اینترنت

برچسب: students

  • Why are students often ineligible for homelessness funding? | Quick Guide

    Why are students often ineligible for homelessness funding? | Quick Guide


    Hygiene supplies and clothing for families in need at the Family Resource Center in Monterey Peninsula Unified.

    Credit: Betty Márquez Rosales / EdSource

    With schools adjusting to the end of historic Covid-era federal funding for students experiencing homelessness, much of their focus has shifted to trying to sustain the programming they implemented and keep the staff they hired with those pandemic relief funds.

    California has allocated significant levels of state funding toward addressing homelessness, and there are other streams to help cover students’ needs, but students experiencing homelessness are not always eligible.

    “I think particularly in California, unsheltered, visible homelessness is in the news and is a political issue, but people aren’t talking about children. State policymakers in particular are not talking about this crisis, and certainly not anywhere near the level that they are about adult homelessness,” said Barbara Duffield, executive director of youth homelessness nonprofit SchoolHouse Connection.

    This quick guide, a follow-up to a recent EdSource story — “Looming end of historic student homelessness funding has arrived” — explains why students are not always eligible for all homelessness funding and the challenges this presents to the school staff tasked with supporting students experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

    Why are homeless students eligible for some streams of homelessness funding but not others?
    Some of the state funding that California has funneled toward preventing and addressing homelessness is targeted toward youth. The state’s Homekey program, for example, has resulted in millions of dollars toward the building or conversion of housing for youth who are homeless or on the verge.

    But most students experiencing homelessness are not always eligible for state or federal funding, and that often comes down to how homelessness is defined.

    There are two definitions: one outlined by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development and the other by the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act.

    The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, a federal law implemented decades ago to ensure students experiencing homelessness are identified and supported, defines homelessness, in part, as “children and youths who are sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar reason.”

    Among homeless liaisons and other school staff, this is often referred to as being “doubled-up,” and that is how the majority of homeless youth in California and nationwide live.

    But the more common definition of homelessness used outside of school settings is the one set by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, and that definition does not include people living in doubled-up environments.

    “You’ve got all these kids living in precarious doubled-up situations that have no way to get any type of services because they technically don’t meet HUD-related pieces,” said Jennifer Kottke, the homeless liaison for the Los Angeles County Office of Education.

    Some children are indeed living unsheltered, but most are out of sight. Given that reality, homeless liaisons say they are best equipped to address the impact of homelessness among their students because schools are where families experiencing homelessness are more likely to already be.

    In other words, liaisons are meeting those families where they are, and this rings particularly true for liaisons working in rural parts of the state.

    “In rural areas, schools are where you’ll find families. We don’t have big drop-in centers and resource centers where families would be showing up for services. They’re out there in unpopulated areas, but they’re coming to school, so school is this kind of avenue to do outreach,” said Meagan Meloy, the homeless liaison for the Butte County Office of Education.

    What forms of funding are available for students experiencing homelessness?
    There are several streams of funding for students experiencing homelessness, though they are either short-term, one-time grants, limited in amounts, or not set aside specifically for this population of students.

    The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act’s Education for Homeless Children And Youth grant is a steady stream of funding, for example, but at $129 million nationwide, it does not reach all schools that enroll students experiencing homelessness. California received $13.9 million for the 2021-22 school year, which was distributed across 6.4% of the state’s school districts via a competitive grant process.

    There is also the state-funded Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) program which sets aside a percentage of funds for youth experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The set-aside for youth uses the McKinney-Vento definition of homelessness, which broadens eligibility of students who live doubled-up, though it restricts the ages to 12- to 24-year-olds.

    Meloy applied and received that grant for rural Butte County, which will provide funds over three years. Her team’s plan is to pilot a program where multiple agencies team up to reach out to homeless families through the region’s schools and provide case management to guide them through housing services and prevent them from entering into unsheltered homelessness. Her team plans to support younger students through their parents.

    “We appreciate it … and it’s one of the strategies we’re using but, again, it’s not going to be a comprehensive fix to address what I see as a huge need in our state,” said Meloy, referring to student homelessness.

    Even if schools are able to tap into those funds, they are set aside exclusively for housing and not for services such as transportation, food assistance, clothing, school supplies and more. “Those services are equally important to housing, especially if youth are going to recover from their homelessness and be successful in school as a long-term prevention strategy,” Duffield said.

    Additionally, Butte County is likely to be an exception in this use of state funding, according to Duffield, “because additional licensing is required for housing providers to serve minors.”

    Schools are also required to set aside dollars from the state’s education funding formula to support high-needs students. That funding requires first identifying students who are homeless — the very effort school staff say needs to first be funded. That funding is also distributed across all high-needs students, not just those experiencing homelessness.

    “The thing is that the work is intense, but the funding doesn’t match, so then you end up undercounting because you don’t have the time to do the proper identification process,” said Kottke, who said the federal housing department should be working with schools, given the evidence that education is a preventive measure against homelessness.

    Other streams of funding can be used to support students experiencing homelessness, though they all run into similar challenges. And, none of them get anywhere near the level of funding that liaisons received for students experiencing homelessness during the pandemic through the American Rescue Plan-Homeless Children and Youth, or ARP-HCY.

    “These California funds still are no substitute or replacement for the scale of ARP-HCY, or what California is spending on its adult homeless population,” said Duffield. “This is where the real disparities lie.”

    What if liaisons keep piecing together various streams of funding?
    Liaisons say that the nature of their funding model can be tedious and time-consuming. Since there isn’t one source of funding that can by itself cover services this population of students, liaisons say they spend much of their time doing what they call “braiding” of grants and other funding streams.

    “Our department here … is almost all grant-funded. For me, it’s kind of a way of life,” said Meloy.

    An example of braiding is what Meloy did with the HHAP funding.

    “It’s hard because it takes a lot of administration work and braiding funding is beautiful if you can figure out how to put a square peg into a round hole,” said Kottke, “but sometimes braiding funding isn’t what it’s chalked up to be, and so sometimes it’s hard to do.”

    The braiding of funding also makes it more difficult to track and assess the use of funding across all schools and counties.

    What further complicates this funding model, plus the time required to identify students as homeless, is that liaisons are rarely, if ever, solely focused on this specific student population. Most often, the time they can spend on supporting students who are homeless is a small percentage of their work.

    A quick scroll through the list of liaisons statewide highlights their widespread titles: director of operations, superintendent, manager of student information systems, truancy mediation liaison, office manager, and more.

