اینترنت

برچسب: time

  • Community college faculty should all be allowed to work full time

    Community college faculty should all be allowed to work full time


    Students at Fresno City College

    Credit: Ashleigh Panoo/EdSource

    When most people think of part-time employment in the public sector, they assume that it (1) could be a steppingstone to a full-time job; (2) pays less than full-time, chiefly because it involves fewer hours of work; (3) is voluntary, and (4) is primarily meant to supplement a family’s income.

    When it comes to California’s 36,000 part-time community college professors, the facts defy all four assumptions.

    Unlike workers in other professions, part-time college instructors, regardless of length of service and/or quality of performance, will not be promoted to full-time unless they are lucky enough to secure an increasingly scarce full-time position teaching on the tenure track. Part-time instructors, many who work for decades off the tenure track, have been called “apprentices to nowhere.”

    Over the last five decades, colleges have gravitated toward part-time instructors for the flexibility of their semester-length agreements with no obligation to rehire, and their lower expense.  For example, while all full-time instructors receive state-paid health insurance, only about 10% (3,742) of the state’s part-timers do.

    Part-time instructor salaries are not pro-rated based on a typical full-time salary; instead, they are a separate scale which amounts to about 50-60% of the full-time instructor rate. To be clear, this doesn’t mean they receive 50-60% of the income of a full-time instructor: California law caps part-time faculty workload at no more than 67% of full-time. This workload cap, when combined with the discounted rate of pay, means that the average California part-time instructor teaching at 60% of full-time receives about $20,000 while the average annual income for full-time instructors is in excess of $100,000 a year. 

    Surveys conducted by the American Federation of Teachers in 2020 and 2022 found that roughly 25% of part-time community college faculty nationwide were below the federal poverty line.

    With no natural transition from part-time to full-time, this two-tier workplace takes on features of a caste system, especially as both full-time and part-time instructors satisfy the same credential requirements, award grades and credits that have the same value, and have the same tuition charged for their courses.

    While California college instructors are represented by faculty unions (primarily the California Federation of Teachers or the California Teachers Association), the priority of those unions would seem to be tenured faculty, as evidenced by the differences in the collectively bargained working conditions. 

    In the case of workload, for example, while part-time instructors are barred from teaching full-time, full-time instructors may elect to teach overtime, often called course overloads, for additional income. Full-time instructors displace part-time jobs whenever they do. In fact, full-timers generally get to choose their courses, including overloads, before part-timers are assigned courses.

    A bill being considered at present in the California Legislature is Assembly Bill 2277.  It would raise the current part-time workload restriction from 67% to 85% of full time, which, in theory, could enable some part-timers to teach more classes and earn more income. But if passed, AB 2277 would hardly solve the problem for part-time instructors.

    To make a more meaningful improvement, AB 2277 could be amended in two ways, neither of which make an impact on the state budget:

    • Remove the artificial workload cap outright, thereby enabling part-time instructors the opportunity to work up to 100% of full time when work is available. 
    • Impose a ban on full-time tenure-track instructors from teaching overtime (overloads).

    One possible source of opposition to these changes could be California’s faculty unions, which are dominated by full-timers. While supportive of earlier attempts at raising the cap to 85% (e.g., AB 897 in 2020, AB 375 in 2021, and AB 1856 in 2022) — neither union has shown a willingness to support elimination of the cap outright or curbing full-time overloads.

    In 2008, AB 591 adjusted the cap from 60% to the current 67%, but the first iteration of that bill proposed outright elimination of the cap (as does our suggested amendment), which was opposed by the CFT (see the April 16, 2007 legislative digest and commentary assembled in a California Part-Time Faculty Association (CPFA) report). 

    Another source of opposition could be those full-time instructors accustomed to teaching overtime/overloads; they could oppose losing that option, which underscores the conflict of interest in a two-tier workplace when more for one tier means less for the other.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom acknowledged that California “community colleges could not operate without part-time faculty” who “do not receive the same salary or benefits as their full-time colleagues” in his Oct. 8, 2021 veto of AB 375 based on budgetary concerns — the fear that the state’s 36,000 part-time instructors would suddenly qualify for health care. (That fear has since been addressed by a 400% increase in the state’s contribution to the Part-time Faculty Health Insurance Program from an annual $490,000 to $200 million.) In the meantime, part-time faculty continue to be barred from working full time. 

    Faculty unions and lawmakers should take a step toward abolishing California’s faculty involuntary part-time work restriction by allowing them to work full time and protecting their jobs. An amended version of AB 2277 is a no-cost way of doing so.

    •••

    Alexis Moore taught visual art at colleges and universities for over three decades and served on the executive board of the Pasadena City College Faculty Association of the California Community College Independents (CCCI). 

    Jack Longmate has long served on the Steering Committee of the Washington Part-Time Faculty Association and taught for over 28 years at Olympic College in Bremerton, Washington, where his ending annual salary was about $20,000 for teaching at 55% of an annual full-time teaching load. 

    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

  • It’s way past time to end gun violence

    It’s way past time to end gun violence


    Photo: Fibonacci Blue/Flickr

    “Teachers, the school is currently in lockdown. Please lock your doors and close your windows. This is not a drill. I repeat, this is not a drill.”

    When I was in 10th grade, my school’s assistant principal made this announcement during first period. Sparked into action, the teachers at once turned off the lights, locked the doors and closed the windows. It took all of half a second for the 1,500 students of Reseda High School to simultaneously, haltingly, fearing for their lives, come up with a single paralyzing phrase: “school shooter.”

