To keep up, I’m forced to spend hours working from home each week, sacrificing time with my family.

    Teachers should not have to choose between their families and students. Yet, a recent survey by Educators for Excellence, “Voices from the Classroom 2024“, found that the second-biggest reason teachers plan to leave the profession is that they take on too many responsibilities outside of paid hours, including lesson planning and grading at home. For teachers in high-need schools, this was the most significant reason — even more important than concerns about low pay.

    At the same time, the Nation’s Report Card (NAEP) 2024 scores show little to no improvement in learning since the pandemic, particularly for LAUSD students. Hispanic students — who make up 80% of the district’s student body — continue to lag behind, with an average 31-point gap compared with white students across all grade levels and subjects.

    Addressing the root causes — including insufficient prep time — is critical for districts to close these gaps and keep teachers in classrooms.

    The future of our students depends on a system that prioritizes educator support and adequate prep time. Without action, schools risk losing more talented teachers and leaving students further behind. By demanding more prep time, we can create a stronger, more collaborative school environment — one where teachers stay, students thrive and outcomes improve. The clock is ticking.

    •••

    Misti Kemmer is a 20-year LAUSD educator, 2017 Teacher of the Year, and an active member of Educators for Excellence – Los Angeles, a teacher advocacy organization.

    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