    What do liaisons say they would do with dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness?
    For Meloy, who lives in a county particularly susceptible to wildfires, the lack of dedicated funding means her team cannot prepare for the now-expected rise in student homelessness that happens when families are displaced due to fires.

    “That need isn’t going away,” said Meloy. “It feels like we’re kind of getting through the Covid disaster, but we’re still facing these other disasters that impact housing.”

    In Monterey County, liaison Donna Smith would like to offer more transportation options to students experiencing homelessness. She also services foster youth in her county, and she’s able to contract with a company to drive foster youth to and from school.

    Students who are homeless can either receive a bus pass or their parents can be reimbursed for gas; families don’t always have vehicles, however, or children might be too young to ride the bus by themselves. “But there’s not a lot of options outside of that. That’s just one kind of thing that I wish we had: better transportation for these kids to and from school that is paid for.”

    Kottke in L.A. County also said she would like to focus more on preventive strategies. “A lot of the work we do is very reaction-based. I’ve always been preventative, so I think that’s one of the pieces that I spend a lot of time in this work fighting for,” she said. “We should be preventionary, not reactionary.”





    Source link

  • All California students should be empowered to be ready for UC and CSU admission

    All California students should be empowered to be ready for UC and CSU admission


    Making Waves Academy, a charter school in Richmond, tries to instill a college-pursuing attitude while leaving room for kids to enter a career after graduation if they wish.

    Courtesy: Making Waves Academy

    There is a troubling trend in California that makes affordable and quality higher education — which is meant to be a public good — not even an option for most students, particularly Black and Latino students. It’s the inequity of students completing the “A-G” courses required for admission to the University of California and California State University systems. More than half of all students, and over two-thirds of Black and Latino students, did not meet these requirements — too often because the courses were not offered or the students didn’t know they were needed. This means they are ineligible for admission into California’s public universities.

    As CEO of a grade 5-12 charter school in Richmond, I believe the A-G requirements should be seen as an asset rather than an obstacle for California schools. The requirements are transparent and attainable. They help prepare students academically, support eligibility for California’s public universities, and open up a variety of opportunities for students’ future career pathways. Ultimately, this helps alleviate inequities in education, the workforce and the economy.

    At our school, our goal is that 100% of our students are ready for college while also embracing, supporting and celebrating students who want to pursue early post-secondary career options. Within the Class of 2024, 95% of our graduates are pursuing higher education, and within that group, 71% are planning to attend University of California or California State Universities campuses. Among our 1,000 or so fifth through 12th graders, 99% are students of color, and 85% are from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.

    Here is how school and district leaders can build a culture around supporting students in meeting the A-G requirements.

    Align your curriculum to the A-G requirements

    Students don’t know what they don’t know. And they don’t always know there are specific course requirements to be eligible to attend public universities. It is our responsibility as school leaders and systems to align our curriculum to the A-G requirements and remove that burden on individual students.

    The good news is that this is not a very heavy lift. In California, students are already required to take a variation of core academic subjects listed within the A-G requirements, such as English, history, science and math. Making sure students are taking a lab science class, a third year of a world language, or a math up to Algebra II are small but meaningful adjustments to their course schedules that would help more students meet the A-G requirements, thus meeting eligibility requirements for UC and CSU campuses. 

    Get creative to track individual students

    For every college and career counselor in California, there are 464 students. It’s no wonder 56% of California students experience barriers to meeting the requirements. Instead of relying solely on counselors, make the most of advisory period. Advisory period teachers can reinforce college readiness and help track individual students’ progress on the A-G requirements. Our advisory teachers track the same cohort of students from ninth through 12th grade. With this support, students can also practice their agency by being actively involved in mapping out their courses and paying attention to their post-graduation plans, which serves them well whether they ultimately pursue college or not.

    Be inclusive of non-college-going students

    It is important to note that a culture that embraces the A-G requirements and college readiness and a culture that embraces a continuum of college and career options can and should live side by side. It is a both/and approach not an either/or approach. Allow for both. When you align to the A-G requirements, you ensure that students meet the “floor” for college eligibility. Build further understanding with students on the continuum of attainable pathways. For example, the A-G requirements can also align with career technical education, which integrates core academic courses with technical and occupational ones. This way, students can explore career interests and still remain eligible for college. Knowing the range of options available means students can choose what’s best for them.

    Communicate early and often with parents and families 

    California has some of the world’s best and most affordable opportunities for higher education. Tragically, many students and families don’t know these opportunities are attainable. The importance of the A-G requirements and information around college affordability must be communicated to students and families early and often. Ideally, regular updates and information sessions start with students and families in middle school. For example, we set clear expectations with students and families at fifth grade orientation. We talk to them about the A-G requirements being built into our curriculum and about our school culture around college readiness. Time and time again, we see ecstatic students and families when they realize college is accessible and attainable.

    It’s our responsibility as school leaders or school systems to provide the necessary courses and support to bridge the inequities between high school to college and careers. The logistical challenges are surely outweighed by the opportunities: more racial representation in higher education, an increase in economic mobility for students from low-income backgrounds, and a more diverse and educated workforce.

    •••

    Alton B. Nelson Jr. is the CEO of Making Waves Academy in the Bay Area city of Richmond.

    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

  • Q&A: Big drop in enrollment of low-income undocumented students at California’s public universities

    Q&A: Big drop in enrollment of low-income undocumented students at California’s public universities


    People rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019 as oral arguments are heard in the wake of President Donald Trump’s decision to end the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The University of California brought the case to the court.

    Credit: AP Photo/Alex Brandon

    The number of low-income undocumented students newly enrolled in the University of California and California State University plummeted 50% between 2016-17 and 2022-23, according to a study released this month.

    The study by William C. Kidder of the UCLA Civil Rights Project and Kevin R. Johnson of the UC Davis School of Law comes at a moment of heightened debate about policy proposals aimed at defraying the cost of college for undocumented students, who are not eligible for federal Pell Grants and often lack legal work permits. Gov. Gavin Newsom on Sunday vetoed Assembly Bill 2586, which would have cleared the way for undocumented students to take on-campus jobs at the state’s public colleges and universities.

    “Given the gravity of the potential consequences of this bill, which include potential criminal and civil liability for state employees, it is critical that the courts address the legality of such a policy and the novel legal theory behind this legislation before proceeding,” Newsom wrote in his veto statement. “Seeking declaratory relief in court — an option available to the University of California — would provide such clarity.”

    Johnson wrote in an email that Newsom’s veto of AB 2586, also called the Opportunity for All Act, “will make it more difficult for undocumented students to attend public universities in California.” 