    High schoolers may be chastised for a lot of things: procrastination, breaking curfew, ditching class, or being overly dramatic. As it turns out, there was not a school shooter in that instance. We were on lockdown because LAPD was in a standoff with a domestic violence suspect nearby. But in this case, we were well within our rights to assume the worst. In the past decade, the number of mass shootings per year in the U.S. has nearly doubled. In 2021, 689 mass shootings were reported. That’s an average of nearly two mass shootings each day.  As of Tuesday, the 198th day of the year, our nation has suffered more than 302 shootings, according to the Gun Violence Archive. Since 2020, gun violence has overtaken motor vehicle accidents as the No. 1 cause of death for Americans under the age of 19.

    I’ve grown up hearing stories of my classmates having to run home because they heard gunshots on their block. No one — let alone still-developing children and teens — can or should be expected to lead successful, productive lives in a state of such anxiety. Millions of people across the nation have risen up and spoken out against gun violence, and there have been many student walkouts demanding action from our leaders, but to no avail. 

    This must change. The time for action came 12 years ago with the Sandy Hook school shooting, but it is not too late to make change now. We must not be deterred by the fact that previous efforts to address gun violence have failed, but encouraged by the hope that we have the ability to prevent the next tragedy. Unfortunately, too many legislative and policy attempts at addressing the problem have fallen victim to partisan politics or relied on shortcuts that made them vulnerable to being overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.  

    For example, the court recently struck down a federal ban on bump stocks, devices that enable semi-automatic weapons to fire even more rapidly. The Trump administration issued the ban after a 2017 mass shooting at an outdoor Las Vegas concert in which 60 people were killed and hundreds more wounded. The court only ruled in this way because Congress failed to enact a law banning all high-fire weapons. If Congress had passed such a law instead of relying on administrative action, a different ruling would have ensued, and assailants would not be allowed to use bump stocks. 

    This weekend’s attempted assassination of presidential candidate Donald Trump, in which one person was killed and two others were critically injured, reminds us that no one is immune from gun violence. Hopefully, the nation’s attention on this tragedy will show politicians that both liberals and conservatives must work together to find creative, effective solutions.

    This issue is not one that can be solved overnight. One single law will not suffice, but rather a multitude of innovative policies, such as limiting access to the most dangerous weapons, better licensing and education, more attention to mental health, background checks, gun buybacks to get unwanted firearms out of circulation, limiting children’s access to guns, and more can all work in a coherent fashion to reduce gun violence.

    Local, state and federal politicians must brave the potential threat of losing voters and work together to figure out real, practical measures to reduce American gun violence. 

    Perhaps the three most famous foundational American ideals are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But, on a daily basis, gun violence takes away these rights from students. Because of guns, American students are denied the pursuit of education, the liberty of feeling safe and, too often, stripped of their right to life.

    We, as American citizens, entrust our rights in the hands of those we elect. They must, then, use their power to, with fidelity, find solutions to protect citizens.

    The responsibility falls not only on politicians, but to the community as well. Publish your stories, pester your local leaders, join activist groups, and do anything you can to force change to happen. This is a problem that affects all of us, meaning it will require the entire community to solve it. 

    We shouldn’t have to be in an enduring state of checking before turning every corner. So let’s stop waiting. And let’s start living.

    •••

    Neel J. Thakkar is a rising senior at Reseda High School in Los Angeles.

    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

  • Lithwick & Stern: A Time for Lawyers to Defend Their Profession and Democracy

    Lithwick & Stern: A Time for Lawyers to Defend Their Profession and Democracy


    Writing in Slate, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern criticize the big law firms that immediately caved to Trump’s demands to quash their diversity programs and pledge millions of dollars in pro bono work for Trump’s causes. They were singled out for punishment by Trump in executive orders because they dared to represent his political enemies.

    In the present crisis of American law, judges have been overwhelmingly strong in upholding the rule of law over the demands of an egotistical, lawless president. Over 200 lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration, which has so far not gone well for Trump. Judges have been targets of abuse, intimidation, even death threats directed at them and their families.

    The authors single out Judge Beryl Howell for her fearless defense of the right of lawyers to represent their clients regardless of their political views.

    They write:

    Last Friday, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell deftly knit together the professional obligations of the bench to the bar when she handed down a 102-page opinion in favor of one of these fighting firms, Perkins Coie, handing it a massive victory that carried a deeper lesson for the entire legal profession. Howell’s decision is noteworthy for all manner of things, but perhaps the most important aspect is that it serves as a clarion call for lawyers—meaning every lawyer in the country—to find their way to doing the work of democracy. The judge highlighted the “importance of independent lawyers to ensuring the American judicial system’s fair and impartial administration of justice,” a role “recognized in this country since its founding era.” She condemned the administration’s “unprecedented attack on these foundational principles.” And she praised Perkins Coie for defending its lawyers’ right “to represent their clients vigorously and zealously, without fear of retribution from the government simply for doing the job of a lawyer.” Howell also gave credit to the hundreds of lawyers who filed amicus briefs on behalf of the firm, including a cross-ideological array of lawyers, former government officials, and retired judges, reflecting the profession’s near-unanimous revulsion at the prospect of singling out firms based on the clients they choose to represent.

    But Howell went out of her way to cast doubt upon the capitulating firms that took Trump’s deal, for possibly compromising their own legal ethics. Describing Trump’s threat that “lawyers must stick to the party line, or else,” she wrote, archly: “This message has been heard and heeded by some targeted law firms, as reflected in their choice, after reportedly direct dealings with the current White House, to agree to demand terms, perhaps viewing this choice as the best alternative for their clients and employees.” Some clients, she noted, “may harbor reservations about the implications of such deals for the vigorous and zealous representation to which they are entitled from ethically responsible counsel”—an extraordinary warning to these clients that their lawyers may no longer be defending their best interests. And to make her position perfectly clear, the judge added: “If the founding history of this country is any guide, those who stood up in court to vindicate constitutional rights and, by so doing, served to promote the rule of law, will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written.”

