The Problem With NCLB Act
This essay will analyze the ‘No Child Left Behind Act’ and how it has been instrumental in the overall decline of the United States educational system. NCLB has only managed to allow other nations to outdo us in educating its population in Math, Science, Technology, and overall literacy. The 2000 presidential campaign of George W. Bush made education reform a major plank in his domestic platform, saying that he wanted especially to end the ‘soft bigotry’ of low expectations for minority students. From its inception, the law was unpopular with many teachers' groups, who stated it placed too much emphasis on test preparation which was enacted by the law brought.
According to one study, (U.S. News and World Reports, December, 2008) “the United States has failed to raise student achievement in science over the past decade while Singapore and several other Asian countries continue to score higher in both subjects.” The cry for reform has been echoed by Rep. George Miller, a California Democrat and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, who stated that the current economic climate is directly linked to the troubles faced in the U.S. educational system. Policymakers and educators alike drew criticism when the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) report were recently released. The TIMSS report indicated that the United States has made improvement, especially at the eighth-grade level. Between 1995 and 2007, the average fourth-grade score jumped 11 points, to 529, while the average eighth-grade score increased 16 points, to 508. But American scores remain well behind those of Asian countries. Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan posted eighth-grade math scores ranging from 570 to 598. Hong Kong fourth graders came in first place with an average score of 607. By the 12th grade U.S. scores become even more depressing. These scores are indicative of an educational decline in our nation; moreover, it is a direct result of the No Child Left Behind Act.
Test results of student performance in the upper grades reveal a serious problem within our school systems, which has a negative result on students. We must study the results with a cautious eye and reevaluate US educational policy. According to Mike Petrilli, vice president for national programs at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington, he states that the focus on math and reading in U.S. classrooms might explain the country's low science scores. "The lesson is that what gets tested gets taught," he says. "Under the No Child Left Behind Act, and state accountability systems before that, elementary schools have been held accountable for boosting performance in math and reading.
Teaching for the test is no way to prepare or inspire future leaders. The role of standardized tests relies on unexamined notions about the goals of assessment. One can agree that educators should be accountable for students’ education; much like civil engineers are accountable for the safety of a public building but it is even less obvious what the nature of that accountability should be.
The idea of assessment should compel learning and lead to critical thinking. One must consider the paradigms that guide the structure of standardized assessments used for the purposes of NCLB. These tests characteristically use a model where the quality of learning is indicated by locating an individual along a single aspect of knowledge. With NCLB, students are taught along a single (rigid) line and when this deviates come test time, it results in lower scores. The problem with this approach is that when material does not fit the model, it is eliminated. One alternative would be to take the needed time and money to build standards that are firmly rooted in learning, so that testing and learning cease being thought of as mutually exclusive.
If the time and effort is not put into building adequate educational bridges then our country’s dropout rates for minorities will continue to rise. Minorities have a greater chance to attend low resourced schools. As a former student of the sink or swim philosophy, I have been fortunate to have been surrounded by warm, patient and gifted teachers/paraprofessionals. My parents did not speak any English and the adjustment was difficult but I worked hard (often alone) and managed to persevere. English limited learners (ELL) must become skilled in English so that they can progress in other aspects of the school curriculum. The fact there is a sever lack of qualified bilingual educators does not help matters when it comes to ELL learners. The requirements set forth by NCLB also make it hard for schools to hire highly qualified teachers. Overall, minority and ELL students are more likely to have fewer opportunities to acquire the content knowledge to ensure academic success. Overcoming the huge hurdle of mastering English while learning required content in other subject areas keeps ELL students’ one step behind their native speakers. Providing equity, extra resources, hiring highly qualified bilingual educators is one step towards a solution.
The need to hire bilingual educators is imperative since the U.S. Census Bureau states that nearly 67 million people of Hispanic origin would be added to the nation’s population between 2000 and 2050. The numbers are projected to grow from 35.6 million to 102.6 million, an increase of 188 percent. Their share of the nation’s population would nearly double from 12.6 to 24.4 percent.
To many minority and ELL students, schools raise challenging issues with regard to culture and the overall relationship to the community. When test scores become the focus instead of creating critical thinkers, the repercussions can be long lasting. Policy makers and schools must support students, be conscious of their community and culture. Hiring teachers and paraprofessionals from within the community would be a good way to improve teaching and learning. The overall intent of NCLB was well meaning but hopefully the Obama administration will consider reworking NCLB and hire qualified teachers and create two-way learning for all parties involved.
