اینترنت

برچسب: Proactive

  • We must be proactive in guiding the influence of artificial intelligence on education

    We must be proactive in guiding the influence of artificial intelligence on education


    Photo: Flickr/Rainer Stropek

    The topic of AI has already grown trite, but don’t let that fool you. It’s not a fad. It feels more akin to the “atmospheric river” storms hitting California — a phenomenon we didn’t hear or know about a few years ago that is now changing how we look at rain and mudslides and fires and insurance. The storms also bring life-giving water desperately needed in the West.

    Artificial intelligence is an atmospheric river impacting everything we do — including how teachers teach, how students learn — and creating opportunities to rethink and redesign the 200-year-old institution called public education. While some may view AI as a threat, I see it as breathing new life into education.

    With education at a critical juncture, the recent K-12 AI Summit in Anaheim provided education, policy, philanthropy, and industry leaders (from 31 states and over 100 districts) an opportunity to explore ways of integrating these new technologies into K-12 experiences for both students and teachers. Spearheaded by key partners such as the Anaheim Union High School District, Digital Promise, AI EDU, and UC Irvine, this summit landed on one resounding message: The powerful role of AI as an assistant and thought partner, not a replacement for teachers.

    AI technologies offer opportunities to personalize learning experiences, provide immediate feedback and identify areas where students need support. They complement teachers’ expertise, fostering a human-centered approach to education while enhancing learning outcomes. Other themes that emerged include the need to:

    Address equity and access disparities. As AI becomes increasingly integrated into classrooms, we must ensure that all students have equitable access to these resources. Participants stressed the importance of bridging the expensive AI digital divide, providing training for educators (but not in traditional top-down ways that edtech has delivered in the past), inclusive design practices in AI development, and addressing infrastructure gaps to promote equitable access to technology.

    Incorporate ethical and responsible AI use in education. Concerns about data privacy, algorithmic bias and the ethical implications of automated decision-making have grown. Participants emphasized the need for collaborative efforts to establish frameworks and guidelines for ethical AI use that foster transparency, accountability and equity as AI becomes a tool for enhanced curriculum and instruction and the reinvention of schooling where the walls of learning between school and community come down.

    Equip students with skills for an AI-driven economy. AI can help teachers assist students with technical proficiencies and mastering substantive knowledge, but also in critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity, and collaboration. Participants emphasized how AI can accelerate interdisciplinary teaching and hands-on learning to prepare students for the challenges and opportunities ahead.

    Share knowledge and collaborate. Partnerships between schools, universities, industry and community organizations are essential for developing AI curriculum, providing professional development and piloting initiatives to connect school experiences with career opportunities. 

    Sharing best practices and research findings fosters a community dedicated to advancing AI education. It is estimated that over 30% of current jobs require some type of AI skill set. This number will likely increase sharply over the next few years. School leaders who put their heads in the sand ignoring AI are committing a serious disservice to their students when it comes to competitiveness in the job market. 

    I believe that this “movement” in K-12 spaces could energize the vibrant community school initiatives happening across California where folks are rethinking schools and teachers are developing experiences for students to problem-solve local and national issues. The AI future holds immense potential to empower teachers, students, parents and community members around what is the purpose of school. By leveraging the community school movement, which is a relationship-centered, inclusive process that uplifts the voices, needs and assets of historically marginalized students and groups, advanced AI tools can help teachers develop more personalized instruction, promote equity, foster ethical use, and prepare students to thrive through civic engagement and discover real-world solutions to real-world problems. AI can also help us assemble evidence of student learning and teacher leadership as well as insights from community stakeholders in ways heretofore impossible. 

    The journey toward integrating AI into K-12 education is just beginning, with summit partners committed to continuing this crucial work. Therefore, let’s seize this opportunity to rethink and re-imagine what schools can be. As Martin Luther King Jr. once emphasized, “Our very survival depends on our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change.”

    •••

    Michael Matsuda is superintendent of the Anaheim Union High School District.

    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 must not punish districts for being proactive on early learning

    California must not punish districts for being proactive on early learning


    Transitional Kindergarten students in Garden Grove Unified School District benefit from a full day of high quality instruction.

    Courtesy: Garden Grove Unified School District

    According to a recent survey on education, overwhelming majorities of Californians think that preschool is important for student success in K–12 schools, and a strong majority supports state-funded programs such as transitional kindergarten for all 4-year-olds.

    We agree. This strong preference is echoed by families in our districts clamoring for their children to participate in transitional kindergarten (TK).