    Howell’s opinion serves as the most important reminder to date that in this constitutional moment, those trained to operate within the law and those who swear oaths to defend it have a singular and critical role to play. The days of “I just do mergers and acquisitions” are behind us, sports fans. If America were experiencing a national tooth-decay crisis, the dentists would be on the front lines; and were it experiencing a sweeping leaky-pipe epidemic, the plumbers would be on the front lines. Given that we are in the throes of the greatest legal disaster the country has faced in many Americans’ lifetimes, it might be a good idea for the nation’s attorneys to begin to understand that they have a role to play too. Howell, meanwhile, holds no quarter for those who would seek to be neutral. If you have the tools to fight lawlessness and you opt not to use them at this moment in history, you are emphatically still taking a side.

    It is hard to read Howell’s opinion without worrying that some judge somewhere will find it too sweeping, too polemical, and too teeming with overinflated claims about the centrality of attorneys in American life. (She quoted Alexis de Tocqueville’s observationthat in the early United States, “the authority … intrusted to members of the legal profession … is the most powerful existing security against the excesses of democracy.”) What Howell seems to understand, with as much force as de Tocqueville, is that those entrusted to protect against the “excesses of democracy” are not going to have the luxury of appearing “neutral” much longer, or even just tamping down criticism by avoiding flowery prose in favor of more anodyne wrist slaps. Effective immediately, the defenders of the rule of law are those who went to school to understand it, who get paid to fight for it, and who swear an oath to uphold it.



    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

  • Grant rollout fiasco: CDE announces $470 million in Golden State Pathways awards for a third time

    Grant rollout fiasco: CDE announces $470 million in Golden State Pathways awards for a third time


    Students in a Linked Learning Engineering Pathway.

    Photo: Linked Learning Alliance

    This story has been updated to include the news that the California Department of Education announced the awards for a third time.

    Will the third time be a charm?

    The California Department of Education announced the recipients of $470 million in grants for the Golden State Pathways Program, for a third time on Friday.

    The ambitious effort is aimed at high schools creating career pathways in fields such as STEM, education and health care, but it has faced a troubled rollout.

    CDE first announced the grant awards in May and then pulled them back in July. The announcement that the grants were revoked once again came on Oct. 1.

    CDE said the agency temporarily removed the September grants results after school districts “questioned the funding results,” according to a statement from CDE spokesperson Scott Roark. This decision was made to “ensure the integrity of the grant distribution process, so that all [Local Educational Agencies] receive their allocated funds based on correct and verified data.”

    Advocates call the Golden State Pathways an important investment to improve the economic mobility for the next generation of Californians. But they are frustrated that more than two years after the legislature approved the program, money has not begun to roll out.

    “To our knowledge, the CDE hasn’t been forthcoming about why they’ve recalled these latest results, nor why we’re seeing yet another delay, which we find alarming,” said Denise Luna, the higher ed policy director for EdTrust-West. “What we need to see as soon as possible is grant award information that the CDE can stand by and for those monies to flow to districts immediately.”

    The advocacy group was one of the signatories of a September letter calling on state leaders to release the promised funds by November.

    The Golden State Pathways Program was approved by the legislature in 2022. The application called for grant proposals for programs that would begin in April. But the CDE didn’t announce the grant results until May 31. In July, CDE announced it was recalling and reviewing those grants.

    CDE has offered no explanations about what caused the problems that led to the recall of the May grant results or those results announced Sept. 20.

    After the July recall, administrators told EdSource that there were some clear red flags: some school districts had been awarded up to three times the amount of funding that they had applied for. Schools were counting on that money for this school year. 

    Roark acknowledged that this delay is “frustrating” but stated that the reevaluation was done to “ensure the integrity of the grant distribution process.” 

    “The review of these results is a top priority for CDE as we work to expedite the process and deliver final outcomes as quickly as possible,” he wrote, in a statement.

    Tulare County Superintendent of Schools Tim Hire, who is heading the lead agency for the state, said that he is not sure what kind of technical issues the CDE is facing in rolling out these grants. However, he has seen the CDE take additional steps to ensure the grants are rolled out more smoothly, such as bringing on Erika Torres, deputy superintendent of strategy, policy and special projects.

    “I think there’s been some movement and some effort by the CDE to improve the process,” he said.

    Right now, everyone is in a “holding pattern,” said Hire, but these regional agencies are doing everything they can to prepare for the grants to be disbursed — and ultimately help students to have unique experiences and opportunities that prepare them for fulfilling careers.

    “We’re continuing to plan and try to do everything we can to prepare the regional leads,” he said, “so that when the allocations come — and everyone agrees that they’re appropriate and accurate — they can fast-track the work of the districts.”





    Source link

  • Nature’s classroom: Why preschoolers need more time outdoors 

    Nature’s classroom: Why preschoolers need more time outdoors 


    Trees are teaching tools at the Berkeley Forest School. Credit: Courtesy of the Berkeley Forest School

    At a forest school, the roof is the bright blue sky, a cluster of ladybugs flying through the air can turn into a science lesson and the fog lingering on your face becomes an example of the water cycle.

    Learning amid the leaves is the core of the curriculum in outdoor early learning programs, which often focus on children aged 3 to 5. Mother Nature provides the classroom where the littlest learners can dig up snake skins, bury treasure maps and climb trees, steeping in the myriad wonders of life.