    “I hope that the University of California and California State University systems will consider ways to help financially support undocumented students,” he wrote. “Scholarships, fee remissions, and the like must be considered if lawful employment, as would have been permitted by the Opportunity for All Act, is not possible.”

    Since 2012, the federal program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, has allowed certain undocumented immigrants to temporarily work legally in the U.S. and live without fear of immediate deportation, but the program has ceased processing new applicants due to legal challenges.

    “When we think that we’re seeing a decrease in enrollment in California, CSU and UC, with all the support provided by the university and by the legislature in terms of allowing undocumented students to pay resident fees, you have to imagine that in other states it’s much worse in terms of drop off in enrollment of undocumented students,” Johnson wrote.

    Johnson and Kidder’s study seeks to fill an important gap in California policymakers’ understanding of how undocumented student enrollment has changed over time. 

    The state’s colleges and universities historically have avoided collecting official data on undocumented students, mindful of those students’ vulnerable legal status. To solve that problem, Kidder and Johnson examined the number of students awarded a Cal Grant under the California Dream Act, a state financial aid program for which low-income undocumented students are eligible. The numbers likely represent a subset of all undocumented college students at Cal State and UC campuses, since they do not include students who applied for a Dream Act award but were not eligible or who were offered an award but didn’t accept it.

    Kidder and Johnson find that Dream Act awardees at CSU and UC appear to have peaked around the 2018-19 and 2019-20 school years.

    At CSU, they found that new and returning Dream Act awardees fell 30% between 2019-20 and 2022-23, outpacing an almost 7% decline in other Cal Grant awardees at CSU during the same period, as well as falling undergraduate enrollment within the university system.

    The story was similar at UC campuses, where Dream Act awardees dropped by roughly 31% between 2019-20 and 2022-23, a period in which other Cal Grant awardees only dipped 1%.

    Kidder and Johnson tie the decline in Dream Act awardees to the demise of the deferred action program. The Trump administration moved to rescind the program in 2017, and subsequent efforts to revive it have been stymied by court decisions that allow current DACA recipients to renew work permits but block new applicants. As a result, most current undergraduate college students are not eligible to apply for DACA and the youngest current DACA recipients are about 22 years old.

    That said, the study does not use the kind of granular data that would allow the researchers to test explicitly whether the rescission of DACA is causing the decline in Dream Act awardees. Previous research has found that the program boosted graduation rates among undocumented high school students and that harsher immigration enforcement correlated with lower academic achievement for undocumented K-12 students. Kidder and Johnson cite those studies — as well as the similar results they observed across UC and CSU — as pointing toward the likelihood that an external force is behind declining Dream Act awardees. 

    Supporters of AB 2586, the bill Newsom vetoed this weekend, argued that the UC system is not subject to a federal prohibition on hiring undocumented workers because it is part of the state of California. Johnson is among 29 scholars to sign a legal memo building that case, which was published by the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy.

    Neither CSU nor UC took a formal position on the bill. But in a letter to lawmakers, the UC expressed concerns that hiring undocumented students could jeopardize “billions of dollars in existing federal contracts and grants.” The university system also said the bill could expose students, their families and UC employees to criminal or civil prosecution. In July, CSU officials similarly said the bill rested on an untested legal theory that could result in litigation against the system. 

    EdSource recently spoke with Kidder and Johnson to discuss their forthcoming article in the Journal of College & University Law. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

    What do we understand about the impact that DACA had on undocumented high school students, and what has happened since the Trump administration began challenging the Obama-era program?

    Johnson: The data that we were able to put together shows that, basically, the dismantling of DACA —-the refusal to accept new applications – is having an impact that one might expect. While DACA created some kind of stability, initially, in high school students and boosted college enrollments, its dismantling has had the effect of reducing undocumented enrollment and destabilizing students and, the way I’d put it, it’s making them wonder whether they have a future in this country. …

    It’s a wake-up call in all kinds of ways for colleges and universities to claim that they want to be open, be more accessible.

    What did you find when you looked at how many students at Cal State and University of California campuses received California Dream Act grants in recent years?

    Kidder: New California Dream Act awardees, both freshmen and students, had declined by half between 2017 and 2023, which is just a remarkable drop. … I was a little surprised at the scale of the decline, just given the situation in California and how it’s different from Texas or Florida or some other states where there’s greater opposition and hostility to supporting undocumented students.

    Do you see the same pattern of decline in awards among California residents who are citizens and who received Cal Grants during this period?

    Kidder: We tried to adopt what social scientists call a “difference in difference” methodology. That’s where you study the rate of change over time with one group compared to a matched comparison group. 

    So, we looked at low-income students who are not undocumented, primarily U.S. citizen residents of California — who are going to the same high schools; the same age group; similar, but not exactly the same, income levels; very similar academic profiles in terms of high school GPAs, etc. We did that to confirm that there weren’t other systemic effects on the California budget and economy that might be unaccounted for outside factors. 

    What we found is that other Cal Grant students, both within UC and within CSU, were flat at the same time that both the undocumented students at UC and CSU had this 50% decline. So it did shore up our inference that there was something uniquely challenging in the current environment for undocumented college students.

    You write that back in the 2016-17 school year, 56% of new Dream Act students attended a UC or Cal State campus, while the remainder attended a California Community College campus. By the 2022-23 school year, that dynamic had flipped: 40% of those Dream Act students attended UC and Cal State, and the rest attended community college. What do you make of that shift?

    Kidder: We did include in the data that we are capturing not just new freshmen, but also new entering transfer students. It is of concern that somehow, in recent years … it’s not translating into those (community college) students still having higher education access to a university education through the transfer pathway. There’s a blockage there, and that was clear in the data. 

    From a public policy level, that’s troubling, given that these are students, many of whom have been living in California since age 5 or age 8, and the California taxpayers and the system of California laws has invested in their future. For those students to be blocked in their pathway lowers their future life chances. 

    State university officials can’t control what happens with DACA. If educators at UC and Cal State are concerned about losing undocumented students, what could they do to encourage those students to enroll and help them to stay enrolled?

    Johnson: I think one of the assumptions in the question is that there’s limited possibilities for what the university could do. It was the University of California that brought the lawsuit that ended up in the Supreme Court stopping the rescission of DACA, and that was a controversial move in some quarters. But I do think the university– legally, politically and otherwise — is a powerful advocate for students, and can and has, at various times, pushed for reform and change. 