    California is on course to make TK a universal option for California families. Universal TK in our districts provides a full-day program with credentialed teachers and full-time aides. In 2021, the state laid out a five-year timeline to expand TK, gradually phasing in younger students each year, until 2025-26 — when all 4-year-old children will have the ability to enroll. 

    The intent of this foundational program is to meet a critical need for quality early learning and care for children at no cost to families. This allows parents to work full time to support their families, knowing that their children are receiving educational services that lay a foundation for academic success and support children’s development. Our districts serve distinct communities that have in common a high proportion of low-income students and significant numbers of English learners. As we shared information about the TK expansion with families, unsurprisingly, we heard from many who wanted to enroll their 4-year-old children, including young learners whose fourth birthdays fall outside the annually expanding eligibility window. 

    Our families urged us to accelerate the implementation of the early TK timeline and provide universal TK as soon as possible. 

    Recognizing our families’ significant need and the benefits of early learning, our districts decided to get ahead of the curve. We planned ahead for an accelerated two-year rollout of transitional kindergarten for students born through June 30. We knew we would not receive average daily attendance (ADA) funding for students whose birthdates fell outside the state’s rollout plan, but as we were planning well in advance of the 2023-24 school year, we were unaware of any penalties for early rollout as they did not exist at that time. We budgeted accordingly for the expansion of our enrollment and made plans to staff our TK classrooms months in advance of school starting.

    Our districts are now facing penalties in the millions of dollars for taking these proactive steps. And we are not alone. Based on a voluntary informal survey, seven of 28 districts in Orange County likely face penalties for accelerated implementation. We believe many districts across the state are similarly impacted, with some yet unaware of the fiscal hit for early expansion.

    Last July — months after districts started planning for the 2023-24 school year — Gov. Gavin Newsom signed education budget trailer bill SB 114, which created new statutory requirements for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years for school districts offering early transitional kindergarten. These changes included a maximum class size of 20 students and a 1:10 adult-to-student ratio, which is smaller than regular TK ratios. No additional funding was provided to meet these new requirements. The trailer bill imposed significant fiscal penalties for districts if they did not comply with the new provisions.  

    Districts like ours were not able to meet the lower class size requirements because the school year was weeks away from starting when this bill was signed. We had no time to change course. Many families in large urban districts like ours are most in need of TK due to families’ inability to afford private preschool and lack of free preschool options. Turning away families who had enrolled their child in TK and who desperately needed this care was unthinkable. 

    School districts plan and budget — inclusive of staffing, facilities and bargaining — at least nine months in advance of the next school year, which typically begins in early or mid-August. This includes communicating with families so they can make plans for their children, and enrolling students in January and February for the following school year. This is necessary so that schools will be appropriately staffed and classrooms are ready before the first day of school.

    The steep fiscal penalties we face for early enrollment in TK threaten our fiscal outlook in a budget year that is already anticipated to be lean.   

    There is an opportunity to make this right.

    The Legislature and Newsom administration can waive the current year, 2023-24 fiscal penalties and allow districts appropriate time to plan and implement requirements for 2024-25. Actions can be taken via legislation — Assembly Bill 2548, authored by Assemblymember Tri Ta, would waive the current school year penalties on districts offering early TK; another option is to enact the waiver for 2023-24 through budget trailer bill language. We, and more than 40 leaders of districts and county offices of education, are urging lawmakers to take action now.

    The districts that are impacted by penalties for early enrollment in TK serve high-poverty communities where free or low-cost full-day preschools are not available and parents cannot afford paid preschools.

    Making early TK available to as many families as possible is the right thing to do. Approving the waiver of the fiscal penalties for 2023-24 will save our districts from millions of dollars in penalties and protect our fiscal stability while we continue to make great strides in serving early learners. 

    •••

    Gabriela Mafi is superintendent of the Garden Grove Unified School District.
    John Garcia is superintendent of the Downey Unified School District

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





    Source link

  • Proactive campus policies, communication with students critical under ‘antagonistic’ federal actions, panel says

    Proactive campus policies, communication with students critical under ‘antagonistic’ federal actions, panel says


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUqMDwwZbO8

    How might federal funding to colleges change under the current federal administration? What to tell students who are worried their financial aid packages might be impacted by proposed changes to federal education funding? Is it possible to find common ground with President Donald Trump?

    A panel of education experts on Tuesday provided few definitive answers to those questions, leaving several unanswered, reflecting the uncertainty facing many in education today as they examine how the Trump administration’s approach to higher education may impact them.

