برچسب: with

  • State’s school awards dinner at Disneyland comes with hefty price tag

    State’s school awards dinner at Disneyland comes with hefty price tag


    State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, center, stands with Mickey and Minnie Mouse, alongside Lisette Estrella-Henderson, center right, the Solano County Superintendent of Schools, at Disneyland in Anaheim during the California School Recognition Program in 2019.

    Credit: Lisette Estrella-Henderson / X

    California schools that have significantly improved student achievement will be honored in a ceremony hosted by the California Department of Education at Disneyland on Friday, but the $500 per person ticket price has some superintendents fuming.

    Districts pay between $460 and $500 per person to attend the California School Recognition Program Awards Ceremony, depending on when they register. They also pay the cost of employee travel to Anaheim and for their lodging. The Disneyland Hotel is offering a conference rate of $324, plus taxes and fees. Parking is $60 per vehicle. 

    The price tag is leaving some superintendents conflicted. Do they send teachers and other staff to celebrate their school’s success, or do they use the money to pay for other needs, such as professional development, tutors or supplies?

    “The state understands that most districts, a majority of districts right now, are in budget constriction and deficit spending,” said Anne Hubbard, superintendent of the tiny 900-student TK-6 Hope Elementary School District in Santa Barbara. “And it seems just crazy that the CDE would be the host of this event, this honoring, this lifting up of education, with a price tag that just does not make sense to me.”

    The annual awards ceremony celebrates California Distinguished Schools, National Blue Ribbon Schools, Green Ribbon Schools Green Achievers and Civic Learning Awards Schools. It is expected to draw 1,300 people to the hotel, according to event organizers.

    The event, which has been held at the venue for decades, will cost more than half a million dollars. It is paid for with registration fees and sponsorships.

    School may have a nacho party instead 

    Hubbard was proud and excited when she learned that Vieja Valley Elementary — one of the district’s three schools — had been named a California Distinguished School. She quickly booked a few rooms at the Disneyland Hotel and proceeded to the registration page to see if there was a limit to the number of employees she could send.

    “I was completely floored when I got to the checkout and saw the price tag for attending the ceremony — $490, plus a $10 processing fee,” Hubbard said. 

    Hubbard asked event organizers if her staff could forgo the dinner and be in attendance to receive the award. She said she was told everyone must pay to attend. Hubbard decided it would be less expensive and more inclusive to celebrate with the entire staff and is considering a nacho bar.

    Demian Barnett, superintendent/principal of nearby Peabody Charter School, will pick up the award for Vieja Valley Elementary. He and another administrator plan to make the three-hour round trip to avoid room charges. Two teachers from the school will stay overnight.

    “We found a way to be able to support four people to go, but I would be using that money to do programming with kids here if I wasn’t doing this,” he said last week.

    Funding help available, CDE says

    The California Department of Education can not directly fund awards or recognition programs because the Legislature has not authorized it to spend taxpayer funds in this way, said Elizabeth Sanders, director of communications for the CDE.

    She says honorees should first look to their district foundation to cover the cost of attending the awards dinner, but can also contact the department for help obtaining a sponsor or a scholarship, if funds are available. Honorees who do not attend will receive their award by mail at no charge, she said.

    A check of the registration website last week found no mention of scholarships, and superintendents who spoke to EdSource were not aware that funding could be available.

    The only district team that directly requested financial assistance this year has been able to find local support and is registered for the event, Sanders said.

    Photos and giant mice

    The California School Recognition Program Awards Ceremony will start at 10 a.m. with group photos taken throughout the day, according to the California Department of Education registration webpage

    Guests can also wait in line to take photos with Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, passing sponsor and district booths as they move along. Mickey and Minnie Mouse are on hand for photos as well. 

    The awards dinner begins at 6 p.m. with entertainment usually provided by student musicians, according to past attendees. It is scheduled to last three hours.

    Distance can make travel costs prohibitive

    Ferndale Unified in Humboldt County will spend more than $10,000 from its general fund to send Principal/Superintendent Danielle Carmesin and two Ferndale Elementary School teachers to Anaheim.

    Because of the school’s distance from the event — 662 miles — the school’s staff will fly to Anaheim and stay two nights.

    The cost is steep for a district struggling with budget cuts, but district leaders decided it was important to celebrate the big improvements the school has made in math, English and science scores on the state’s California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress, or CAASPP tests.

    “It’s all just a publicity stunt, but if you don’t show up, then that’s not fair for my school,” Carmesin said. “So they have you kind of over a barrel, and it’s like, we haven’t won it in over 10 years; my face is going to be in that picture.”

    Live Oak Unified is sending half its teachers

    The cost of the event is prohibitive for rural schools, said Yuri Calderon, executive director of the Small Schools Districts’ Association. Calderon said many small districts are struggling to make ends meet, and have staffing shortages that take precedence.

    Live Oak Unified in rural Sutter County is sending the principal of Encinal Elementary School and two teachers to the dinner in Anaheim to collect a Distinguished School Award. The school won the award for the first time by improving test scores and suspension rates, said Superintendent Mathew Gulbrandsen.

     Gulbrandsen would have sent more staff to the awards ceremony, but the cost limits the number of people who can participate, he said. Additionally, the school would have to pay substitutes $120 each to cover classes because the event is on a Friday.

    “I mean that school itself is a small school — 120 students,” he said. “Five teachers, a principal, a secretary. There’s no way all of them could attend on a workday. You’d have to shut the school down. So we can’t do that.” 

    They want more for their money

    Sanders said that a $500 registration fee is pretty standard for a daylong conference, but superintendents interviewed by EdSource said they expected more for the money — possibly some workshops or a keynote speaker.

    “So, I thought, OK, is Taylor Swift playing? What’s going on? Hubbard said. “And really to find out that there is nothing, and you have to attend the banquet in order … to just pick up the award. I would have taken a team down there, taken them out to dinner for under $500 by the way.”

    Hubbard said she has attended many two- and three-day conferences that include multiple meals that cost less than the awards dinner at Disneyland. 

    When she previously attended the National Blue Ribbon School Award celebration in Washington, D.C., Hubbard paid for travel and rooms, but no registration fee. The event included three days of speakers and workshops. Every school receives a National Blue Ribbon School flag and plaque at the awards luncheon, according to the website. 

    The California School Boards Association offers one free ticket to the Golden Bell Awards Ceremony to each school district or county office that wins. Each additional ticket is $150. The event, which will take place at the Hyatt Regency in Sacramento on Dec. 4, includes appetizers and dessert. It honors outstanding programs and governance practices of California school boards.

    Conference breaks even 

    With 1,300 attending this year, the registration fees for the California School Recognition Program Awards Ceremony will bring in at least $600,000, plus contributions from corporate sponsors such as Pearson, Garner Holt Education Through Imagination, Smart School, the California State Lottery and the California Association of School Business Officials.

    “We’re not accumulating a big pile of money that we kick back to the department or anything like that,” said Ed Honowitz, chief executive officer of Californians Dedicated to Education Foundation, the CDE’s nonprofit foundation. “It really is kind of essentially a break-even kind of thing. Sometimes, there’s some carryover from one year to the other, but it’s kind of minimal.”

    Registration and sponsorship funds are collected, and bills for the awards event are paid by the Californians Dedication to Education Foundation, but the event is run by CDE staff, Honowitz said.

    Rising conference costs are causing challenges for organizations across the state, he said.

    The CDE has worked to make the conference as affordable as possible, even considering cutting the visits from Minnie and Mickey Mouse to save money, Sanders said. In the end, it was decided that the cost of the mice — a few hundred dollars, according to Sanders — was worthwhile.

    Suites for top CDE executives

    According to a former manager who has attended the event within the last five years, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and other high-level CDE staff stayed in suites with access to a VIP area with complimentary food and beverages.