REFERENCES:
Abedi, J. 2004. The No Child Left Behind Act and English language learners:
Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Researcher 33(1), 4-14.
Black, P. and William, D. 1998. Inside the black box. Phi Delta Kappan.
October, 136-150.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-education/2008/12/9/study-us-trails-asian-countries-in-math-and-science.html
www.census.gov
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
How effective are correctional adult educational programs or any educational program in reducing recidivism? The purpose of correctional educational programs is to provide inmates with skills to succeed in the workplace and the community thus breaking the “cycle of catch-and-release” (Klein & Tolbert, 2007, p. 284). Vacca (2004) in his article, Educated Prisoners Are Less Likely to Return to Prison, wrote that, “Since 1990, literature examining the return rates of prisoners or recidivism, has shown that educated prisoners are less likely to find themselves back in prison a second time if they complete an educational program and are taught skills to successfully read and write (p. 297)”. The main argument of Vacca’s (2004) article centered on the effectiveness of correctional educational programs and their findings with regards to reducing recidivism. The claim in the article was based on reviews of research literature which investigated and evaluated beliefs and studies of other researchers’ works and thoughts which were similar in nature. The assumption was that education is a strong factor in reducing recidivism.
In a second article, Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What is Promising, authors, Seiter & Kadela (2003) retraced a twenty-year period in comparing the operations of the prison system and programs offered with regards to the then makeup of offenders, status of prison entry, sentencing and supervision policies, and prisoner reentry with the present patterns (p. 366) to try and find effective programs for ex-offenders on reentry. Seiter et al. (2003) wrote that “The current model of prison operations and prison entry [did] not focus on inmate rehabilitation and preparation for release…” (p. 363). Seiter et al’s assumption that education would reduce recidivism was not as outright as Vacca’s assumption. These two articles related to each other because of the similarities between the studies and findings. They both set out to investigate what “effective prison educational programs do and to what extent they [were] successful at reducing recidivism” (Vacca, 2004, p. 298).
The topic of correctional education programs and recidivism, and welfare of reentry ex-offenders is of particular interest to me because these men and women, these ex-offenders, make up my adult learner population in the classroom. As an adult educator it is crucial for me to understand the political and economic aspects surrounding the prison systems but, most of all, I need to know who my students are in order to design a curriculum that will meet their individual needs and, in so doing, become a part of the Aftercare service that is important to their rehabilitation. Identifying with the literature in the articles was easy because my learners and I have debated and shared opinions on similar issues. It is one thing to say, like Vacca (2004) did, that educated prisoners are less likely to find themselves back in prison a second time if they complete an educational program but is that true reality? The ex-offender is released and reenters society. What happens next?
“[Ex-offenders] released from prison face daunting struggles” (Abramsky, Maruna, O’Brien, Petersilia as cited in Kenemore & Roldan 2006, p. 6). They leave prison with “no savings, no immediate entitlement to unemployment benefits, lack of employable skills, expired driving permits/licenses, few job prospects, no funding for further schooling in some cases” and on probation which means limited mobility (Kenemore et al. 2006, p. 6). They are “disproportionately poor, African-Americans or Hispanics (Champion as cited in Kenemore et al, 2006), and are characterized by mainstream society in negative, stereotypical terms.” (Kenemore et al. 2006, p. 6). Kupers (as cited in Kenemore et al. 2006) tells us that “over 90% of ex-offenders including those with mental illnesses will leave prison with little or no discharge planning, with no support or access to resources, and are left to fend on their own.” (p. 6). These are some of the pitfalls, the realities that ex-offenders are faced with on reentry.
In the article, Staying Straight: Lessons From Ex-Offenders, ex-offenders told their stories. Kenemore (2006) highlighted their thoughts on “their challenging experiences transitioning from incarceration to freedom” (p. 5). Kenemore (2006) drew a true picture with his pen. For these men and women it is a disconcerting period in their lives and they need to have confidence in themselves that they can survive re-entry after release. It is their only hope of not recidivating. Education programs could bring more success if they were one, not caught in so much political rhetoric; and two, if there was greater emphasis on psychological evaluation of the offender/adult learner.