    Yet, that’s the exception to the rule these days, as many preschool children spend too much time indoors huddled around screens. Despite the fact that time in nature increases opportunities for play and exercise, boosting children’s health and development and reducing hyperactivity — the bane of our short-attention span era — most American preschoolers don’t get enough time outdoors, according to a new national report from the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER).  

    “Outdoor nature-based learning is vital for young children’s health, development, and education,” according to the report, which was written by W. Steven Barnett, the institute’s senior co-director and founder, and Kate Hodges, an early childhood education policy specialist. “Increased screen time and reduced exposure to nature are linked to serious health problems, such as obesity, diabetes, hyperactivity, stress, asthma, and allergies.”

    Sharpening a sense of stillness, calm and focus is easier for children in a natural setting, experts say. Amid the post-pandemic rise in child behavioral issues, some suggest that outdoor education might be an antidote to shattered attention spans and frayed nerves. 

     “The kids are play-deprived,” said Angela Hanscom, a pediatric occupational therapist and founder of Timbernook, a research-backed therapeutic play program. “Once they dive deep into the play, they calm down. It’s very interesting to watch. Being outside also helps you get you into an alert state of mind, which is ideal for the brain.”

    Giving children enough time for free play, experts say, may make it easier for them to sit quietly at their desk later. As with many aspects of the educational system, the risks of getting stuck too long indoors are elevated for low-income students, according to the institute’s report. 

    “These issues are particularly concerning for low-income children who often have limited access to safe outdoor spaces. By prioritizing nature-based learning in early childhood programs, states can help mitigate these health risks.”

    Hanscom notes that in an attempt to keep kids safe, we may have unwittingly put them in a new kind of danger. Some of the children she works with now require the kind of physical therapy, particularly balance and flow exercises, that were previously reserved for the geriatric. We force children to sit still at an age when they are built to move, she says, which has hampered their development.

    “Their neurological system is not developing properly,” Hanscom said. “We’re overly restricting children’s ability to move and play in pretty profound ways, and we’re actually causing harm to their development now. They’re literally falling out of the chairs and they’re having trouble paying attention, and they’re becoming more and more clumsy in their environment.”

    The lack of nature exposure in many kindergarten programs is ironic given that the term originated with visionary 19th century educator Friedrich Froebel, the founder of the kindergarten movement, “who believed that children are like flowers and need care and cultivation to grow and blossom, hence the name,” notes Barnett. Froebel’s original program featured an actual garden in which children each tended to their own plots.

    “Learning through nature was an important part of the program,” said Barnett. “Froebel also emphasized the preparation of highly proficient teachers, so it was not just the outdoor/nature aspect that has been lost.” 

    Rethinking the preschool experience to include the myriad wonders of the natural world is part of the purpose of the report. There is much to be learned from stomping through puddles, scrambling over fallen logs and digging in the dirt with sticks, some say.  

    Students explore at the Berkeley Forest School. Credit: Courtesy of the Berkeley Forest School

    “Considering that many preschool children attend for at least four to six hours per day, leaders should consider whether 30-60 minutes of outdoor time is sufficient,” said Barnett. “Many lessons can also be learned from forest or outdoor preschools in which children interact with a natural landscape and spend the entire preschool day outside.”

    Rooted in the Scandinavian education tradition, forest schools got a huge boost in popularity during the pandemic as a safe way to keep learning going even when buildings were closed. There are roughly 800 nature preschools in the U.S., a 200% increase since 2017, according to a survey by the Natural Start Alliance. 

    Science has long suggested that children’s mental and academic health can be buttressed by increasing exposure to nature while decreasing time online. One report, which distilled the results of 186 studies, noted that most researchers find that time spent in nature contributes to both psychological stability and academic agility. Time spent gazing at glowing screens, meanwhile, has often been associated with poor outcomes, including increased mental illness and diminished cognition. That should not come as a surprise, experts suggest.

    “Natural spaces are the context the human body has evolved in,” said Lia Grippo, founder of Wild Roots Forest School in Santa Barbara. “Our bodies expect variations in light, air temperature and movement, sights and sounds far and near, uneven terrain, space for a plethora of movements, and a host of life around us, doing what life does. When these expectations are met, we tend to be alert and relaxed. This is the state we learn best in.”

    More outdoor time has also been associated with better executive functioning. One study of 562 Norwegian preschoolers found a link between time spent outdoors and sharpened executive functioning, which includes attention and short-term memory. That study also found a connection between too much time indoors and hyperactivity symptoms. 

    “Outdoor and nature-based preschool activities contribute to children’s health development directly, support more complex play,” said Barnett, “and offer a teaching tool for children to learn about nature and the environment.”

    When Grippo taught at a traditional preschool, she tried hard to get the children outside into green spaces for playtime. She noticed that a lot of behavioral issues disappeared when the little ones were playing in meadows or woodlands. The children were quickly soothed by the pleasures of the natural playground, she said. 

    “Over time, this pattern became painfully clear,” said Grippo, who learned to forage in the woods as a child in Latvia. “Many of the problems I was working with were in fact problems of the environment rather than the children. Over the next few years, I spent more and more time in natural settings with the children until I finally abandoned the indoor space all together. It was the children who showed me what they needed.”

    Anything children encounter in nature can become a springboard to learning, some say. A dead bug can spark a discussion about the circle of life. A muddy stream becomes an art studio for a clay-based art project. A stack of sticks can be the raw material to build a fort in the forest.