    The former manager described the room as a corner suite with a kitchen, living room and bedroom, and large windows that allowed a view of the nightly fireworks at Disneyland. Similar rooms as the one described go for $1,252 at the regular rate, according to the website.

    Rooms, travel and meals for volunteers and staff are paid for by sponsors and do not come from registration costs, Sanders said. 

    Carmesin says the cost of the event shows that CDE leaders are disconnected from the work educators do.

    “You know, they think they’re celebrating us, but giving me an invoice didn’t make me feel very celebratory,” she said.





    Source link

  • Newsom prioritizes electric school buses over preschool for children with disabilities

    Newsom prioritizes electric school buses over preschool for children with disabilities


    Marysville Joint Unified School District runs preschool for children with and without disabilities.

    Courtesy of Marysville Joint Unified School District

    Gov. Gavin Newsom invested millions into expanding preschool for children with disabilities. Now, he’s proposing to scale it back, to invest more in electric school buses.

    The move is causing an uproar among leaders of county offices of education and school districts, and advocates for early education and special education.

    “While I appreciate the governor’s dedication to climate change, as a special education administrator and somebody who’s been in the special education field, I think students with disabilities are more important than electric buses,” said Anthony Rebelo, director of the Trinity County Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and chair of the Coalition for Adequate Funding for Special Education.

    Two programs that aim to expand access to preschool for children with disabilities are proposed to be slashed in Newsom’s May revision of his budget proposal.

    The first is an increase in the number of slots in state-subsidized preschool programs that are set aside for children with disabilities. Beginning in 2022, the state began to require these preschool programs to set aside at least 5% of their space to enroll children with disabilities. The percentage of space set aside was to increase to 7.5% in 2025-26, and to 10% in 2026-27. Facing a massive budget shortfall, Newsom is now proposing to cancel that increase and leave the number of slots for children with disabilities at 5%. This move would save the state $47.9 million in 2025-26 and $97.9 million ongoing, beginning in 2026–27.

    The second program the governor plans to cut is the Inclusive Early Education Expansion Program, a program that was set to fund $250 million in grants to help school districts and county offices of education adapt facilities and playground equipment and train preschool teachers to meet the needs of children with disabilities. The state funded a first round of grants in 2020. School districts and county offices of education had applied in April for a second round of grants. The California Department of Education sent out award letters this week to some applicants specifying how much funding they can expect to receive.

    During a May 16 hearing before the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee on Education, Alex Shoap, finance budget analyst from the California Department of Finance, made it clear Newsom is proposing “pulling back $250 million in currently unallocated Inclusive Early Education Expansion Program funding to instead support the electric school bus grant investment.”

    H.D. Palmer, deputy director for external affairs for the Department of Finance, said the state Legislature had committed to putting $500 million toward electric school buses in 2024-25 and another $500 million in 2025-26. Newsom now aims to spend $395 million more on the buses in 2024-25, most of which would come from the Inclusive Early Education Expansion Program.

    Palmer said spending more now on electric school buses would reduce the amount the state would have to pay in 2025-26 to $105 million.

    In response to criticism of cuts to preschool for children with disabilities, Palmer pointed to the following comment from Newsom on May 10 when he announced his new budget proposals.

    “You will ask me, I’m sure, in the Q and A, ‘Why this cut?’ I will undoubtedly say, ‘I prefer not to make this cut.’ These are programs, these are propositions that I’ve long advanced, many of them. These are things that I’ve supported. These are things we worked closely with the Legislature to advance. None of this is the kind of work you enjoy doing, but you’ve got to do it,” Newsom said.

    School district and county leaders, as well as other preschool providers across the state expressed dismay that these programs would be cut at a time when preschool programs were just beginning to include more children with disabilities in their classrooms.

    “It really is a breach of promise,” said Dave Gordon, Sacramento County superintendent of schools. “People have been planning for these services to go forward for several years. They’re ready to go. I have several people on my staff who are broken-hearted that this is not going to go forward, because they feel it’s been long delayed.”

    Preschoolers with and without disabilities learn and play together in Marysville Joint Unified School District.
    Courtesy of Marysville Joint Unified School District

    Under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, children as young as 3 years old with disabilities must be provided special education. The U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have stated that children with disabilities should have access to preschool and child care programs where they can participate alongside their peers without disabilities. California also made expanding access to inclusive preschool programs a goal in its Master Plan for Early Learning and Care, released in 2020.

    “We’re woefully behind most states,” said Elizabeth Engelken, chair of the association SELPA Administrators of California. “We were relying on this … support to begin to shift the environment in schools to be more developmentally appropriate.”

    Jolie Critchfield, director of child development for Marysville Joint Unified School District in Yuba County, said her district used funding from the Inclusive Early Education Expansion Program to train staff and completely revamp their preschool programs with new materials and playground equipment, like swings built for children with disabilities. The district also moved all “special day classrooms” alongside general preschool classrooms, so that children with disabilities are able to interact with other children on the playground and spend time in class with them as well.

    She said the district planned to use future funding to increase coaching for teachers and to include more children with disabilities in general education preschool classrooms.

    “It literally brings tears to your eyes, seeing the kids in the program with wheelchairs and scooters. Kids that you just would not think could be OK in a general education setting, because it would be too overwhelming, are going in there and doing so well,” Critchfield said. “I can’t believe we ever did it any differently.”

    One mother, Stella Goodnough, said she is grateful her daughter was able to attend preschool in Marysville alongside children with disabilities. 

    “I was always afraid to approach special-needs children because I didn’t know what to say or do. Now I see my daughter make friends, especially a best friend, with a special-needs child,” said Goodnough. “She often talks about him at home, which creates opportunities to talk about how wonderful we all are with our differences.”

    The Kings County Early Learning Center playground includes a swing for children in wheelchairs and other equipment for children with disabilities.
    Courtesy of Kings County Office of Education

    The Kings County Office of Education in the Central San Joaquin Valley used funding from the first round of grants to transform an old school building into an early learning center, with many services available for children with disabilities. The center, in Hanford, currently has one classroom where children with and without disabilities are taught together. The county office applied for another grant this year to open two more inclusion classrooms. 

    “Without this funding, our goals are once again relegated to a far-off future when we can’t ever guarantee when that might happen,” said Todd Barlow, Kings County superintendent of schools.

    Several special education administrators said cutting the program would end up costing the state more in the future, because children who have had early education and services at a young age may not need as much intervention in later years.

    “If we identify a student much earlier, get them in that school routine of what it’s like to have group instruction, they’re going to be much more prepared by the time they’re in kindergarten or TK,” Rebelo said. “This just feels like a huge step backwards.”

    The budget proposal would cut about 200 children with disabilities from attending preschool at Kidango, a nonprofit organization that runs dozens of child care centers in the San Francisco Bay Area, according to the organization’s director, Scott Moore.

    “This budget cut is not only harmful to children, but research shows it will result in higher special education costs in the future,” Moore said. “So it’s bad for kids and bad for the state budget.”

    The state budget is still in negotiations until the Legislature passes a final bill in June.





    Source link

  • A conversation with Cal State Chancellor Mildred Garcia

    A conversation with Cal State Chancellor Mildred Garcia


    Mildred Garcia, chancellor of the California State University System.

    Credit: Cal State Fullerton/Flickr

    In October 2023, Mildred Garcia stepped into her role as chancellor for the California State University, becoming the first Latina in the nation to lead a four-year public university system. Formerly the president of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, Garcia joined the CSU system at a time of post-pandemic turbulence.

    Garcia sat down with California Student Journalism Corps reporter Alexcia Negrete in early May for an interview to discuss Garcia’s leadership goals, with student concerns being the primary focus.