For correctional educational programs to be truly effective in reducing recidivism, ex-offenders who have attained some form of education in prison need to supplement their learning with an Aftercare program that would one, assist them in making a smooth transition back into society, psychologically; and two, provide some form of employment. Aftercare is a service which helps persons who have been institutionalized to “make successful transitions from traditional parole both in philosophy and in practice” (Kurlychek, M., & Kempinen, C., 2006, p. 363). Correctional adult educational programs or any adult education program can assist in efforts to reduce recidivism but it can only happen under conditions that favor the ex-offender in helping him to help himself.
My overall response to the literature of two articles Educated Prisoners Are Less Likely to Return to Prison and Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What is Promising is one of limitedness. Its contents were informative in nature however the essence of the articles was more program-centered than offender-centered. The authors’ focuses were on the reducing recidivism through the use of correctional education programs hence they did not discuss alternatives such as tending to the individual – mind, body, and soul, reintegration with the assistance of an aftercare reentry program, and mending relationships among family, friends and the community.
My overall feeling about education being a deterrent for recidivism is one of ambivalence. It might or it might not, depending on a multitude of circumstances. Judge for yourself.
References
Kenemore, T. K., & Roldan, I. (2006). Staying straight: Lessons from ex-offenders. Clinical
Social Work Journal, 34(1), 5-22
Klein, S., & Tolbert, M. (2007). Correctional education: Getting the data we need. Journal of
Correctional Education. 58(3), 284-292.
Kurlychek, M. & Kempinen, C. (2006). Beyond boot camp: The impact of aftercare on offender
reentry. Criminology & Public Policy, 5(2), 363-388.
Seiter, R. P., & Kadela, K. R. (2003). Prisoner reentry: What works, what does not, and what is
promising. Crime and Delinquency, 49(3), 360-388
Vacca, J. S. (2004). Educated prisoners are less likely to return to prison. Journal of Correctional
Education, 55(4), 297-305.
In a second article, Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What is Promising, authors, Seiter & Kadela (2003) retraced a twenty-year period in comparing the operations of the prison system and programs offered with regards to the then makeup of offenders, status of prison entry, sentencing and supervision policies, and prisoner reentry with the present patterns (p. 366) to try and find effective programs for ex-offenders on reentry. Seiter et al. (2003) wrote that “The current model of prison operations and prison entry [did] not focus on inmate rehabilitation and preparation for release…” (p. 363). Seiter et al’s assumption that education would reduce recidivism was not as outright as Vacca’s assumption. These two articles related to each other because of the similarities between the studies and findings. They both set out to investigate what “effective prison educational programs do and to what extent they [were] successful at reducing recidivism” (Vacca, 2004, p. 298).
The topic of correctional education programs and recidivism, and welfare of reentry ex-offenders is of particular interest to me because these men and women, these ex-offenders, make up my adult learner population in the classroom. As an adult educator it is crucial for me to understand the political and economic aspects surrounding the prison systems but, most of all, I need to know who my students are in order to design a curriculum that will meet their individual needs and, in so doing, become a part of the Aftercare service that is important to their rehabilitation. Identifying with the literature in the articles was easy because my learners and I have debated and shared opinions on similar issues. It is one thing to say, like Vacca (2004) did, that educated prisoners are less likely to find themselves back in prison a second time if they complete an educational program but is that true reality? The ex-offender is released and reenters society. What happens next?
“[Ex-offenders] released from prison face daunting struggles” (Abramsky, Maruna, O’Brien, Petersilia as cited in Kenemore & Roldan 2006, p. 6). They leave prison with “no savings, no immediate entitlement to unemployment benefits, lack of employable skills, expired driving permits/licenses, few job prospects, no funding for further schooling in some cases” and on probation which means limited mobility (Kenemore et al. 2006, p. 6). They are “disproportionately poor, African-Americans or Hispanics (Champion as cited in Kenemore et al, 2006), and are characterized by mainstream society in negative, stereotypical terms.” (Kenemore et al. 2006, p. 6). Kupers (as cited in Kenemore et al. 2006) tells us that “over 90% of ex-offenders including those with mental illnesses will leave prison with little or no discharge planning, with no support or access to resources, and are left to fend on their own.” (p. 6). These are some of the pitfalls, the realities that ex-offenders are faced with on reentry.
In the article, Staying Straight: Lessons From Ex-Offenders, ex-offenders told their stories. Kenemore (2006) highlighted their thoughts on “their challenging experiences transitioning from incarceration to freedom” (p. 5). Kenemore (2006) drew a true picture with his pen. For these men and women it is a disconcerting period in their lives and they need to have confidence in themselves that they can survive re-entry after release. It is their only hope of not recidivating. Education programs could bring more success if they were one, not caught in so much political rhetoric; and two, if there was greater emphasis on psychological evaluation of the offender/adult learner.