     “Young children need a tremendous amount of movement in order to develop the capacity for stillness,” said Grippo, president of the California Association of Forest Schools. “They need an environment that offers a rich diversity of experiences with a healthy blend of predictability and novelty, in order to incorporate new information and understanding.  They need to feel a part of a large family, larger than just the human family. Nature provides for all of these needs.”

    The classroom is outside at many forest schools.
    credit: Berkeley Forest School

    Boosting opportunities for exploration and free play is just one reason that the National Institute for Early Education Research report argues that little children need more outdoor time. Play, some experts suggest, may well be characterized as the superpower of the young. A growing body of research suggests that play may even be a way to help close the achievement gap.

    “Just one of the many important reasons for increasing preschoolers’ time in natural spaces is that it improves the amount and quality of young children’s play,” said Barnett. “Research suggests that additional guidance and funding to support outdoor, nature-based learning in preschool settings could lead to positive early childhood educational experiences and cognitive, physical and social-emotional benefits for young learners.”

    For the record, California fares better than many states because it requires some outdoor time in its subsidized preschool program, the report suggests, but it fares less well in terms of supporting nature-based schools in general. 

    “California is among the states with stronger policies because it requires outdoor time every day for a substantial portion of the day, sets standards for air quality for children’s outdoor time, and requires preschool programs to have outdoor space,” said Barnett. “However, it is not one of the leaders with policies specific to outdoor and nature-based programs, which do not always fit well into the usual regulations for preschool and child care programs.”

    While California has more outdoor schools than most states, it should be noted that most forest schools aren’t licensed in the Golden State because they often do not have a permanent indoor venue. Washington became the first state to license outdoor preschools in 2019. There are roughly 80 such schools in California, according to the California Association of Forest Schools.

    Given its storied roots and the exhaustive research proving its efficacy, why has outdoor education struggled to take root in the American educational system? Why do many assume that schooling should be dominated by fluorescent lighting, asphalt and edtech? 

    outdoor school
    Students at the Berkeley Forest School have story time by the bay.
    Credit: Courtesy of the Berkeley Forest School

    “Inadequate funding explains a lot,” said Barnett. “We don’t invest in preschool teachers and, as a result, many do not have the knowledge and skills needed. Legal worries probably make it seem risky. Public programs tend to be built as cheaply as possible with no consideration for beauty or nature. Even for older children, it is hard to tell the difference between schools and prisons when they are being built.” 

    While some teachers can’t wait for the latest ed-tech breakthrough to engage their students, others point to the majesty of the natural world and its ability to spark our curiosity. 

    “Nothing I can do as an educator can begin to approximate the depth and breadth of what the natural world has to offer,” said Grippo. “Nature teaches us to pay attention,  expand awareness,  move with aliveness and agility, respond to our environment, experience awe, gratitude and love, develop fortitude, make mistakes and try again, and all in a space that makes the body healthier, happier, and smarter.”





    Source link

  • Legislative deal on reading instruction reached in the nick of time

    Legislative deal on reading instruction reached in the nick of time


    Credit: Allison Shelley / American Education

    KEY TAKEAWAYS
    • The new bill will offer state-approved training and textbooks to all TK-5th-grade teachers.
    • State-sanctioned training will be voluntary, part of the compromise.
    • A shift toward in evidence-based strategies, including phonics, moves away from local control.

    Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas has nudged parties at odds on how early literacy should be taught to agree to legislation that could significantly advance reading proficiency in California.

    After weeks of intense talks following months of stalled negotiations, a new bill that Rivas, D-Salinas, will co-author will have a hearing April 30, the deadline for an initial committee vote on new bills. Assembly Bill 1454 will call for providing potentially all transitional kindergarten through fifth-grade teachers with training and textbooks that stress what’s known as structured literacy, starting with phonics in the early grades. (The bill, which will be co-authored by Rivas, Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, and Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, had not yet been published as of Wednesday; it will soon replace the current AB 1854, an unrelated bill.)

    The bill won’t end the resistance of critics who argue that structured literacy, with an emphasis on foundational skills, is too narrow and can set back the progress of English learners who need more vocabulary and oral language strategies.

    But passage of the bill would move California toward a consistent statewide approach to reading instruction. The legislation will also follow the lead of other states whose adoption of evidence-based strategies, known as the science of reading, have contributed to wide gains in proficiency on both state tests and the National Assessment of Educational Progress or NAEP in the early grades.

    By contrast, on the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress, the 41 percentage point gap in proficiency between economically and non-economically disadvantaged students in California was among the widest in the nation, and growing. Only 8% of Black and 23% of Hispanic fourth graders in California were proficient in reading, compared with 56% of white and 67% of Asian students.

    Until now, California had avoided controversy by ceding control over reading instruction to local schools. The state did not collect information from districts on the reading strategies they used and the textbooks they purchased. Newly credentialed elementary grade teachers who were trained in the science of reading could be hired by districts using textbooks that conflicted with what they had just learned in credentialing programs.

    “This legislation is essential, important progress, and it reflects agreement and robust consensus on ways to provide educators the evidence-based tools they need to support California’s diverse students,” said Rivas in a statement. “We must make sure every child, no matter their background, has the opportunity to become a confident and thriving reader.”

    Also supporting the compromise is Californians Together, a nonprofit organization that advocates for English learners and biliteracy programs. It had opposed the original bill, Assembly Bill 1121, authored by Rubio. But in the statement that Rivas released, Hernandez said, “We appreciate Speaker Rivas’s leadership in bringing this legislation forward, and we remain committed to ensuring that any new literacy policy fully supports English learners.”