    The discussion ranged from underrepresented groups having increased access to the CSU system, to Title IX (sex discrimination) issues, to enrollment and tuition challenges.

    This interview was edited for clarity and length.

    What are the main goals that the CSU, or the main goals that you have to continue supporting students in the next school year?

    My North Star is student success, equity, affordability, graduation, retention, everything. The reason I am here is because of the students we serve. We serve the first-generation, the low-income, the students of color, and the adults in the majority in California, with a four-year degree and beyond. 

    And we are going to be the role model — or we are the role models — on how we graduate students from diverse backgrounds to reach their highest potential. Everything I do is centered on that — how does this affect the students, the families and their goals to reach where they want to be? 

    And sometimes that goes against people’s perceptions; but this is mine, right? Because I am a first-generation college student. I know how it changes lives. I know we came from a very poor family. And I know how now people that come after me — my nieces and nephews and family members — will say not ‘Will I go to college?’ The question is, ‘What college am I going to go to?’ And so for me, it’s part of my passion, my mission and my life’s work.

    You have been president of two Cal State universities, Dominguez Hills and Fullerton, and you have been able to work with students one-on-one during that time. But as a chancellor, that can sometimes feel a little separated. What would you want students to know about you?

    I think No. 1 is that I had a similar background that they had. … I grew up in a very poor neighborhood. Then my father died when I was 12, and we had to move to the housing projects of Brooklyn. 

    I had to work my way to college. We were seven children, and my mother had to support us on a factory salary. … Everybody has a different story, but it’s a story of having the hunger to do better, because we want out of poverty, we want to live a satisfying life (with) economic independence. 

    I marvel and congratulate each student that is struggling to get that degree and go on and be whatever they want to be — whatever that goal is — and go off and help others and reach their highest potential and be engaged citizens in our communities and cities in California. … It’s not just the college degree, but it’s a path, it’s a chapter in your journey of your book of life. 

    As a whole, the CSU has faced Title IX scandals, which have led to some students expressing concerns about the overall Title IX process. How will you work to repair the trust lost by the students, and overall, change the image of the process by the CSU?

    Well, first of all, we had a huge report by Cozen O’Connor, and also the state auditor, and we are following those steps. Every president has a committee now on how to implement steps, and (they) are supposed to be communicating with their campuses how to really have a voice and have nobody be afraid, with no retaliation on issues of Title IX. 

    Every campus now is going to have a committee, someone in charge, and we at the Chancellor’s Office are going to monitor that. … Every president of every university in the CSU has a goal (of) reporting to me that Title IX is a priority, and that they are implementing the recommendations of the Cozen O’Connor report, and they will be held accountable for that. 

    What my hope is, is that each of the campuses is working with their vice president for student affairs, the provost and … human resources, (and explaining) our process. Yes, you can come forward; we will make sure that there is a process, and it’s documented, and that we follow the procedure to do the investigations.

    In the CSU, there have been some campuses facing some declining enrollment, and some campuses have been forced to cut classes or faculty members. Are you currently working to ensure that students are still getting the education that they need, regardless of the classes (and faculty) being cut? And if so how? 

    The answer is yes. Each president is working with their teams to ensure that the students that we have admitted will be able to get the classes and graduate. That is their No. 1 goal. 

    My No. 1 goal is for the students to have a wonderful experience on their campus and graduate, get the classes and go off and do great things and then come back and tell us about it and become great alumni. 

    Our No. 1 priority with our team — which is all the presidents and the vice chancellors — is student success. It’s going to be different on each campus, right? So each president has to work with their teams to set up structures and practices, and then hold themselves accountable to watch how students are progressing to graduation.

    Before you officially started as chancellor, CSU trustees voted to increase tuition for the next five years. A lot of students have disagreed with the decision and have had protests, saying that the Cal States will now become too expensive for them, or they won’t get enough financial aid support. What kind of reassurance can you provide students who are currently working to pay their tuition and who are concerned about the tuition increase?

    First of all, let me go to the data — I don’t have any exact numbers in front of us, but 60% of students have their tuition completely covered. So for the students, it’s not the tuition that’s giving them the problem, it’s the cost of living. What we have to figure out is how do we help and bring together Pell [Grants], State University grants and scholarships to be able to help each of the students really reach the cost of living as much as possible. 

    While I understand the students — I had to pay my way through college, and I worked three to four, multiple jobs, during the year — our tuition is one of the cheapest in the country. If most of our students are getting their tuition paid, what’s really hurting them is the cost of attendance.

    And so we’re trying to figure out ways that we can help the students — that’s No. 1. No. 2, I have been lobbying — even before I came here, at my former job in Washington, D.C. — to double Pell. No. 3, we need to work with our state legislators, who have been good to us, about telling them the need for more resources, for state universities like the California State University system.

    The CSU as a whole is anticipating more universitywide budget cuts due to less state aid, and some campuses, because of those cuts, have made cuts to their programs and positions. How will you continue to make sure that students feel supported during this time when we’re getting less state aid?

    Each campus has to look at what are core necessities for students so that they can grant what it is that they need the most. Each campus has to look at, ‘What is it that our students need in order to graduate, and how do we do that in a limited budget?’ 

    It’s very much like your budget at home — you have a budget, you’ve got to pay rent, you’ve got to pay your electricity, you’ve got to pay whatever it is that you pay — and you use your paycheck and the fringes have to go. You may not be able to go to dinner three times a week. 

    It’s the same thing with a university, you take your budget, and you say, ‘What’s our No. 1 priority?’ The No. 1 priority is our students graduating, our students getting their classes, and our students getting the support services they need in order to be doing well in classes and graduate. 

    Is there anything else that you would like to tell us?

    I think that the CSU has to understand they’re a very special place. I worked with 400 institutions across this country when I was in Washington, D.C., and we have to be working together to tell our powerful story saying what the value of the CSU is. Eighty percent of our students stay within a 50-mile radius of where they live after they graduate. That means (they) are the entrepreneurs, the journalists, the people who are going to run businesses, the people who go on to graduate school, the people who become medical doctors. This is what we’re doing for California, this is what we’re doing for the cities. 

    It’s a private good, I’ll give you that. It helps you and your family for generations to come. But it also helps the city and communities in the state because you pay taxes, you are engaged in your community, you are leaders, you vote, you’re healthier, all of that. 

    Look, I’m the first one to say nobody’s perfect; we have a lot to do to be better. But we are engaged in such a way that so many of our students are doing great things. … That’s what we need to be talking about. (We need to) continue to do better, improve performance, learn from our mistakes and get better.

    Ashley Bolter is a fourth-year journalism major and French and ethnic studies minor at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. Alexcia Negrete is a fourth-year communications major at California State University, Fullerton. Both are members of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Why focus is a superpower in the classroom: A Q&A with author Doug Lemov

    Why focus is a superpower in the classroom: A Q&A with author Doug Lemov


    A first-grade boy and his kindergarten friend read together on a bench outside. Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Attention must be paid. Amid the worsening literacy and numeracy crises in our schools, Doug Lemov, former teacher, education expert and author of the bestseller “Teach Like a Champion,” believes that there should be far greater awareness of what the research says about how the brain works, that parents and teachers should know how kids learn best. 

    Funny, warm and unassuming, Lemov recently took a few minutes away from his latest book to hold forth on how we can better connect what we know about cognition with what we do in the classroom. These insights into the science of learning shape the way he thinks about everything from focus to engagement, from the use of cellphones at school to why kids should read entire books, and not just passages, to fuel reading comprehension.

    Is it possible that diminished student focus is part of why test scores have cratered? Could it be one cause of the literacy and numeracy crises?