    I think that the university, if they’re really committed to undocumented students, can support things like the Opportunity for All Act, which has been basically briefed and set on their desk, showing that it might be legal for the University of California to allow its students, all students, to be employed by the University of California. …

    I think that the university could also think about, “How do we create more scholarships and funding for undocumented students?” If we’re really designing, or we really want to have, a university that serves all, shouldn’t we commit ourselves to enrolling all students who we admit and making it possible for them to attend? 

    Then the question is, how you raise money, how you distribute that money, how you create scholarships. The University of California often takes great pride in bringing in large chunks of money for research projects and, for example, spends years talking about and invests mounds of money in Aggie Square in Sacramento for research. … Why not work to create more funding for all students, including undocumented students? Why not think carefully about your tuition increases at various points in time, and what impacts it has on the people that you say you want to enroll in the university?

    I want to talk to you about AB 2586. The first Cal State board of trustees meeting I attended was in July, and there was some discussion about this bill. The trustees were asking staff to brief them on what they think of this bill. The gist was, ‘We see this as risky. We see this as potentially putting us on a collision course with the federal government, where we would open ourselves up to litigation. What do you think about that approach?

    Johnson: I think it’s a cowardly approach. It’d be like the university saying “We’re not going to weigh in on the civil rights movement because it’s controversial politically, and it’s risky to do so, and we’re not going to move forward because we’re afraid of getting sued.” 

    It’s funny, but (former UC President) Janet Napolitano could have taken the same position, saying “We’re not going to challenge the rescission of DACA, don’t want to alienate the federal government, which gives a large amount of money to the University of California. We’re just going to sit on our hands and let these DACA recipients be poorly treated.” …

    I’m an attorney. I was dean of the (UC Davis School of Law) for 16 years. Attorneys are always going to tell you there are risks. There are also risks driving to the grocery store, but we still go to the store. So I don’t buy that risk assessment argument, and I think that this is the time for universities that are truly committed to these issues to show their commitment to these issues.

    Why should CSU and why should the UC prioritize helping undocumented students to get a college degree?

    Kidder: Both my data analysis as well as my personal experience as a university administrator working with lots of undocumented students confirms my conviction that this is a very talented pool of young people in California. If their hopes and dreams are allowed to flourish in California, it benefits all Californians, and I mean that both in an economic sense and in a larger democratic sense.





    Source link

  • AI can free up time for principals to engage with staff and students

    AI can free up time for principals to engage with staff and students


    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Imagine a school where the principal spends less time buried in paperwork and more time in classrooms, supporting teachers and fostering an inclusive learning environment for students with disabilities.

    Embracing artificial intelligence (AI) can make this vision a reality.

    AI holds the potential to revolutionize school leadership by alleviating the administrative burden on principals. Principals are essential to developing school culture and steering our schools toward more inclusive practices. Their guidance and decision-making for professional learning, promoting specific desired outcomes, and allocating budgets and resources directly impact students’ experiences.

    When a school leader is passionate about creating inclusive learning environments and ensuring students have more access to the general education curriculum, little can stop them — except, of course, the ever-increasing tasks and paperwork that keep them in their offices and away from the classrooms.

    Just this past year, the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) targeted the growing number of duplicative mandates that district and school leaders are spending valuable time on as one of their platforms for Legislative Action Day. Nearly 400 education leaders came together in Sacramento this past April to demand change in a handful of areas, including streamlined accountability: calling for less time spent on writing separate plans and reports for the many (often redundant or overlapping) state and federal programs, so more time can be spent in classrooms.

    Not only are principals responsible for numerous plans required by the state, they also have school site plans, emergency plans, loads of evaluations to write, newsletters to the community, emails to respond to, websites to keep up-to-date, data to review and analyze, the list goes on and on. The workload on principals has dramatically increased over the years, and we should be concerned if we want effective leadership in our schools.

    In much of my work with administrators on creating more inclusive schools, I address these issues through ideas like sharing responsibilities, delegating tasks and inventorying initiatives to help streamline resources, including time; and now I’m adding a new one: Embrace AI!

    New tools, including AI virtual assistants, or SchoolAI and TeachAI, can automate routine administrative tasks like scheduling, attendance tracking, data analysis, and report generation. Tools like ChatGPT, Grammarly, and Co-Pilot can summarize our notes, edit our writing, and be thought partners when our brains are fried. Just this week I have used AI tools to help with rewording and editing my writing, drafting an agenda, and creating original pictures to use in presentations without having to search the web for what I need, all in all, saving me a few hours.

    And imagine what our principals could be doing with a few extra hours a week — observing classrooms, providing instructional feedback and greeting students. At the Inclusive Leadership Center at Chapman University, I work with K-12 school administrators supporting their strategic planning and providing professional development. We hear again and again that one of the biggest barriers administrators face in creating inclusive environments for students with disabilities is a lack of time — so let’s remove this barrier.

    As we work on improving the quality of education for students with disabilities, leveraging technology and AI to achieve this is a no-brainer. So why not use it as a tool for administrators and not just for our students?

    In addition to taking on some of the mundane tasks, AI can even assist in identifying trends and areas for improvement through data analysis, helping principals make informed decisions that support all students. Once administrators embrace AI, think of how teachers can use it. The possibilities are endless and time-saving.

    Of course, there are valid concerns about artificial intelligence, such as data privacy and the fear of technology replacing human roles. We need to think about AI as a tool to enhance human capabilities, not replace them. We need proper safeguards to address privacy concerns, but solving these issues should not stop us from using AI to the advantage of our communities and students. I am not advocating for AI to take over all our school leaders’ tasks, like generating all school communication, teacher evaluations, and individualized education plans. But it can assist through editing, clarifying and summarizing through the drafting process, even helping with communicating to specific audiences and tone. Most administrators, including myself, have sent an email we later wished we could have asked AI to check first.

    By embracing AI, schools can empower their leaders to spend more time fostering an inclusive, supportive and effective learning environment. It’s time for education to harness the power of AI to benefit all students.

    •••

    Kari Adams directs the Inclusive Leadership Center at the Thompson Policy Institute on Disability at Chapman University and leads the Coalition of Inclusive School Leaders. She previously was a public school special education administrator.

    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

  • How a caring teacher can make or break school for young students

    How a caring teacher can make or break school for young students


    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    The pint-sized pupils in Paula Merrigan’s transitional kindergarten, or TK, class often call her mom, or sometimes even grandma. One reason there’s such a strong teacher-student bond boils down to warmth. Merrigan makes sure all the children are greeted with a big smile when they enter the classroom in the morning, she works with every single one of them one-on-one at some point during the day, and she is generous with praise, hugs and affection. 