    A year ago, amid opposition from the California Teachers Association, the California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE), and Californians Together,  Rivas pulled Rubio’s bill and asked critics and supporters to come back in 2025 with a compromise. When that failed to happen, Rivas got involved and directly pressed for a deal. The opponents met with Rubio and advocacy nonprofits  EdVoice and Families In Schools,  Decoding Dyslexia CA and the California NAACP, the organizations co-sponsoring AB 1121.

    Rubio, who had expressed frustration with the opponents, thanked Rivas for his leadership and called AB 1454 “a significant step toward addressing very real concerns with our student outcomes while supplying teachers with the tools to ensure success in their roles.”

    CTA has not yet decided its position on the new bill, said CTA President David Goldberg, while noting that it “is in a far better place thanks to the leadership of Speaker Rivas and the coalition of educators working on behalf of students to ensure a viable and responsible approach to a truly important issue.”

    Jeffrey Freitas, the president of the smaller California Federation of Teachers, meanwhile, gave the new bill a full endorsement. “CFT members have been calling for more robust and improved literacy training and support to better meet the needs of our students,” he said. “We urge Governor Newsom and the Legislature to fully fund this important legislation, so that California teachers can immediately access the training.”

    What’s in the bill

    Although AB 1454 had not yet been released as of Wednesday morning, a 13-page analysis by staff of the Assembly Education Committee for the hearing had been posted.

    The main elements of Rubio’s bill, calling for a state-vetted choice of teacher training, along with materials aligned with instruction that the State Board of Education will approve, are in AB 1454. However, one key difference is that the teacher instruction, mandated under AB 1121, will be voluntary.

    “It is no longer required, but we feel good about it,” said Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice. “We believe districts will want to take advantage of it and get the professional development they need.”

    Also, language was added that satisfied Californians Together. There is more emphasis on aligning training with the California English Language Arts/English Language Development framework, Hernandez said, and the bill will explicitly call out “linguistically and culturally responsive” strategies. It will also highlight dual language instruction. “That’s a step in the right direction,” Hernandez said.  

    The bill will require the California Department of Education to consult with a range of groups, presumably including the English learner community and advocates for dyslexics, who strongly support phonics-based instruction.

    According to the Assembly analysis, the bill will require:

    • CDE to identify effective professional development in TK to grade 5 by Sept. 1, 2026 and for districts receiving funding for training to report to the state how many teachers received the training by 2029.
    • the State Board of Education to update its list of acceptable English language arts and English language development instructional materials;  
    • the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to update school administrator standards to include training on how to support effective literacy instruction. Muratsuchi, who chairs the Assembly Education Committee, had proposed this idea in his own literacy bill this year. He also participated in the negotiations.

    Funding for the training and materials is unresolved, for now. Gov. Newsom proposed $250 million for literacy instruction in his initial 2025-26 budget. Money is expected to be tight, but Rivas, as speaker, will be at the table with Newsom for final budget talks in June.





    Source link

  • Fresno Unified teachers condemn district for plan to cut extra class time for students

    Fresno Unified teachers condemn district for plan to cut extra class time for students


    Fresno Unified School District will cut its Designated Schools program that provides 30 additional instructional minutes to over 24,000 students each day. Fresno Teachers Association President Manuel Bonilla and around 100 educators protested the decision on Wednesday.

    Credit: Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource

    About 100 Fresno Unified educators slammed the state’s third-largest school system for its “unilateral” decision to eliminate a decadelong initiative for underserved students during a news conference Wednesday evening. 

    The district’s decision-making is being challenged as leaders face pushback for getting rid of a student-focused program that, from the district’s perspective, isn’t consistently meeting the needs of those students. 

    The district will cut its Designated Schools program, an initiative to improve student achievement through additional daily instruction. The district announced in January that the program, affecting about 40 schools, 24,000 students and over 1,250 educators, will end after this school year.

    Fresno Teachers Association President Manuel Bonilla said educators feel devalued and disrespected because eliminating the Designated Schools program without input from the school community is not a classroom-centered decision as it takes money away from the classroom, from teachers and from much-needed resources. 

    “It is a huge cut to trust,” Bonilla said. “It is a huge cut to respect and to value in this district. And we’re here to say, ‘We’re not going to put up with it.’”

    For the superintendent and district staff, the main consideration in the decision to eliminate the program is its effectiveness: “Are we getting the return for the investment that we’re making?” asked interim Superintendent Misty Her. 

    “While we have gotten some results, they’ve not been consistent,” Her said. “We’ve not had consistent (growth) year after year.” 

    What are Designated Schools?

    At Designated Schools, which are intended to close academic gaps at a faster pace, students have 30 extra minutes of instruction each day, teachers have 10 additional work days for professional training, and campuses have a full-time teacher on special assignment to assist with reading or math intervention, costing the district $30 million annually.

    Designated Schools are typically located in neighborhoods with large numbers of students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged. They serve vulnerable student populations that often start behind other groups. The extra time and resources are meant to catch students up by focusing on foundational skills they’re missing, teachers told EdSource. 

    Those students are going to lose 30 minutes of instruction every day, Bonilla said, equating the time to 90 additional instructional hours each year. 

    For example, during that 30 minutes of intervention time, teachers divide their classes into small groups by proficiency level and target students’ weak points. Teachers have the assistance of support staff who provide enrichment activities and targeted instruction.

    “Having that 30 extra minutes makes such a difference for these students, and we can see the gains, and we can see the growth that they make,” said Kate Hooper, a first grade teacher at Wilson Elementary, a Designated School.

    What does the decision mean?

    Designated School teachers are paid for the extra time and extra days they work, so eliminating the program means less pay for them. 

    Bonilla said the decision forces teachers to take a 12% pay cut, ranging from $651 to $1,150 each month. 