    Yes. On two levels. Attention is always the currency of learning. To learn something you first have to pay attention to it and sustain that attention. When attention is fractured, both learning and performance are lowered. And, of course, a habit of paying lesser attention reduces long-term learning. So, students both learn less and can produce poorer versions of what they do know when their focus is diminished.

    Why might cellphones and other devices in the classroom diminish focus?

    They are designed by the sharpest minds in society to do just that. They are designed to disrupt and reroute attention to the things on your phone. That is the business model: to get eyeballs. To do that you have to create a malleable consumer.

    And humans are inclined to respond to new and unexpected stimuli. We evolved to do this because the new and unexpected is often — or was often — important in terms of survival. Hear a new noise in the woods you’ve never heard before? If you want your progeny to pass down into modernity, you’d better pay particular attention.

    We are also especially responsive to “variable, unpredictable rewards” —we want affirmation —we are wired to be social because we are weak as individuals and could never compete with other species and only survived evolution because we banded together.

    Group formation is an evolutionary imperative. We are hypersensitive to whether we are still liked and loved by the group because if not, we know we are at risk. Unpredictable and variable rewards hack that system. We’re always wondering if we’ve gotten those “likes” … and when we do, we get a little dopamine hit in our brains. And, in the end, the brain is neuroplastic. It wires how it fires. If you are constantly distracted, constantly seeking affirmation, you come to need the distraction and the affirmation, to be wired to expect it.

    First you need your cellphone close to you all the time, but after a while your cellphone is within you. Its influence is wired into you even when it’s not there.

    And would removing cellphones also help build student engagement?

    It would help students to pay far better attention and to rebuild attentional skills. And it would reduce the anxiety of the shadow world of social media. My daughter’s school banned cellphones this year. She was not happy because she loves to listen to music. And she suspected I might have had something to do with it. So she was upset the first week. But on Friday she came to me and said: “Dad, don’t let this go to your head, but I can’t believe how much happier and less stressed I am without my phone. It’s just like this thing that was always on my mind is gone.”

    What is important to understand about cognition, how working memory functions, for example, when teaching kids how to read or do math?

    Working memory is the brain’s ability to think actively and consciously about something. It’s definitely a superpower, and its effectiveness is directly tied to attentional skills and focus. But learning is, a cognitive scientist would say, a change in long-term memory. In fact, we don’t learn most of the things we think about. We forget instead. And again, attention is one of the key drivers of the process of encoding — which is getting what we think about into our long-term memory.

    Why does background knowledge matter?

    Reading comprehension is not a set of formalistic skills. Practicing making inferences about “Tuck Everlasting” won’t help me make inferences about “Little House on the Prairie” because resolving the ambiguity in any text demands background knowledge. You make the inference that something special is happening in town when you are reading “Little House” because the girls are taking baths on a Wednesday evening. And if you know that people on the prairie in the 19th century only bathed for church on Sunday and on special occasions — because taking a bath required you to bring water up from the well and chop wood to heat it pan by pan, and so it was incredibly labor intensive — if you know that, you make the inference, and if you don’t, you don’t. So once students are fluent readers, background knowledge is the single biggest influence on comprehension.

    Why is it important for kids to read whole books, instead of just reading passages, to foster reading comprehension? 

    Life is complex. A book is a long-form reflection on a topic. A narrator almost never sees the world at the end the way he or she does at the beginning. Understanding the world takes 200 pages, and that is actually a better reflection of the humility and depth it takes to navigate the world than the belief that we can tell the story of our lives fully in radically truncated forms.

    You can only read fully if you understand “voice” … who is this person speaking to me, and how do they communicate? What are the gaps between what they say and what they are? A long-form relationship with a sustained narrative voice is necessary for the deepest forms of comprehension. 

    Why do we read less deeply online? If there is less brain activation from reading on screen, as some research suggests, why don’t we encourage kids to read printed books? 

    I’m not sure why we don’t, but maybe we need a short pithy phrase to remind ourselves that learning and reading are better without screens. So my phrase is: high text; low tech.





    Source link

  • Gov. Newsom, school groups settle funding fight, with some more money coming as IOUs

    Gov. Newsom, school groups settle funding fight, with some more money coming as IOUs


    Gov. Gavin Newsom unveils his revised 2024-25 state budget during a news conference in Sacramento on May 10.

    Credit: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

    The Newsom administration has settled a disagreement with K-12 education groups over multiyear funding that will provide nearly all of the money the groups had demanded, although deferring and delaying several billion dollars for at least a few years.

    Pending legislative approval, the compromise that the California Department of Education negotiated with the California Teachers Association (CTA) would remove an obstacle to resolving the 2024-25 state budget by the June 15 deadline.

    The deal would preserve Gov. Gavin Newsom’s promise to exempt TK-12 schools and community colleges from appreciable funding cuts that other areas of the state budget would face, including the California State University and the University of California.

    The proposal also would meet the legal requirements of Proposition 98, the 4-decade-old formula that calculates the minimum portion of the general fund that must be spent on education. It was Newsom’s plan in his original January budget to spare schools and community colleges immediate cuts while scaling back Proposition 98 growth in future years that led CTA and the California School Boards Association to threaten to take Newsom to court with a lawsuit it had reasonable odds of winning.

    “This is a good deal for public schools. In its simplest terms, this agreement will protect the state’s core TK-12 investments, like the Local Control Funding Formula and new whole child programs,” said Derick Lennox, senior director of governmental relations and legal affairs for the California County Superintendents Association, who was briefed on the negotiations Tuesday. “If approved by the Legislature, the governor will be able to honor his commitment to protect school funding amidst a challenging budget.”

    Challenging is an understatement. Because the state will fall short of full funding for the current year, 2023-24, the Legislature would suspend Proposition 98 for the first time since the height of the Great Recession in 2010-11 by $5.5 billion. The money owed, an IOU called the “maintenance factor” under Proposition 98 terminology, would be repaid over multiple years, as determined by the growth in state revenue. The repayments would start with $1.3 billion in 2024-25.

    The deal would reintroduce funding deferrals — another accounting maneuver from the Great Recession, though at a smaller magnitude. As opposed to a funding suspension, a deferral is a late payment, in which the Legislature shifts funding by days or months from one fiscal year to the next, and districts are on the hook for money they’ve already spent.

    The settlement calls for three years of deferrals, ranging from $1.3 billion to $2.6 billion, from 2023-24 through 2025-26. The last deferral, for $2.4 billion, would make up about 2% of funding to community colleges and school districts. Together, the three deferrals should have no appreciable impact on school and community college budgets but will require $2.4 billion in future school funding to pay off. They will involve an accounting shift from June, the last month of one fiscal year, to July, the first month of the next.

    “The agreement reached with the governor to protect public school funding is a critical step forward for California’s schools and communities,” said CTA President David Goldberg. “It ensures that students, educators, and families aren’t impacted by cuts to the classroom and includes protection against additional layoffs of educators.”

    The revenue conundrum reflects a slow rebound from an unexpected drop in state revenue following the Covid pandemic. Because of winter storms in early 2023, the federal government and California pushed back the filing date for taxes by six months. Without accurate revenue estimates when they set the 2023-24 budget in June, Newsom and the Legislature appropriated $8.8 billion more than the Proposition 98 minimum.

    Since TK-12 and community colleges had already budgeted and spent the money, Newsom promised to hold them harmless. But in his first budget draft in January and his May revision, Newsom proposed to treat the $8.8 billion as an off-the-books, one-time overpayment; CTA and school groups viewed it as an ongoing obligation, that, as spelled out by voters in approving Proposition 98, would become the base for the following year’s minimum level of the guarantee.

    “They arrived at a solution that gives the Governor and Legislature near-term budget flexibility while abiding by the state’s constitutional provisions related to minimum funding for schools,” education consultant Kevin Gordon said. “A negotiated suspension of Prop 98 has been the obvious solution since the outset of the debate.”