    “When a small child tells you they love you, say it back to them!” said the veteran Castro Valley Unified teacher. “They need to know you care. Imagine telling someone, “I love you,” and all you hear back is, “Thank you,” or “OK.” How would that make you feel versus being told, “I love you, too?”  If you don’t want to be that specific, you can also say, “I love all of you too.”

    Merrigan knows that caring is just as important as the curriculum when it comes to small children. Unless they feel nurtured, they may well struggle to learn.

    Paula Merrigan

    “It is so important for every child to feel that their teacher truly cares about them, that school is always a safe place to be,” said Merrigan, who also serves on the National Education Association’s (NEA) board of directors for California. “If they don’t make that connection with their teacher, it can impact their learning. When they know you truly care about them, they want to do their best for you, because they are seeking your approval.  If they think you don’t care, they don’t care.”

    That’s one reason why some little children hate going to school. Consider the case of a first grade boy who had a tantrum when a teacher threw his artwork away. Or a kindergartner who cried when a teacher scolded her for starting her math worksheet too early. Adults may have different criteria for an academic environment, but for small children, friendliness is often the bottom line.

    “It’s really just little things like these that make a big difference to a child,” said Merrigan. “When you take them to the office, for whatever reason, they need to know it’s a safe space as well. The cafeteria needs to be welcoming when they are going to get food. Often, young children are just looking for a friendly smile to make them feel better when at school.”

    Merrigan also takes pain to listen to the children. She lets them tell her their stories, and she learns where their interests lie so she can engage them more deeply.

    “When you learn about certain things they like and tie that into your curriculum, they love it,” she said. “Not that you’re creating a new curriculum.  Maybe you’re just recognizing that the children told you they really like dinosaurs so when you’re teaching the letter ‘D,’ you create a dinosaur art project to go with it.”  

    Separation anxiety hits many youngsters hard as they struggle to let go of their caregiver’s hand when entering the kindergarten classroom. Sometimes it’s the first time they’ll be away from home for a whole day. That stress can feel like a huge chasm for families to cross.

    How the child feels at the beginning of their schooling can set the tone for the rest of their academic life, experts say. That’s why the emotional component of early education can not be overlooked. 

    “This is so important for little ones because this is often the first time that young children are experiencing formal education,” said Hedy Chang, executive director of Attendance Works, a nonprofit that works to boost student attendance. “It may be one of the first times that they are in the care of someone who is not their parent or another adult family member. They are learning how to learn, make friends, overcome conflicts, and thrive outside their home. … What happens during this time can help lay the foundation for social and academic success.”

    Mónica Zegers said her daughter Elena had jitters about starting a new school in the middle of the year. Luckily, the teacher had students write little welcome notes to her before she arrived. It was a small gesture that made a magical difference to the third grader. She now keeps the jar of notes in her desk so she can reread them at her leisure. 

    “This was a wonderful act of kindness that should be celebrated,” said Zegers, a Concord mother of two and a postdoctoral scholar at the UCSF Dyslexia Center. “Many teachers now are overwhelmed, and they don’t have the cognitive bandwidth to really address these social-emotional needs.”

    Creating an atmosphere of kindness and generosity is fundamental to learning in the early grades, experts say. That’s why many believe creating a nurturing environment may be key to healing the rifts between many families and schools that grew during the pandemic. Even one caring adult on campus, whether it’s a teacher, a coach or a music teacher, can make the difference between a child who wants to go to school and one who dreads it.

    Deborah Stipek

    “I’m not sure there is anything as important for young children than feeling comfortable with the teacher,” said Deborah Stipek, an expert in early childhood education at Stanford University. “There is a lot of research on the importance of teacher sensitivity to young children and the relationship between teacher and child. And there is evidence that mental health and behavioral problems have risen since Covid, and the teacher’s sensitivity is all the more important now.”

    Amid the youth mental health crisis, it’s more important than ever to make sure children feel a sense of belonging on campus, experts say. The emotional connection between adult and child can be the reason children feel motivated to overcome obstacles, from social anxiety to coping with a playground bully at school.

    “What are the little teeny steps that you can provide so people feel comfortable?” said Mary Jane Burke, who served 28 years as Marin County’s superintendent of schools and serves on the EdSource board of directors. “If you are in a great classroom, you can see it in everything that they do. It’s there in the way they greet the children in the morning. I’m huge on relationships; those are the things that I think buoy us in hard times. It can just make such a difference in how you feel.”

    Despite its significance to student achievement, not all teacher preparation programs cover how to meet emotional needs as comprehensively as they should, experts say.

    “Teacher prep programs vary hugely in how much and how well they address social-emotional issues,” said Stipek, who helped develop the new PreK-3 credential.

    Merrigan, for one, will never forget the year her son Andrew had a teacher who didn’t seem to prioritize emotional validation. It was hard on both of them.

    “He was a rule follower, and he just wanted to please his teacher,” she remembers. “The constant look of defeat on his little face when he got home from school was heartbreaking.  I don’t ever want a child to feel that way.”

    Bonding might even be a secret weapon in the battle against chronic absenteeism, which has skyrocketed in the wake of the pandemic, experts suggest. USC researchers found that students of all ages who miss an excessive amount of school often suffer from mental and emotional issues. They may need to feel nurtured, experts say. 

    “To the degree that parents keep kids home from school because the kids say they don’t want to go,” said Stipek, “children’s relationship with the teacher should be an important factor.”

    Merrigan, who herself remembers faking being sick a few times as a child, couldn’t agree more.

    “When it comes to truancy, sometimes a child will fake being sick because they just want to take a day off to spend with family,” Merrigan said. “I’ve found most young children want to be in school; they thrive off the consistent expectations for them.  Of course, that’s in a school where children know their teachers and staff truly care about them.”





    Source link

  • ‘Academic probation’ sends message to students that college isn’t for them, research says

    ‘Academic probation’ sends message to students that college isn’t for them, research says


    Students at Fresno City College

    Credit: Ashleigh Panoo/EdSource

    When a college student’s GPA dips below 2.0 — lower than a C average — schools often send a notice meant to serve as a wake-up call: Improve your grades or risk losing financial aid and being kicked out of college.

    But the way that universities and colleges deliver this wake-up call could be backfiring and pushing students to give up on higher education altogether, according to new research. 

    That’s what California Competes, a nonpartisan policy and research organization, concluded in a recent report on “academic probation.” The policy report was born out of a study that relied on interviews with over 50 “comebackers” — students who returned to higher education years after stopping out — from Shasta College and Sacramento State.

    Academic probation wasn’t on the radar of researchers until the comebackers, brought on to co-design the study, raised academic probation as a serious issue that led many students to give up on their studies. 