For correctional educational programs to be truly effective in reducing recidivism, ex-offenders who have attained some form of education in prison need to supplement their learning with an Aftercare program that would one, assist them in making a smooth transition back into society, psychologically; and two, provide some form of employment. Aftercare is a service which helps persons who have been institutionalized to “make successful transitions from traditional parole both in philosophy and in practice” (Kurlychek, M., & Kempinen, C., 2006, p. 363). Correctional adult educational programs or any adult education program can assist in efforts to reduce recidivism but it can only happen under conditions that favor the ex-offender in helping him to help himself.
My overall response to the literature of two articles Educated Prisoners Are Less Likely to Return to Prison and Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What is Promising is one of limitedness. Its contents were informative in nature however the essence of the articles was more program-centered than offender-centered. The authors’ focuses were on the reducing recidivism through the use of correctional education programs hence they did not discuss alternatives such as tending to the individual – mind, body, and soul, reintegration with the assistance of an aftercare reentry program, and mending relationships among family, friends and the community.
My overall feeling about education being a deterrent for recidivism is one of ambivalence. It might or it might not, depending on a multitude of circumstances. Judge for yourself.
References
Kenemore, T. K., & Roldan, I. (2006). Staying straight: Lessons from ex-offenders. Clinical
Social Work Journal, 34(1), 5-22
Klein, S., & Tolbert, M. (2007). Correctional education: Getting the data we need. Journal of
Correctional Education. 58(3), 284-292.
Kurlychek, M. & Kempinen, C. (2006). Beyond boot camp: The impact of aftercare on offender
reentry. Criminology & Public Policy, 5(2), 363-388.
Seiter, R. P., & Kadela, K. R. (2003). Prisoner reentry: What works, what does not, and what is
promising. Crime and Delinquency, 49(3), 360-388
Vacca, J. S. (2004). Educated prisoners are less likely to return to prison. Journal of Correctional
Education, 55(4), 297-305.
Globalization and America’s Workforce
Globalization has forced the United States of America to evaluate their standards of education and workforce development. Reach Higher, America: Overcoming Crisis in the U.S. Workforce, a report released by the National Commission on Adult Literacy, highlights the lack of preparation and skills of Americans to compete in a global society. In addition, the report projects that if changes are not made to adult education and workforce development America will continue to become a less viable leader in our global society. The report stated that “out of the 30 free-market countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the United States is the only country where the young adults are less educated than the previous generation”(NCAL, 2008, Executive Summary). Couple this with the lack of training of middle class workers and our nation has the perfect cocktail for being ineffective and unproductive in the global workforce.
The report aims to provide solutions to the systemic problems faced by Americans regarding insufficient training programs. The major concerns of our workforce include: a high rate of high school dropouts, lack of post-secondary training and education for adults, and language barriers. The report proposes strategies and policies to transform adult education so that it efficiently assists adults in receiving the training they need to further their careers. Furthermore, it urges the US government to look to community colleges to lessen the skills gap of Americans and for the training of post-secondary adult learners to compete in an international arena.
Community colleges can play a critical role in revitalizing the national economy and workforce. Currently, there is an inefficient amount of laborers trained to work in specialties such as electricians, plumbers, health care workers, and technology. In addition, there is a severe lack of proficiency in literacy among adult Americans. Furthermore, there is the realization that lifelong learning is imperative to ensuring an adequately prepared workforce. These institutions can strengthen their programs by adding continuing education, basic literacy training, and training in critical needs professions to their agendas. The federal and state government must ensure that all members of the community have access to these programs.
According to the report, there are currently 88 million Americans unable to compete in a global society due to their lack of training. If this number continues to rise then our financial forecast remains bleak. Companies will have to continue outsourcing jobs to other countries due to the inadequacy of the workforce. Consequently, the working class suffers because of their inability to attain jobs that pay sufficient funds. Inadvertently, the U.S. economy suffers because of this imbalance. GED and two-year degree programs provided by community colleges can bridge the skills gap of these Americans and enhance their opportunities for advancement in their careers. In addition, they can provide a growing workforce with knowledgeable and competent employees reducing the need for companies to recruit outside of the United States.
The demands on skilled labor are changing rapidly. Companies and organization are requiring ongoing development and coaching of their employees. This is a stark contrast to how companies were managed fifty to sixty years ago. Many employees are faced with the option of attaining higher level degrees or being demoted. Community colleges can work with businesses in designing continuing education programs that meet their needs as well as their employees.