    The panelists on an EdSource roundtable, “The future of California higher education under Trump,” described a barrage of executive actions — banning diversity efforts, withdrawing already budgeted funds, blacklisting colleges, canceling visas of international students and threatening college leaders — actions that Dominique J. Baker, associate professor at the University of Delaware, described as “antagonistic.”

    Baker stated that while many of the funding threats and proposed changes to education come from the executive branch of government, it’s important to consider the role of “the entirety of our federal apparatus” when discussing the future of higher education in this country, including Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Panelists agreed that proposed changes to student loan repayment options and to the federal Pell Grants, which are awarded to students with exceptional financial need, would be detrimental to many students.

    “If all of these policies went into place the way that they are currently written out, we would expect to see a stark drop in low-income students enrolling in higher education, whether that’s for the first time or students who had previously enrolled leaving higher education before they can earn any sort of credential or degree,” said Baker, in a blunt assessment of what could occur if the proposed changes to those programs are approved.

    Panelist Cristian Ulisses Reyes, a master’s candidate in higher education counseling and student affairs at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo who received the Pell Grant, said that threats to such funding are instilling fear in his peers.

    “Students aren’t just numbers and policy debates,” Reyes said. “We’re the ones that are being directly impacted.”

    Potential scenarios in case of cuts

    Gregory A. Smith, chancellor of the San Diego Community College District, said that of around $64 million in annual federal funds, about $43 million goes toward financial aid for students, much in the form of Pell Grants.

    The rest of the funds go to programming — about $3.5 million in yearly Title III grants from the federal Department of Education are geared toward the enrollment and retention of Hispanic students in STEM fields; the community college district is a Hispanic-serving institution.

    If threats to funding continue, Smith said the San Diego Community College District needs to be prepared for these scenarios:

    • The funding could be withheld altogether.
    • The funding may remain intact, but the staff who process the payments may have been laid off during recent staff terminations at the federal Department of Education, which could lead to funding delays.
    • “The most catastrophic version” of events, he said, would be if Congress amended Title III of the Higher Education Act, which would eliminate the Hispanic-serving institution’s STEM program.

    And if any of these scenarios were to occur, “[the program] may need to look different, it may need to be funded differently, but we’re certainly committed to continuing the work in any of those three scenarios,” Smith said.

    “Especially for a lot of the populations that we’ve listed — like low-income students, first-generation students — the administration’s attacks on student protections feel personal for many of us,” said Reyes, the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo master’s student.

    Reyes urged colleges and universities to be more transparent with their students about discussions and involve them in decisions being made. “Institutions shouldn’t be making decisions about us, without us,” he said.

    Relying on long-standing California policies

    California has decades of practice in implementing anti-affirmative action policies after approving Proposition 209 in 1996, the panelists noted, as a reminder that the state is protected from some of the changes being made at the federal level.

    “Legally, we’ve spent a lot of time figuring out what that looks like to not consider race in hiring, race in admissions, while still being equity-minded,” said Gina Ann Garcia, professor in the School of Education at UC Berkeley.

    Affinity graduation ceremonies, for example, have been criticized by the federal administration as part of its attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.

    Garcia, however, not only recently attended a cultural graduation, but said she feels supported by her university to say such graduations will not be canceled.

    “We’re talking about a state that’s been anti-affirmative action for 30 years, so we’ve had 30 years to get in compliance,” she said. “We’re not really the state you want to come for, if they’re smart.”

    Smith, from San Diego community colleges, echoed Garcia’s sentiments about feeling no fear when the federal Department of Education issued a “Dear Colleague” letter in February, threatening cuts in federal funding if schools did not eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

    The letter has not changed their DEI programming, Smith said, but it has led to fear in their school community, and they are afraid about the security of these programs.

    Smith also shared strategies his district has implemented to keep their students and staff informed, including:

    • Discussions on what DEI activities are offered and why.
    • Communicating that campus policies on civility, academic freedom, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech remain intact.
    • Proactive action by their board in adopting resolutions related to institutional protection from certain government threats.

    “It is really important in this moment that we say these are lines around which there is no negotiation, they are fundamental to higher education in America, they’re at the core of a free democratic society, and so there is no negotiation,” Smith said, echoing what Baker and others noted during their discussion. “We can’t give up any margin on it whatsoever at all without crumbling the entire foundation of our institutions.”

    While the panelists agreed on this point, they also warned of a future in which the state’s present-day policies on education may change. Upcoming state elections, they said, will determine the direction California heads in regardless of who is in power at the federal level.

    “We could swing in a few years … there are many red districts in California,” said Garcia. “It changes what happens as far as funding and commitments to education when we change political leanings.”





    Source link