    Su Jin Gatlin Jez

    “I was very surprised that this came up from the students, but this is why we center students in our work,” said Su Jin Jez, California Competes CEO, in an interview with EdSource.

    Jez said students perceived being put on academic probation as a message that they aren’t cut out for higher education, not as a wake-up call. This was especially true when an automated notice did not offer clear next steps for a student to begin to turn their academic career around.

    This is an issue that affects a lot of students. One national study by the Center for Analysis and Postsecondary Education and Employment found that 1 in 5 first-year students on Pell Grants were at risk of losing their grants due to low GPAs. But there’s no California-specific data about these students — something California Competes would like to see changed.

    Laura Bernhard

    The organization calls on the state to create a task force to examine academic probation policies at California public universities and promote practices that will help students. It also calls on each of the state’s higher education segments — community colleges, the CSUs and the UCs — to address this issue. That is happening already. 

    “There is interest. There’s growing recognition of the need to make these changes,” said California Competes senior researcher Laura Bernhard. “I think that’s exciting.”

    Bernhard acknowledges it can be tough to roll out sweeping policy changes in a higher education system as decentralized as California’s, but there are signs of progress. During the study, the University of California announced that it would be following one of the study’s recommendations: calling it “academic notice” rather than academic probation, a phrase that makes getting D’s or F’s sound like a crime.

    In this Q&A, Jez and Bernhard detail what they have learned in their research and, specifically, what they want to see happen in California. It has been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.

    What typically happens when a student’s GPA drops below 2.0?

    Bernhard: Most schools use an automated system where a student will receive a form email notifying them of this status. Campus policies vary. California Community Colleges are required to notify students when their GPA falls under this threshold.

    There is not a systemwide process, which is one of the things we wanted to flag. So the student experience varies pretty widely. It’s also going to vary based on if they’re in a targeted program that receives specialized advising, such as student athletes or people who are in an honors college, but in a lot of ways it’s left to the student. I don’t think we do a lot.

    What is the problem with telling a student they are on academic probation?

    Bernhard: The first, perhaps the most obvious one, would be the link to the carceral system. That can be very triggering for many people.

    One of our institutional partners was reviewing their website about academic probation, and she was taken aback by the language. After they are given notice, the first image students see is a cop holding a stop sign saying, “You’re on probation.” She was horrified. Then she remembered 20 years ago, she was one of the people who helped write that policy. It was just a real moment of, “Oh goodness, what have we done?”

    Jez: I think previously there wasn’t a lot of concern about a letter with that kind of language because people assume students were on academic probation because they couldn’t hack it. Because they truly weren’t college material. They couldn’t handle the coursework. 

    Fast-forward to today, there’s a growing understanding that students can be academically capable and excellent — and still not be getting good grades. There are all of these factors in students’ lives that impact their academic performance. Institutions want to figure out how they can help students navigate those sorts of life circumstances, so that they can succeed in the classroom. For that reason, institutions are really wanting to make sure they have the right tone in these letters.

    So are some of these assumptions based on an outdated vision of who a college student is?

    Jez: Traditionally, we’ve had a student who is full-time focused on academic studies. You wouldn’t think of life outside of school being a major factor for them. So if they weren’t performing academically, it was because there was some academic shortcoming. 

    But now most students have heavy workloads, particularly at community colleges and the CSUs. Over 400,000 students in California have children. It’s just a very different student. I think we’re beginning to tackle our policies one by one as we look back and sort of realize they don’t work anymore. 

    Besides that phrase “academic probation,” what are some other problems with those automated notices sent to students when their GPA dips?

    Bernhard: Usually just the length. It’s long, it’s verbose, it’s wordy, it’s complex. There’s jargon. It’s not clear what steps I need to take. It’s not clear who I need to reach out to. It’s not personal. It can tend to use deficit-minded language: “You’ve done something bad; you are on probation; you are in trouble.”

    Instead, things can really be flipped. It can be short; it can be clear. It can be: ‘This is temporary. This is a setback. This happens to a lot of people. We all struggle sometimes.” We can normalize this behavior. ‘These things happen sometimes. It’s out of our control and here are the steps you can take. We care about you as our person. Please talk to us. Reach out.”

    I think a lot of colleges have also realized that, in addition to sending an email, we can text, we can call, we can have tables on campus. We can have an academic event with more personal outreach, which we realize is bandwidth-heavy. But sometimes that makes a huge difference for people. 

    This policy analysis mentions that nationally, 1 out of 5 first-time college students receiving Pell Grants end up with a GPA below a 2.0. Is there any statewide data on that?

    Bernhard: I think that’s one of the biggest issues. It’s not a publicly shared data point in most cases. It’s usually within an institution. It’s hard to get good, comprehensive, systemwide statewide information about students who have a certain GPA. We obviously believe in the power of data, so that is something we would love to be able to collect and analyze.

    Jez: I would love to see that, as the launch of the Cradle-to-Career data system happens, we have students’ GPA information.

    Is there any kind of pushback to these changes you’re suggesting? What’s the attitude among campus leaders?

    Jez: Across the three systems, I will say that there’s a growing recognition that this is a really critical issue that needs improvement. And so we’re seeing attention to this at the systemwide level. 

    At the campus level, there are a number of campuses that are just picking it up and sprinting with it. In many ways, our work has been thinking about how we get a more consistent, comprehensive approach, so we can pick up on campuses leading the way, learn from what they’re doing, and then sort of broaden it across the system. So the systems are all in and then the campuses are in. 

    You’re calling for a statewide task force. Why would that be helpful?

    Jez: Unlike literally every other state in our country, we don’t have a coordinating entity that would be thinking about these issues statewide, centering the student and the students who are attending multiple institutions. It’s critical, then, that we pull it together — in these more ad hoc ways, sadly — to be able to address this. 

    We are hopeful that there will be a proposal in the next 12 months, maybe even the next two or three months, that will tackle this.

    Was there anything that surprised you as you researched this issue?

    Bernhard: I think we could have named 17 other things that we think would have led people to stop out and make returning to complete their degree more difficult. I don’t think academic probation would necessarily have been on that list. 

    The other thing I just really wanted to tout is that this feels, to me, like a relatively easy win. It’s essentially free. It feels small, but it could be incredibly impactful for students. There really hasn’t been pushback, because it just feels very common-sense. Now it’s just like, “Great, how do we get momentum, take action and make this change statewide?” I feel like in a year when we’re sort of feeling financially constrained, I think we should take the win. 