    Here’s how the negotiated deal resolves the dispute over the three-year period covered by the budget:

    2022-23

    Original Proposal: Newsom proposed an unorthodox move: holding the general fund, not Proposition 98, responsible for paying for the $8.8 billion shortfall over five years, starting in 2025-26, at $1.8 billion per year.

    Compromise: Shift an unallocated $2.6 billion in one-time funding from 2022-23 into 2023-24. That would lower the ongoing Proposition 98 increase from $8.8 billion to $6.2 billion. The effect would be to cut general fund repayments by $500 million to $1.3 billion per year for five years. And it would lower the calculation for the following year’s Proposition 98 minimum.

    2023-24

    The state would drain $8.4 billion from the Proposition 98 reserve fund, built up during a half-decade of good revenue years, to pay off a continuing Proposition 98 shortfall, including the $2.6 billion deferral from 2022-23.

    Compromise: The $6.2 billion rise in the Proposition 98 base in 2022-23 would raise the Proposition 98 minimum by $4.2 billion. Lacking the money to pay for it, the Legislature, by an anticipated two-thirds majority, would suspend the Proposition 98 base by $5.5 billion; this would include $1.3 billion, the first installment of the maintenance factor, due to be repaid in 2024-25. As a result of the $5.5 billion suspension, the Proposition 98 base would be lowered to $101.3 billion.

    2024-25

    The level of Proposition 98 is determined by several factors, called “tests,” that are tied to changing economic conditions, such as a rise in state spending or personal income, and the increase in the base from the year before. The 2024-25 Proposition 98 level, under Test 1, would be set at about 39% of the general fund: an estimated $110.6 billion. This would include a $1.3 billion maintenance factor repayment.

    The Department of Finance says that “overall, the Agreement provides stability for schools both in the short and long-term.”

    That’s true as long as the governor’s revenue projections for the next two years hold. But if they come up short, expect additional deferrals or cuts without a state rainy day fund to cushion the impact; many districts were already required to reduce their local rainy day funds this year. And heading into 2025-26, the state will still owe districts and community colleges a $4.5 billion maintenance factor, an IOU with no immediate deadline for repaying it.   

    “We’re encouraged that the administration has found a way to address the constitutional concerns, and this might be the best funding package that schools could hope for in this budget environment,” said Rob Manwaring, a senior adviser for the nonprofit Children Now. “At the same time, it is difficult to support suspending the constitutional funding guarantee when California schools are still in the bottom five states in terms of student-teacher ratios and other staffing supports.”





    Source link

  • Long-term English learners do worse on tests than peers with fewer years in U.S. schools, data shows

    Long-term English learners do worse on tests than peers with fewer years in U.S. schools, data shows


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    Long-term English learners who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for more than six years without becoming proficient in the language do worse on California’s math and English language arts tests than English learners who have been enrolled for fewer than six years.

    California released data for the first time on long-term English learners’ achievement in standardized tests in math, English language arts and science for the 2022-23 school year, after a bill signed in 2022 required it. Long-term English learners are students who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for six years or more but have not advanced on the English proficiency test in two or more years. The state also released data for those “at risk of becoming long-term English learners,” defined as students who have been enrolled for four or five years and scored at intermediate level or below on the English proficiency test.

    In the past, California had separated achievement data for English learners by those who had been enrolled for less than or more than a year, but not for long-term English learners or those at risk of becoming long-term English learners.

    As a whole, students classified as English learners tend to do poorly on academic tests precisely because they are still learning English, and once they are reclassified, they tend to do much better

    Yet the data shows that long-term English learners do worse than their counterparts who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for fewer years.

    Only 5.4% of long-term English learners met or exceeded English language arts standards in 2022-23, compared with 10.9% of English learners as a whole. In math, only 2.1% of long-term English learners met or exceeded the standards, versus 9.9% of English learners as a whole.

    “There’s something really tragic that happens when students are not getting what they need every year, and they’re not feeling successful, and it really shapes their identity as a student,” said Nicole Knight, executive director of English language learner and multilingual achievement at Oakland Unified School District. 

    Knight said Oakland Unified has been separating the district’s own achievement data by the number of years English learners have been in school and found similar results. “The longer they’re in the system as long-term English learners, at least from a statistical standpoint, they tend to do worse and worse,” she said.

    Conor P. Williams, senior fellow at The Century Foundation, said the data is not surprising and is likely due to several factors. 

    In part, these scores may have to do with the way the state defines English learners. Students who do not do well on academic tests continue to be classified as English learners because California requires students to do as well as their English-speaking peers on English language arts tests, in addition to passing the English Language Proficiency Assessment, in order to be reclassified as fluent. 

    “The fact that long-term English learners do particularly worse on a lot of academic metrics likely reflects the fact that there is an academic indicator in California’s reclassification criteria. That is not standard in all states,” said Williams. In many states, he said, students only have to pass an English language proficiency test in order to be reclassified as fluent.

    Shelly Spiegel-Coleman, strategic adviser of Californians Together, said it’s important to note that most English learners do reclassify within six years. She said long-term English learners may not have received strong English language development support in their early years and probably no instruction in their home languages. She added that some English learners with fewer years of enrollment in U.S. schools may have arrived in the country already knowing how to read in their home languages.

    A study by Californians Together showed that more than a third of long-term English learners also have disabilities that qualify them for special education services.

    “Sometimes that is an excuse for folks, but those students can also reclassify, (though) it may take them a little more time,” said Knight. She said English learners with disabilities are less likely to receive quality instruction in English language development and quality special education services. “That’s a big issue that districts and schools need a lot more support and guidance with than what we currently have.”

    Knight added that being classified as English learners for many years can hurt students’ self-esteem and cause them to become disengaged with school and stop turning in assignments or attending class.

    The data is a call to action for districts, said Spiegel-Coleman. She said beginning next year, districts will have to include plans for long-term English learners in their local control accountability plans, or LCAPs. These are plans that every district and charter school must write every year, explaining how they will use state funds to improve educational outcomes for certain groups of students.

    “When they’re writing their LCAPs, they need to look at those kids and say what is it we need to do for them?,” Spiegel-Coleman said. “Now that will happen. It will heighten their visibility, for sure.”

    Knight said districts also need to offer more training and support for middle and high school teachers to incorporate explicit instruction in the English language, no matter what subject they teach. For example, she said Oakland Unified has worked to train middle school math teachers on how to teach students the language they need to understand in order to figure out a math problem.

    She said districts can also help long-term English learners become more engaged in school, for example with internships or career education where they can use their skills in their home language.

    The data also shows districts need to do more to help students learn enough English to reclassify as fluent in their first six years of school, before they become long-term English learners, both Spiegel-Coleman and Knight said.

    “The number of long-term English learners in our system is really an indictment on our system as a whole, in Oakland and outside of Oakland,” Knight said.

    She said some schools in Oakland reclassify almost 30% of their English learner students every year, while other schools reclassify almost none of them. 

    “That tells us that it’s really about the experiences they’re getting,” Knight said. “So how do we make sure more and more of our classrooms and schools are doing what these schools that have high reclassification rates are doing?”





    Source link

  • Legislators struggle with how to rein in but not repress ethnic studies

    Legislators struggle with how to rein in but not repress ethnic studies


    Assemblymember Rick Zbur responds to senators’ questions during a July 3 hearing on Assembly Bill 2918.

    Credit: Senate Education Committee

    Legislation authored by members of the Jewish Legislation Caucus to prevent antisemitism and prejudice from seeping into ethnic studies courses passed its first legislative hurdle on Wednesday.

    However, Assembly Bill 2918 faces a hot summer of intense negotiations to persuade legislators who agree with its intent but question whether the bill’s restrictions and lack of clarity could lead to avoidable conflicts. 