    District spokesperson Nikki Henry asserts that district officials stand behind their decision to end the $30 million program, but that much of what’s been communicated by the teachers union is “blatantly false” and “fear-based rhetoric.” 

    Nearly two-thirds of Designated School teachers will not see a pay reduction because there are already pay increases planned in their salary schedules, Henry said. In 2023, when the school district and teachers union reached a “historic” contract, the district agreed to 4.5% educator raises with a 2.5% bonus next school year. The remaining one-third of impacted teachers will see about a 2% decrease over two years. 

    Rather than keeping money in classrooms, Bonilla accused the district of wanting to pad its reserves and put the money toward consultants who, teachers say, don’t help them or students. According to Bonilla, the district’s reserves currently sit at about $234 million.

    Most of the money is already tied up by the district’s financial obligations, Henry said, explaining that only about 7%, or $121 million, belongs to the unrestricted reserves that can be used. The district plans to spend the reserves to a projected 4% in the next two years, she said. 

    Fresno Unified is in its second year of budget cuts with at least two more years of “tough decisions” ahead. Though cuts were at the district level for this school year, they will likely touch the classroom next school year, including consultant contracts, Henry said. 

    Much like other California school systems, the district is facing declining enrollment, less funding due to lower average daily attendance, and lower than expected cost of living adjustments from the state — all of which contributed to the decision to end the program. Now the district must add the volatility at the federal level to that, district officials said. 

    Is funding the only reason for the decision?

    The Designated School program seemingly includes all the components necessary to better student outcomes: more time with kids, more time for teachers’ professional learning and more support staff. 

    Henry said that in evaluating student growth over time, regardless of where student proficiency started, Designated Schools perform about the same as non-designated schools. 

    “You put $30 million a year into a program, and they perform similarly to non-designated schools,” she said. “There’s not a bigger growth.”

    And there should be, Henry said. The Designated Schools initiative was meant to show that with extra investment, schools make academic gains faster. 

    An analysis of the program, conducted by Hanover Research in the 2020-21 school year, also found that evidence of the program’s effectiveness on academic outcomes is mixed.

    “It’s just, more than anything, disheartening, coming from people who haven’t been in the classroom in a very long time,” Hooper, the Wilson Elementary teacher, said. 

    She and other teachers say they see the gains students are making. Devyn Stephens, another Wilson Elementary teacher, said she had a first grader who didn’t know their letters or sounds on the first day of school and is now able to read at a kindergarten or early first grade reading level, adding that she can’t imagine that being possible “without that 30 minutes.”

    Wilson Elementary third grade teacher Jessica Avila said the time is needed to ensure her students know how to read since the third grade curriculum is to read to understand, not learn to read. 

    There are “a few bright spots” in the data, the district admits, but not enough. The district did not provide the school-specific data it used to make its decision.

    Henry said after-school programs, which include homework help and intervention, will absorb the students who will no longer have 30 extra minutes of instruction in the classroom. Fresno Unified will also look to other programs that can make a difference.

    Since eliminating the program is a superintendent and staff-level decision, district staff won’t be recommending the program’s continuation in next year’s budget. Technically, the school board has the discretion and authority to add it back. 

    To many, that process is the problem. 

    “It’s not just the teachers that are suffering in regards to this lack of leadership, a lack of direction and student-focused decisions,” Bonilla, the teachers union president, said about a decision that affects tens of thousands of students. “They have not gone to our community whatsoever to have a discussion.”

    “If the district wants to own this, they need to come out and be real leaders and talk about it with the community.”





    Source link

  • How CSU campuses are helping more students graduate on time, without debt

    How CSU campuses are helping more students graduate on time, without debt


    Student para-planners at the Chico State Financial Wellness Clinic provide the campus community with free financial planning and education services overseen by a licensed financial planner.

    Credit: Jessica Bartlett / Chico State

    There’s a group of students whose fate has largely been forgotten amid the shifting political and policy landscape of higher education. It’s young people from lower-income backgrounds who are taking classes and studying while also working, caring for their families, and struggling to afford housing and basic needs, such as food.

    As the shifts continue, institutions and their allies can step up and do more to ensure these students complete their studies and realize the lifelong benefits of graduating with a bachelor’s degree. And they can do so by prioritizing affordability, recognizing that cost is often a major barrier to student success.

    Consider the example of Dejanae Wilson, who graduated from California State University, Chico, last year with a bachelor’s degree in social science. While working toward her degree, she was also caring for three younger siblings. 

    “I had a lot on my plate trying to manage our finances and keep up with my courses,” she said. 

    To ensure that Dejanae could graduate on schedule and according to plan, she turned to the recently established Financial Wellness Clinic at Chico State. Thanks to consultations with both a student and a faculty adviser at the clinic, she managed the household budget and connected to campus resources (like the Hungry Wildcat Food Pantry), which offered her family crucial support.  

    “It’s easy to get caught up in the flow of life, your job, and taking care of people — and not realize there are resources on campus that can help,” Dejanae said.

    Across California State University’s 23 campuses, administrators, faculty and students are working diligently to support students like Dejanae to complete their studies on time and according to plan. From expanding mentorship, tutoring, and academic advising, to increasing access to financial counseling, to instituting early warning systems to identify and support struggling students, campuses are piloting a range of promising approaches to support student persistence and success. These approaches often build on existing campus policies and programs, making them impactful and achievable.

    The Financial Wellness Clinic at Chico State, led by finance professor Jaycob Arbogast in the university’s College of Business and staffed by finance students, is just one example of these practical and effective strategies. This well-organized and structured program, which seamlessly integrates classroom learning with practical experience to support student needs, was recognized for its effectiveness and bestowed the prestigious Catalyst Fund award by the National Association of Higher Education Systems. The awards recognize replicable programs and strategies that California’s public colleges and universities are pursuing to remove cost as a barrier to higher education.