    A lot of what you’re talking about and pushing for is systemic change, but I want to close by asking you what your message would be to students on academic notice or probation right now.

    Jez: When we’ve done previous research and we’ve talked about academic probation, what we hear from faculty and staff is they really saw it as an early warning sign, like “Hey, pay attention.” And then what we heard from students was the opposite. It was more like “You don’t belong, you’re not college material.” 

    So I think that a student should know that this status doesn’t mean you’re not college material and you don’t belong and you can’t do it. I think of it more like a wake-up call. Obviously, there are some students where some sort of crisis happens in their life, and they need to get through that moment and then get back on track. And when they hit that crisis, it’s really important to reach out to their institution because they can take incompletes or withdraw or there are other strategies that make it so that this doesn’t have an impact on their GPA.

    If it’s something that’s sort of like a bigger issue where they’re having to work full time and trying to figure out how they balance their studies, reach out to your institution. There are also a number of community-based organizations that can support students. Also, many struggles aren’t visible, but students are far from alone in grappling with this. In many ways, it is a very normal experience. Students can successfully, absolutely make it out of this temporary status. 

    It’s really like the institution’s obligation to help the student. It is not like, “Go figure it out, student.” The institution needs to help figure out with the student, “How do we support you to success?

    My last recommendation is a general customer service one. If you call customer service and the person’s not helpful, I wouldn’t try to convince that person how they should help you. Sometimes, you just hang up and find someone else. Our institutions are pretty big, so there are lots of people. Find a person that can get to your issue and that’s willing to help.





    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

  • Proposition 2 is essential for California’s students and run-down schools

    Proposition 2 is essential for California’s students and run-down schools


    Classrooms for career technical education are cramped, and the Wasco Union High School District hopes to expand them with Proposition 2.

    Credit: Emma Gallegos / EdSource

    After decades of disinvestment and neglect, it’s clear that California’s schools are in desperate need of repair. Many school districts across the state are struggling with dilapidated buildings, old classrooms and unsafe conditions for their students.

    According to a recent report from the Public Policy Institute of California, 38% of K-12 students in California are enrolled in schools that don’t meet our state’s minimum safety standards.  This is obviously dangerous and completely unacceptable. Unsurprisingly, countless studies have shown that bad environmental conditions — including dirty air, lack of light and lack of safe building facilities — significantly decrease students’ academic achievement.

    Unfortunately, with no dedicated resource pool and no new state school bond measures in almost a decade, California is almost out of money for school repairs. Unlike many other states, California does not have a dedicated funding stream for investments in school facilities, which makes districts across the state entirely reliant on raising money from state or local bonds for facility upgrades.

    As a result, California’s school repair fund is expected to be depleted by this upcoming January, which would leave countless schools across the state without any ability to repair or upgrade their resources, sans a well-resourced PTA or local bond measure providing the funding. Wealthier districts might be able to skate by, but districts in low-income communities would be devastated.

    As state superintendent of public instruction, I’ve overseen the administration of billions of dollars for K-12 school construction and modernization that came from the last state bond, but these funds were only a drop in the bucket that just scratched the surface of California’s immense needs and were depleted quickly.

    That’s why Proposition 2, a bond measure this November that would provide $8.5 billion in facility renovations for TK-12 schools and $1.5 billion for community colleges, couldn’t come at a more urgent time. It’s a vitally necessary, common-sense step forward to provide critically needed upgrades to California’s schools.

    To receive state bond money, districts must attempt to raise a local bond of their own and then apply to the State Facilities Program for a funding match — though districts that are unable to raise more than $15 million from a local bond can receive up to a 100% match.

    The measure, along with the accompanying local bonds, would help upgrade facilities at public elementary, middle and high schools and community colleges across California to build more classrooms, modernize science labs, enhance gymnasiums, build performing arts centers, and replace aging buildings.

    But most critically, Proposition 2 would help ensure basic 21st-century facility standards in every school across the state — helping low-income districts receive desperately needed funding to repair heating and air conditioning systems, repair leaky roofs, and remediate hazardous black mold. Some of the money is also earmarked for removing lead from water, creating transitional kindergarten classrooms and building career and technical education facilities.

    Significantly, this proposal also includes significant equity-focused improvements to existing policy that would ensure this funding goes to the districts that most need it. Proposition 2 improves how state funds are distributed to school districts across the state, making it more equitable for less-affluent districts and those with higher numbers of English learners and foster youth.

    Ten percent of the funds would be dedicated to small school districts that currently struggle to amass the funding for facility upgrades, and the formula for allocating state funding establishes a higher match to low-wealth districts that cannot afford to generate much local funding, as well as those with a high percentage of disadvantaged students.

    Without Proposition 2, schools districts in smaller and lower-income areas would have no other way to pay for these critical improvements, as they struggle tremendously to raise enough local bond money to pay for school repair, making them completely reliant on funding from state bonds for facility repairs.

    Additionally, while not the focus of the measure, the investments provided by Proposition 2 will also create tens of thousands of good-paying construction jobs across the state, which will boost local economies.

    Ultimately, California’s schools have a desperate need to modernize our buildings, facilities and campuses, and the money needed to make the necessary repairs has been exhausted. Proposition 2 will provide an infusion of vitally important investments to our schools that will address the significant backlog of districts hoping to receive funding for repairs, and considerably improve the conditions of students across the state.

    •••

    Tony Thurmond is California’s superintendent of public instruction and a candidate for governor in 2026.

    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

  • Community college students far from a four-year university are less likely to transfer, study says

    Community college students far from a four-year university are less likely to transfer, study says


    Madera Community College is in the rural Central Valley. Fresno State, about 22 miles away, is the closest four-year public university.

    Credit: Ashleigh Panoo / EdSource

    Why is it harder for community college students studying far from four-year universities to transfer? 

    The answer to that question — which is at the heart of a new study previewed at a webinar last week — could influence state higher education officials’ thinking on proposals to expand bachelor’s degree offerings at community colleges.

    Most community colleges in California are within a 25-mile drive of the nearest California State University or University of California campus, according to the study by the RP Group, the independent nonprofit that conducts research for California’s system of 116 community colleges. But among the 29 colleges that are not, a research team led by Darla Cooper and Daisy Segovia found lower rates of transfer from two-year to four-year institutions.

    Gaps were most visible across the seven community colleges located the farthest from public universities. Colleges at least 87 miles from the nearest UC or CSU had a 28% transfer rate, researchers said, lagging colleges within a 25-mile drive by 8 percentage points. 