    Assembly Members Rick Zbur, D-Los Angeles, and Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, the bill’s chief authors, told the Senate Education Committee they and key education groups are willing to put in the time to fix it.

    “While we actually have issues now that are affecting the climate in schools for Jewish students, this affects all communities that are subject to bias and discrimination,” said Zbur. “We have to get this right for everyone, no matter what your background is.”

    But what supporters see as transparency, opponents see as interference. 

    The bill’s requirements “will expose districts to increased harassment and litigation. The lack of clarity in defining what curriculum and instruction materials are will leave our teachers vulnerable to unwarranted scrutiny,” said Teresa Montaño, a former Los Angeles Unified teacher who now teaches Chicano studies at CSU Northridge. 

    The bill would strengthen disclosure requirements for approving ethnic studies courses and materials. The 2021 law establishing an ethnic studies mandate — that all high schools offer a course in 2025-26 and make it a graduation requirement in 2030-31 — requires districts to hold two hearings before adopting an ethnic studies course. The law also includes a broad warning that the instruction must be free of “any bias, bigotry, or discrimination.”

    But those provisions have proven ineffective, Zbur and others said. Parents have complained they had no idea what their children were being taught; school board members said they were unaware of what was in a course they approved, sometimes on a consent calendar with no discussion.

    The bill, which has the support of State Superintendent of Instruction Tony Thurmond, would require:

    • A committee, including classroom teachers, as a majority, and parents, would formally review instructional materials and a locally developed ethnic studies course.
    • The governing board of a district or charter school would determine that the course doesn’t promote any bias, bigotry, or discrimination and explain why they declined to adopt a course based on the ethnic studies model curriculum that the State Board of Educationadopted in 2018;
    • Parents would be sent a written notice before a course is presented for approval.

    At the suggestion of staff, Zbur and Addis agreed not to apply the bill to already approved courses and not to require school board members to certify with the State Department of Education that the course is factually and historically accurate.

    Tensions over the content of ethnic studies courses have simmered since a protracted process by the State Board from 2018 to 2021 to adopt a voluntary ethnic studies course framework. Gov. Gavin Newsom, State Board President Linda Darling-Hammond, and Thurmond criticized the first draft of the framework, written primarily by ethnic studies experts and faculty members, as ideological and biased. 

    After the state board adopted a substantially changed framework in 2021, the first draft’s authors disavowed the final version and formed the Coalition for Liberated Ethnic Studies. Its member organizations have contracted with districts to buy their versions of ethnic studies, which stress the challenges of white supremacy and an oppressive capitalist system, and solidarity with Palestine’s battle for liberation. 

    As Montaño said during a webinar on ethnic studies last year, “I have no choice but to challenge settler colonialism everywhere and to acknowledge that from the very beginning, our disciplines of ethnic studies were aligned to the global struggles in Africa, Palestine and Latin America.”

    In the past year, without mentioning the Liberated Ethnic Studies coalition by name, both Attorney General Rob Bonta and the Newsom administration have reminded school districts to adhere to the law’s prohibition of discrimination.

    “Vendors have begun promoting curriculum for (districts) to use for ethnic studies courses. We have been advised, however, that some vendors are offering materials that may not meet the requirements of AB 101, particularly the requirement (against bias and bigotry), an important guardrail highlighted when the bill was signed,” Brooks Allen, a Newsom adviser and executive director of the state board, wrote in August 2023.

    Conflicts have flared up in the past year. Jewish parents in Palo Alto have complained they’ve been left in the dark about the development of an ethnic studies curriculum that will be piloted this fall. Opponents are protesting the board of Pajaro Valley Unified’s second thoughts about renewing a contract with a liberated ethnic studies contractor.

    Tension has further escalated in reaction to the massacre of 1,200 Israelis by Hamas in October and the subsequent invasion and occupation of Gaza by Israel, causing tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths. The Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education is investigating charges that Berkeley Unified failed to respond properly to rising incidents of antisemitism in its schools. 

    Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Orinda, said his concerns about bias when the ethnic studies law was adopted have come true. “Now we see in practice, particularly for those of us in the Jewish community, how, in my view, bad actors have hijacked the process to promote a curriculum that does the opposite of what the goals that we had established,” he said during the discussion on the bill.

    However, more than a dozen ethnic studies teachers and parents, including several Jewish parents opposed to the Israeli military’s invasion of Gaza, disagreed, saying at that hearing that they opposed the bill.

    Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, said he was troubled by ambiguities in the bill and the possibility that the strength of ethnic studies could be weakened. “Everything in my core being is telling me that as it’s currently put together, (the bill) is actually going to have the unintended consequence of exacerbating the intensity of disputes at the local level,” he said.

    Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, the committee chair, said he shared Cortese’s concern that ethnic studies could “get unproductively caught up in controversies over whose version of history should be taught in our schools.” 

    “It’s fair to worry about the consequences, absent clarity in the bill, of organizations and individuals without teaching experience involved in developing high school courses,” he said.

    “I think it’s important that the bill move forward. It’s an important discussion,” he added. Encouraging Zbur and Addis to work through unresolved issues with the Latino Caucus and others, he joined the majority in passing the bill, with Cortese dissenting.

      





    Source link

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Potential scenarios in case of cuts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Relying on long-standing California policies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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





    Source link

  • Cal Maritime pleads for merger with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo to save the academy

    Cal Maritime pleads for merger with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo to save the academy


    Cal Maritime is the smallest campus in the California State University system.

    Credit: Cal Maritime / Flickr

    This story has been updated to include reporting from the Board of Trustees meeting on Tuesday.

    A steep drop in enrollment has put Cal Maritime, the smallest of the California State University’s 23 campuses, on a path to merge with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.

    Under the plan, which went before the Cal State board of trustees Tuesday, Cal Maritime’s 761 students would blend into San Luis Obispo’s 22,000-person student body with the goal of saving on overhead and ultimately attracting more students to the maritime academy.

    Recruiting out-of-state students and competing for federal dollars are two pieces of the turnaround plan, according to newly released details about the proposal.

    But faculty at both institutions said they have received little guidance about how the plan would impact their day-to-day jobs. And CSU officials’ proposal to the board does not address what one investigation into sexual harassment at Cal Maritime called a “history of pervasive male toxicity.”

    The CSU board of trustees opened discussions on the proposal on Tuesday and plan to raise the subject again in September. A vote on the proposed integration is set for November. If approved, CSU officials estimate bringing the two institutions together will cost $35 million over seven years. The plan would go into effect in July 2025 and affect students in the fall of 2026.

    Cal Maritime Interim President Michael J. Dumont appealed to the Board of Trustees to support the proposal on Tuesday, saying the campus has already made deep budget cuts that include leaving positions unfilled. Without dramatic improvement in the campus’ enrollment and revenue, Dumont said he does not “see the maritime academy continuing.”

    “Quite frankly, we’ve taken a chainsaw to every expense on our campus,” he said. “We are working drastically to save money everywhere we can. I don’t know how much longer that can continue … I have cut muscle, bone, and I’m now down to tendon and arteries.”

    In response to questions seeking more information about admissions, degree conferral and recruitment strategy under the proposal, CSU spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith said it would “be speculative and premature to respond to questions about details yet to be determined.” Bentley-Smith said privacy concerns limit what the university can say regarding incidents and reports related to Title IX, the federal sex discrimination law. She said Cal Maritime responds “appropriately with measures aimed at holding individuals accountable for their actions and providing equity to affected members of the community. The university has placed a great deal of focus, energy and commitment on creating a stronger culture of safety and inclusion on campus and on cruise.”