The faces of America have changed, however adult education is ill-equipped to handle the challenges surrounding the evolution of America. There needs to be an increase in the amount of programs that help non-English speaking immigrants and citizens attain a GED, associate, or bachelor degrees. Community colleges should continue to create programs that make the process easier for these individuals to assimilate and become apart of the skilled labor force in America.
Globalization has brought many opportunities to the United States. An open economy encourages innovation and offers economic growth. However, U. S. citizens have felt the overwhelming strain of operating under competitive pressure. All too often they have lost jobs because of their inadequacies or lack of training. If America is to stay in the forefront of global thought and leadership, government and businesses must transform how they define adult education in relation to community colleges. Also, they should merge their agendas with community colleges’ curricula to ensure that sufficient education and training is accessible to all people. The solution to America’s dilemma lies in the ability of community colleges to strengthen the skills of the middle class and skilled labor.
References
1. National Commission on Adult Literacy, Reach Higher America
Overcoming the Crisis in the U.S., U.S. Department of Education,
2008
The report aims to provide solutions to the systemic problems faced by Americans regarding insufficient training programs. The major concerns of our workforce include: a high rate of high school dropouts, lack of post-secondary training and education for adults, and language barriers. The report proposes strategies and policies to transform adult education so that it efficiently assists adults in receiving the training they need to further their careers. Furthermore, it urges the US government to look to community colleges to lessen the skills gap of Americans and for the training of post-secondary adult learners to compete in an international arena.
Community colleges can play a critical role in revitalizing the national economy and workforce. Currently, there is an inefficient amount of laborers trained to work in specialties such as electricians, plumbers, health care workers, and technology. In addition, there is a severe lack of proficiency in literacy among adult Americans. Furthermore, there is the realization that lifelong learning is imperative to ensuring an adequately prepared workforce. These institutions can strengthen their programs by adding continuing education, basic literacy training, and training in critical needs professions to their agendas. The federal and state government must ensure that all members of the community have access to these programs.
According to the report, there are currently 88 million Americans unable to compete in a global society due to their lack of training. If this number continues to rise then our financial forecast remains bleak. Companies will have to continue outsourcing jobs to other countries due to the inadequacy of the workforce. Consequently, the working class suffers because of their inability to attain jobs that pay sufficient funds. Inadvertently, the U.S. economy suffers because of this imbalance. GED and two-year degree programs provided by community colleges can bridge the skills gap of these Americans and enhance their opportunities for advancement in their careers. In addition, they can provide a growing workforce with knowledgeable and competent employees reducing the need for companies to recruit outside of the United States.
The demands on skilled labor are changing rapidly. Companies and organization are requiring ongoing development and coaching of their employees. This is a stark contrast to how companies were managed fifty to sixty years ago. Many employees are faced with the option of attaining higher level degrees or being demoted. Community colleges can work with businesses in designing continuing education programs that meet their needs as well as their employees.
The faces of America have changed, however adult education is ill-equipped to handle the challenges surrounding the evolution of America. There needs to be an increase in the amount of programs that help non-English speaking immigrants and citizens attain a GED, associate, or bachelor degrees. Community colleges should continue to create programs that make the process easier for these individuals to assimilate and become apart of the skilled labor force in America.
Globalization has brought many opportunities to the United States. An open economy encourages innovation and offers economic growth. However, U. S. citizens have felt the overwhelming strain of operating under competitive pressure. All too often they have lost jobs because of their inadequacies or lack of training. If America is to stay in the forefront of global thought and leadership, government and businesses must transform how they define adult education in relation to community colleges. Also, they should merge their agendas with community colleges’ curricula to ensure that sufficient education and training is accessible to all people. The solution to America’s dilemma lies in the ability of community colleges to strengthen the skills of the middle class and skilled labor.
References
1. National Commission on Adult Literacy, Reach Higher America
Overcoming the Crisis in the U.S., U.S. Department of Education,
2008
Bridging the gap: The Digital Divide
Anna Ponterosso
Abstract
The following are my reflections and reactions to what I see creating a further gap between those that are digital natives, and those that are digital immigrants. The result may not offer any simple solution and may create some mixed reactions. However, this is a topic that I often think about and as an administrator at a University; it is something that we must understand and keep in mind when advising students. We often take for granted that all individuals have the same possibilities that we do, but that in fact is not true. Some people have to work harder than others to achieve their goals, and unfortunately because life is cruel, they may never get there.