    At CSU Channel Islands, another innovative initiative that received Catalyst Fund support has provided additional resources to students who are struggling academically so they can stay on track and reduce the time (and costs) of earning a degree. Launched in spring 2022, the initiative targets students who have nonpassing or incomplete grades and/or other indicators that they are not progressing academically. The program connects these students to faculty and peer mentors and special, cohort-based activities where they bond with other students and develop skills and mindsets that support their persistence and success.

    Early results from the program show that participating students’ average GPAs increased, and the percentage of students who graduated or returned for the following semester was higher than that of the general student population. Interestingly, one of the key benefits students point to is how the program builds connections with peers facing similar challenges. As one student said after participating in the program, “You are able to be part of a group that becomes your family, you learn about the experiences of other students, and realize you are not alone.”

    Supporting students to persist in their studies can take several forms. At Sonoma State University, students who are the first in their family to go to college are 47% of all undergraduates. As university officials started to see a decline in retention among these “first-gen” students during the Covid pandemic, they developed an early alert system that pings a student and connects them to their adviser and other support when a faculty member reports low test scores or attendance problems. At the end of the program’s pilot year in 2023-24, 97% of first-year, first-gen students enrolled in the program ended in good academic standing and returned the following fall.

    What’s happening at Sonoma State and the other CSU campuses is part of a broader commitment to closing the equity gap in higher education across a university system that, despite its uniquely diverse student population, continues to experience racial disparities in degree completion. It was in response to these disparities that CSU set a goal to increase graduation rates between 2015 and 2025. Thanks to Graduation Initiative 2025, the system has nearly doubled its four-year graduation rate for first-year students, and undergraduates are earning their degrees faster than ever before.

    Expanding access to a bachelor’s degree and supporting student persistence and success are core functions of the higher education system. In California and across the nation, campuses are showing it’s possible to do better, even in today’s uncertain political and policy environment. All it takes is creativity and a commitment to students who might otherwise struggle to achieve their college dreams.

    •••

    Dilcie Perez is a deputy vice chancellor and chief student affairs officer for the California State University system. Monica Martinez is program director for college success at the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund.

    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

  • It’s time to prioritize our youngest Californians

    It’s time to prioritize our youngest Californians


    Credit: Courtesy of Kidango

    California is home to more than 1.7 million children under the age of 3 — our future doctors, teachers, engineers, and leaders. These youngest Californians represent about 4% of our state’s population and are from diverse backgrounds, with nearly 60% speaking a language other than English at home. Yet, for too long, they have been left behind in policy discussions and funding decisions.

    The science is clear: 80% of brain growth happens by the age of 3, laying the foundation for a child’s cognitive, social, and emotional development. Every moment in which we do not invest in babies’ development is a critical missed opportunity to lay the foundation for our future.

    That’s why babies urgently need high-quality, affordable early learning and care from birth. Unfortunately, for many families, this is either too expensive or unavailable, forcing parents into impossible choices between their careers and raising their children.

    This dire shortage of care options affects more than just parents. When families can’t find high-quality, affordable care, the ripple effects are felt across workplaces, classrooms, and communities. Parents — and, in most cases, mothers — are often forced to leave the workforce, creating financial instability for their families, reducing career opportunities for women and decreasing the overall productivity in our economy.

    To expand access and make early learning and care available to all of California’s children, our educators and caregivers need our support. These professionals, the majority of whom are women of color, are among the lowest-paid workers in the state. This chronic underinvestment has pushed many of them to leave the field, worsening an already extreme shortage of care.

    We must expand the workforce because, while 36% of infants and toddlers qualify for subsidized care, only 14% have access to a space. But California — which has led the nation in taking bold action by creating access to universal preschool through the expansion of Transitional Kindergarten (TK) for all 4-year-old children and expanding access to state preschool to 3-year-olds — can close this gap. 

    It’s time to put solutions into action. Scaling successful models across early learning and care settings means expanding proven, high-quality programs to reach more children, especially those who live in communities that are under-resourced. By adapting these models to child care programs of all sizes — from home-based providers to large early learning centers — we can ensure more children have access to the education and support they need to thrive.

    Here’s how we can act now:

    • Continue to support reforms to child care reimbursement rates to reflect the true cost of care. The goal is to develop policies to give caregivers a just and livable wage. 
    • The Legislature and governor should move ahead with their plans to expand child care access to thousands more children of working-class families through the commitment to funding 200,000 new subsidized child care slots by the 2027-28 state budget, but they should target this access to infants and toddlers, because that is what families need the most.
    • We must remove the roadblocks to opening new child care centers and home-based providers, such as: allowing new early learning and care teachers to obtain their required college courses while working, as well as speeding up the time it takes for state child care licensing to approve new facilities, as we are currently advocating for at the legislative level. 

    Let’s Do This, Together

    By listening to families; supporting early learning educators and providers; and working collaboratively with our governor, the Legislature, state leaders, and our partners, we can build a system that works for everyone. The future of our state depends on the decisions we make today.

    Our babies can’t wait. Let’s act now to ensure they get the support they need to thrive.

    •••

    Patricia Lozano is the executive director of Early Edge California, a nonprofit organization that advocates for accessible, high-quality early learning and care for communities that are under-resourced, with a primary focus on babies, toddlers, and preschoolers.
    Scott Moore is the CEO of Kidango, a leading early childhood non-profit that serves thousands of low-income children and families.

    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