    Cal Maritime, which has a campus in Vallejo and operates a training ship, serves a strategically important niche in higher education. Six state maritime academies together educate most of the nation’s merchant marine officers, the civilian workforce that operates commercial shipping vessels and supplies U.S. military ships and bases. Almost 80% of Cal Maritime students are men, according to fall 2022 enrollment data.

    Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, located 250 miles south, is known for its architecture, agriculture and engineering programs. The campus has increased enrollment by 13% over the past decade and receives more qualified applicants than it can accommodate.

    Merging the campuses would bolster both institutions’ academic strengths in areas like engineering, oceanography, logistics and marine science while allowing degree programs that lead to a merchant marine license from the U.S. Coast Guard to continue, according to the CSU proposal. Cal Maritime would also enjoy access to Cal Poly’s marketing and fundraising resources — a leg up to recruit prospective students and right the school’s finances.

    If the marriage of the two schools goes forward, the maritime academy would be led by a superintendent who is also part of Cal Poly leadership, according to documents describing the proposal. Maritime academy faculty and staff, similarly, would become Cal Poly employees. 

    Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo campus.
    Credit: Ashley Bolter / EdSource

    Righting the ship

    Cal Maritime’s finances are so dire that last spring the university projected that it would have only $317,000 in operating reserves at the end of June 2024 — less than it would need to run the university for three days, according to the merger proposal.

    Declining enrollment is a major culprit. Student headcount fell 31% between the 2016-17 and 2023-24 school years. Even if Cal Maritime meets future enrollment targets, Cal State officials write, a growing budget deficit “is inevitable.”

    The campus has already slashed spending to save money, CSU officials say, but further cuts would threaten the university’s ability to carry out its educational mission. As it is, CSU officials acknowledge that falling enrollment and budget woes may have had “an impact on the quality of essential student support services such as housing, dining, health and counseling.”

    The hope is that maritime academy students will benefit from plugging into Cal Poly’s student services.

    Other changes would be subtle. The maritime academy would keep its Vallejo campus during the integration, though additional majors with maritime industry ties could be located there in the future. 

    Kyle Carpenter, who graduated from Cal Maritime in 2014, said he hopes the proposal can save Cal Maritime. But depending on whether and how majors are folded into Cal Poly, he said, he worries that students who are now required to understand the maritime application of their education could lose that important focus. 

    “We need to maintain a strong maritime presence, so any bit of maritime education is a great thing,” Carpenter said.

    The proposal flags possible benefits for Cal Poly students, too. First among them: Cal Poly students would get access to Cal Maritime laboratory space and, crucially, a $360 million training vessel the campus is set to receive in 2026. 

    The chance to take advantage of the Vallejo campus is welcome news to Yiming Luo, a sophomore city and regional planning major at Cal Poly. He said he hopes the proposal would expand course offerings and give Cal Poly students from the Bay Area like him the “possibility of taking classes at Maritime over the summer for credit.”

    Faculty react

    Faculty at both campuses said they have lots of questions about how the proposal could impact them. 

    Steven Runyon, an associate professor of chemistry at Cal Maritime and vice president of the campus California Faculty Association chapter, said the proposed integration “came out of nowhere” and has garnered mixed reactions. 

    “Many faculty are very optimistic,” he said. “If we’re going to be integrated with any other university, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo is probably top of our list in terms of who we would like to be associated with.”

    But Runyon said a lack of clear communication from the university’s leaders makes him worry about how the proposal would impact colleagues, especially those who do not work in a tenure track position, such as lecturers and librarians.

    Faculty learned of the merger plan when it was announced on June 5. They can comment “both individually and through their represented body” before the board acts, a Cal Maritime spokesperson said.

    Jennifer Mott, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Cal Poly, said she has heard little about the proposed integration. 

    “Will we have to teach more students? Will they be teaching more students?” she said. “Will it not affect anything? We just don’t know any information.”

    Mott also questions whether her department would remain independent or merge with Cal Maritime’s mechanical engineering department — a process that would impact her department’s gender makeup. 

    “We made a huge push in mechanical engineering to hire more women faculty,” she said. “I looked at the faculty (at Cal Maritime) and it’s only men, and so I don’t know how that would affect us going forward.”

    Cal Maritime is one of six state maritime academies in the country.
    Credit: Cal Maritime / Flickr

    A reckoning with sexual misconduct

    Reports of sexual misconduct in both the maritime industry and the California State University system have put pressure on Cal Maritime to do more to address sexual misconduct on its campus.

    In 2021, an outside investigator commissioned by Cal Maritime reported “several instances of inappropriate, discriminatory, vulgar or offensive writings or other imagery, especially toward female cadets” as well as “concerns over anti-LGBTQIA+ behavior and language used frequently aboard cruises and on campus.”

    A Los Angeles Times investigation echoed those issues and found that Cal Maritime failed to follow consistent procedures to address reports of sexual misconduct.   

    The resignation of Joseph I. Castro as CSU chancellor in 2022 over his mishandling of a Title IX sexual harassment case involving an administrator when he was president of Fresno State resulted in a system-wide reckoning. Cal State retained the law firm Cozen O’Connor to assess programs at each of its 23 universities to deal with sexual harassment and assault complaints under the federal Title IX law that prohibits sex-based discrimination. The probe found that the system lacks resources and staffing to adequately respond to and handle sexual harassment or discrimination complaints from students and employees.

    At Cal Maritime, a July 2023 report by the firm found “significant improvements to process, responsiveness, training, and prevention programming” over the previous two years. But Cozen O’Connor reported that those improvements were overshadowed by a lack of a permanent Title IX coordinator, distrust of former university leaders and a culture that discouraged reporting misconduct.

    Cal Maritime now has a six-person Title IX implementation team, including a director of Title IX, to implement Cozen O’Connor’s recommendations. 

    In March 2023, Cal State hired Mike Dumont to serve as the maritime academy’s interim president. A 2024 profile of Dumont in the San Francisco Chronicle names several recent reforms at the campus, including improving training on sexual harassment, hiring a full-time victim advocate and updating uniform, naming and housing policies to meet the needs of nonbinary and transgender students.

    In a statement, Bentley-Smith said the work of improving campus safety and inclusion “continues and will continue, both at Cal Maritime and throughout the CSU. One of the CSU’s highest priorities is ensuring all students and employees across our 23 universities are protected from discrimination and harassment.”

    This month, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law requiring CSU to implement the recommendations of a state audit into its handling of sexual misconduct. CSU officials say the system is already in the process of meeting the audit requirements.

    But Mott, the Cal Poly professor, said reports of sexual harassment and assault at Cal Maritime give her pause.

    “I know it’s an issue across a lot of campuses, not to say that we don’t have issues here,” she said. “But if it is a more toxic culture up there (at Cal Maritime), that is definitely a concern that we don’t bring that here, or that the students aren’t forced to go up there if they don’t feel comfortable going to that environment.”

    Funding from fees, feds and more

    The proposal anticipates a combined institution could raise more philanthropic and federal dollars. It is possible Cal Poly’s fee model — increasing one fee and levying a second on out-of-state undergraduates to pay for more financial aid — could be applied to the maritime academy.

    The proposal also argues that Cal Maritime has a great story to tell prospective students and can use San Luis Obispo’s “unquestioned expertise in strategic enrollment management, marketing and brand-building” to tell it.

    One draw is graduates’ future earnings. An analysis by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce found that a Cal Maritime degree had the highest return on investment of any bachelor’s degree from a public university in California as measured by its net present value.  

    Under the proposal, increased outreach would extend to prospective students in Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii and U.S. Pacific territories.

    Michael Fossum, the superintendent of the Texas A&M Maritime Academy, said maritime academy graduates are in high demand. But schools like his don’t always have the marketing budget to pitch prospective students on pursuing the career.  