    The study noted a smaller gap between a middle tier of community colleges located closer to four-year institutions and those within a 25-mile commute. A third of students at community colleges 27 to 78 miles from a California university transferred compared to 36% of those attending a campus where a four-year institution was 25 miles away or less.

    “We need to bring the education to where the students are and not force the students to go to where the education is,” said Cooper, RP Group’s executive director. 

    Proximity to a four-year public university is far from the only factor related to community college transfer rates. RP Group’s own research has identified lots of practices common among students who continue on to four-year institutions, like completing transferable math and English courses in their first year, visiting an academic adviser and getting involved in student programs like Umoja and Puente, said Cooper and Segovia, a senior researcher at RP Group. 

    Money is a consideration, too: California community college students interviewed in 2019 cited the cost of a university education as a top hurdle to continuing their education. 

    The new study examining the role of distance in transfer rates comes at a time when concerns over regional worker shortages in fields like education and nursing have stoked debate about how to make bachelor’s degrees more accessible to students who might fill those labor gaps.  

    California’s overall higher education plan, first released in 1960, left bachelor’s degrees as the purview of four-year universities. But state lawmakers in recent years have relaxed that constraint. In 2021, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill allowing community colleges to add up to 30 baccalaureate degree programs annually, leading to dozens of new offerings. The California Community Colleges website now lists 45 approved bachelor’s degree programs.

    Still, state law places significant checks on which baccalaureate degrees community colleges can green-light. Colleges can’t start a four-year degree if CSU or UC already offers it and must consult with university officials before proposed degrees move forward. CSU and UC can object to proposals they believe duplicate existing university degrees — rules that apply even in rural areas not served by a Cal State or UC campus. 

    That framework has at times put the community colleges at odds with colleagues at four-year institutions. The board of governors for the statewide community college system last year approved a program over CSU’s formal objections. 

    A measure that would have further blurred the boundaries between two- and four-year institutions fell short in the 2024 legislative session. Newsom in September vetoed a bill that would have permitted 15 community colleges to offer bachelor’s degrees in nursing, opening the door for community colleges to create degree programs already offered at CSU.

    Researchers probe ‘university education deserts’

    The RP Group’s work builds on previous studies exploring what researchers call “education deserts,” places that either had no college or university or that only had a community college. A 2016 research brief for the American Council on Education reported that such communities tended to have lower college attainment compared with the rest of the country. 

    The RP Group study — “Exploring Geographic Isolation as a Barrier to Equitable Transfer Outcomes” — followed first-time college students enrolled at a community college between 2012 and 2017 who intended to transfer to a four-year institution. It used data from the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office to measure those students’ outcomes after six years. Driving distances were measured from campus to campus. 

    Researchers excluded Calbright, an online community college, as well as a newer community college and a college focused on students learning technical trades. That left 113 community colleges covering more than a million students in the study sample.

    The analysis defined three categories of community colleges by their proximity to a public university in California. Researchers dubbed the first two groups – Tier 1 schools, which were at least 87 miles away, and Tier 2 schools, which were 27 to 78 miles away – to be colleges located in “university education deserts.” A third group of community colleges within 25 miles of a university were not considered deserts.

    Comparing the three categories revealed demographic trends. Tier 1 and Tier 2 colleges tended to serve a higher percentage of Latino students, first generation students and low income students than colleges not located in university education deserts.   

    Researchers also observed disparities by comparing the transfer rates of students at Tier 1 institutions to students who were not in a university education desert but who shared the same race and ethnicity. For example, 20% of Black students attending a Tier 1 college — those that were the farthest from a public four-year in California– transferred, compared with 33% of those attending a college in the category closest to a university.

    “It’s an equity issue,” Cooper said. “We wanted to see if there were any particular groups that were being disadvantaged by their location in the state.”

    The RP Group’s study also reported that students at Tier 1 colleges who succeeded in transferring more often left California altogether to do so. Across all three proximity-to-university tiers, a plurality of transfer students landed at a Cal State campus. But 38% of Tier 1 college students transferred out of state for a four-year degree compared to only 16% of students not in a university education desert.

    Future research – and possible solutions

    Segovia said future research could take into account not only community colleges’ proximity to public universities in California, but also their distance to nonprofit universities and out-of-state institutions.

    Looking across state lines could explain some of the variation researchers observed in transfer rates among the community colleges that are the farthest from a public university in California. 

    College of the Siskiyous, which is roughly 200 miles from Cal Poly Humboldt but only 70 miles from Southern Oregon University, had a 32% rate of transfer, Segovia said, beating out some community colleges located closer to in-state four-year schools. 

    The researchers also plan to interview students about how proximity to a four-year college has impacted their education. 

    Webinar panelists discussed several barriers preventing community college students who live far from a four-year university from earning bachelor’s degrees — and some strategies that could ease the transition.

    Panelist Joshua Simon, a student at Lemoore College who serves on the board of the West Hills Community College District, said students struggle to finance their bachelor’s degree education, costs exacerbated by a long commute to a four-year university.

    “One of the hardest things is transportation,” he said. “Some students don’t usually drive, or some students don’t have the means of public transportation … so that’s a little bit of a difficulty when it comes to transferring, at least in-state or locally, around that 40-mile range.” 

    Kevin G. Walthers, the president of Allan Hancock College in Santa Maria, said students from his college often don’t get admitted to the nearest Cal State campus, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Those that do, he said, may save money by living at home but find their 70- to 80-mile round trip commute costs $30 a day. 

    Cal State admissions data for fall 2023 shows that 63% of Allan Hancock students who applied to Cal Poly San Luis Obispo were accepted. Of those students, 71% enrolled.

    “If the students are going to finish their degree in two years, and then they can’t afford to leave for Fresno or Northridge or Bakersfield, and they can’t get into Cal Poly, they’re just stuck,” he said. “Given the fact that most of our students are Latino, they’re stuck in a way that is systemically racist. There’s no way around that.”

    Walthers said the lack of bachelor’s degree programs has a simple solution: “Either have the CSU offer services here or allow Allan Hancock College to provide those services.”

    Kate Mahar, the associate vice president of innovation and strategic initiatives at Shasta College, said the school operates several programs with Chico State, about 80 miles south. A dual admission program allows students who apply to Chico State the option to attend Shasta College instead; it also guarantees them a seat at Chico when they’re ready to transfer, so long as they meet eligibility requirements. Students can also receive a Chico State business degree at Shasta College.

    Chico State admitted 87% of Shasta College applicants, according to CSU admissions data for fall 2023. Almost 53% of those students enrolled.

    “They really take it to heart that we are in their service area, even though (some students) are about five hours away from Chico,” she said.





    Source link