    “It’s a massive industry that people don’t know about,” he said. “We don’t have the reach to help educate people on how important the industry is and what great opportunities there are working in this industry.”

    ‘A nationally known name’

    If the integration proposal wins board approval, Cal Maritime’s future might look a little more like Fossum’s institution, ​​Texas A&M Maritime Academy. 

    The Texas maritime academy is not an independent institution, but is part of Texas A&M at Galveston. In terms of leadership structure, Fossum, the school’s superintendent, is also chief operating officer at Texas A&M University at Galveston and a vice president at Texas A&M University. That structure reduces some overhead on his campus.

    “I don’t have to replicate every single vice president and every single function that’s on the main campus,” Fossum said. 

    The Cal Maritime integration proposal suggests the two campuses could experience similar consolidation in areas such as facilities maintenance, information technology, cybersecurity and administrative services like payroll and accounting. 

    Fossum said he hopes that if Cal Maritime links up with Cal Poly, it will enjoy some of the same reputational benefits his campus experiences from its close association with Texas A&M.

    “Cal Poly has got a nationally known name,” he said. “When you get the power of Cal Poly, just like me having the power of Texas A&M University, that absolutely helps. The association is good.” 

    Ashley Bolter, a recent graduate of Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, is a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Trump proposals for students with disabilities create confusion and fear

    Trump proposals for students with disabilities create confusion and fear


    Students rely on an array of services in special education classes.

    Christopher Futcher/iStock

    Top Takeaways
    • A proposal for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to oversee special education draws criticism.
    • Trump has promised stable levels of funding for special education, but critics worry about his plan to reduce oversight of those funds.
    • Advocates worry that a “brain drain” from the U.S. Department of Education could weaken the quality of education for students with disabilities nationally.

    Javier Arroyo has been impressed with the education his 9-year-old son with a disability receives.

    “This country provides so many resources,” said Arroyo, whose son attends Kern County’s Richland School District.

    Arroyo’s wife has family in Mexico, but he believes his son, who has Down syndrome, is better served here than he’d be in most other countries because of the services he receives: “We don’t have resources like this in Mexico.”

    But because of changes happening at the federal level, he said, it’s hard to tell what education will look like for his son.

    Arroyo has heard that federal cuts are already affecting disabled students and that President Donald Trump has proposed moving oversight of special education from the U.S. Department of Education to the Department of Health and Human Services. Local school leaders have told him that they also don’t have much clarity about how special education is likely to change.

    “It’s confusing right now, what’s going on federally,” Arroyo said. “Not even experts really know.”

    Arroyo isn’t alone. There are 850,000 students with disabilities in California. These students, their parents and educators in California say they have a lot of questions — and serious concerns — about federal proposals that could transform the way schools deliver education to students with disabilities.

    Saran Tugsjargal, 18, is a high school senior and one of the first students to sit on the state’s Advisory Council for Special Education. She said her own initial response to moving special education outside the U.S. Department of Education was confusion: “I was like, ‘What the flip?’”

    Tugsjargal attends Alameda Community Learning Center, a charter school in the Bay Area, and she often hears from students like her who have disabilities. Many have told her they are confused and fearful about how the proposed federal changes could affect their education.

    “A lot of my peers at my school were very scared. They were terrified,” she said. “They were just like, ‘What’s going to happen to me? What’s going to happen to my parents, who need to fight for those accommodation services? What’s going to happen to a lot of us?’ There’s a lot of fear.”

    Education for students with disabilities has historically received broad support across party lines. The federal government provides approximately 8% of special education funding. That’s a critical amount, though it falls well short of the original 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) promise that the federal government would pay 40% of special education funding.

    Because of that bipartisan support, most experts believe that federal funding for special education isn’t at serious risk right now. However, they say that other changes proposed by this administration could adversely impact students with disabilities. 

    Reg Leichty, the founder of Foresight Law + Policy, an education law firm in Washington, is one of those experts.

    “I said often the last few weeks, ‘Don’t over or underreact,’” Leichty said. “But we have a job to do making sure that the system continues to work for kids.”

    In his budget, Trump proposes keeping federal funding for special education at current levels — $15.5 billion nationally — while consolidating funding streams, which would reduce oversight and give more control to local governance.

    His proposal to dismantle the Department of Education requires moving oversight of special education to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which previously oversaw the education of students with disabilities.

    “IDEA funding for our children with disabilities and special needs was in place before there was a Department of Education, and it managed to work incredibly well,” U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon told a Fox News host.

    In an April 4 letter to the California congressional delegation, California administrators of Special Education Local Plan Areas, or SELPAs, vehemently disagreed, stating that the proposal undermines the rights of students with disabilities and jeopardizes key funding and resources for these students.

    Scott Turner, chair of SELPA Administrators of California, wrote that moving oversight of the education of students with disabilities to a health department “reinforces an outdated and ableist, deficit-based model where disabilities are considered as medical conditions to be managed rather than recognizing that students with disabilities are capable learners, each with unique strengths and educational potential.”

    Including students with disabilities in the general education classroom to the maximum extent possible is the model that the Department of Education has aimed at over the decades.

    Before the passage of the IDEA, students with disabilities were routinely institutionalized or undereducated, if they were offered a public education at all, according to Robyn Linscott, director of education and family policy for The Arc, a national advocacy group for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

    Moving special education to a health agency “promotes this medical model and continues the othering of students with a disability,” Linscott said.

    Arroyo wants to see his 9-year-old included in more general education classes, such as physical education, and activities like field trips. High staffing ratios make this kind of inclusion possible, ensuring the quality of his son’s education. His son is in a class with nine students, three aides and one teacher. He worries federal cuts could have major consequences for his son and others in his class.

    “I couldn’t imagine if (the teacher) even lost one aide,” Arroyo said.

    The Coalition for Adequate Funding for Special Education has come out in support of a federal bill that would keep the U.S. Department of Education intact and free from any restructuring, according to the organization’s chair, Anthony Rebelo. 

    “We want to make sure that folks understand students with disabilities are still students, that they don’t just get lumped with disabled people,” said Rebelo, who is also the director of the Trinity County Special Education Local Plan Area. 

    Joshua Salas, a special education coordinator at a charter school, Alliance Renee and Meyer Luskin Academy in Los Angeles, worries that the quality of education for students with disabilities will be “put on the back burner” and that there won’t be enough federal oversight to make sure schools are serving students with disabilities. 

    “What I’m worried about are the long-term implications,” said Salas. “I’m wondering about what will get lost in the transition.”

    Education attorney Leichty said it’s hard to know what education for students with disabilities would look like under a new department, but he worries about the “brain drain” of experts from the Department of Education who view education as a civil right.

    “Over time, could it be made to work? Certainly,” Leichty said. “But I think there’s a major loss of institutional knowledge and expertise when you try to pursue a change like this.”

    He said Trump’s executive order to close the Department of Education acknowledges that the Constitution limits the ability of the executive branch to do so without congressional approval.

    The federal Department of Education and other federal offices, including the Department of Health and Human Services, have already experienced wide-scale cuts proposed by the “Department of Government Efficiency.”

    The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) lost half of its staff, including shuttering the San Francisco-based office dedicated to California complaints, which had over 700 pending cases, more than half involving disability rights. A spokesperson for the administration said that it will use mediation and expedited case processing to address disability-related complaints. Those cuts have been challenged in court.

    Advocates are concerned that doubling the caseload for existing staff means there will be a federal backlog of complaints, weakening enforcement.

    Student advocate Tugsjargal has been telling students with disabilities and their parents to call their legislators and attend town hall meetings and public rallies to protest Trump’s proposals.

    “When we talk with each other about our stories, when we speak out, we learn a lot from each other,” she said. “We drive a lot of change.”





    Source link