**********************************************************************************
When we talk about digital divide we often relate the term to a division between those that were born “into” the technology and those that are “immigrants” to the technology. Thus, there is a group in society that is more technology savvy than others that do not have the means or opportunity to learn using new technology, such as webcasts, online courses, blogs, video conferencing, etc. However, we must keep in mind that the term is much broader than that, and that it takes account of cultures, age, social, political and economic differences.
While it is wonderful to see how many improvements technology has made over the years especially with the sharing of information over the World Wide Web, we still have not resolved the problem of poverty. Access to technology and high quality education should be the right of every individual. However, these opportunities are not available to all, not even in our own country. We may even find it difficult to understand why some countries are lagging behind with so much technology available. However, just because technology is available, it does not mean that it is accessible, nor a priority, to all communities. In fact, if we just look at the US society, we will find that there are many communities that lack the opportunities offered by this great technology advanced nation.
While digital divide refers to lack access to technology, or knowledge of how to use the new technology, the problem is much deeper than that. For instance, last night I watched a documentary, A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains, by Diane Sawyer, about the poverty that exists in our own backyards, the Appalachian Mountains. Children and their families live in such poor economic and social conditions where food and a place to sleep are meager. How are we helping them bridge the technology gap? Many of them are living with alcoholic and drug abusive parents in very small and over-crowded trailers. The adults have no jobs, very little education if any at all (one person said that they didn't know how to read) and support their families with the little money provided by welfare, selling scrap metals, or working a nine to twelve hour shift in coal mines (six days a week). For many, welfare money does not seem to be enough to provide food on a regular basis. A 12 year old girl that was part of this documentary expressed that her wish was to have her own bed and a cupboard full of food. Where is justice and equal opportunity in all this poverty? Instead of providing a miserable welfare check, the government should step in and create low income housing, which would in turn provide construction jobs to those in the local communities; provide transportation to local schools so that all children and adults can attend some type of training. There was a young mother in the documentary, that in order to improve her condition, and that of her four daughters, decided to go back to school and get her GED. She had to walk (no transportation) 8 miles each way, which took 4 hours out of her day. The end of the documentary showed that she succeeded, however, how many of us have that type of determination? I for one admired her courage and willingness to learn so that she may end the struggles and sufferings of her family.
Perhaps the one story line in the documentary that struck me the most was the story of 18 years old, Shawn Grim. He was a high school football superstar and determined to be the first in his family to graduate from high school and attend college. To escape the poverty, alcoholism and despair of his home, he lived in a pick up truck while attending high school. He kept his clothes in the truck and showered at a friend’s house before going to school. He struggled through high school, graduated and received a scholarship to attend college. However, once in college, he realized that he did not have the means to pay for any additional costs. Shawn lacked his family's support (they are poor) and after four months into the first college semester, he dropped out. I could see and feel his broken spirit. Here was a young man who struggled to finish HS and received a scholarship to attend college and than, he caved in to the overwhelming experience of college and poverty. I see this as a failure in higher education. Where were his mentors, tutors, peer leaders? I'm sure that it was a known fact that this young man did not have any other means for support. Why did the college allow this to occur? Did they do every thing possible to encourage and support this individual? How can we bridge the technology gap when we cannot insure an education for all that want it?
As a country we offer aid to so many other foreign countries, why are we not providing more assistance to those that live in poverty in our country? Why are we not providing transportation and improving roads so that students can get to schools? Why are we not creating jobs so that individuals can support themselves and their families and feel proud of their abilities to stand on their own two feet? Why are we not providing more low incoming housing so that people do not have to live in these poor conditions? Congress approved a tremendous stimulus package for the economy and bailed out a number of companies that are spending money on staff retreats (vacations on the taxpayers) while allowing American families to live in such poor conditions. Where does the digital divide fit in all this?? How can we say that every individual should have access to the web and any new technology when what they need is housing, transportation, food, jobs, and a basic education? What is a child in the Appalachian Mountains going to do with a lap-top when they have no food? What is a child going to do with a high-tech classroom if he/she can't get there?
Therefore, the issue with digital divide is deeper than just having the access to technology and retraining the trainers, as is the case in Phillpsburg Osceola (Pennsylvania school district), where teachers “must be able to adapt technology skills and knowledge to improve instruction. It's all about quality control; teachers must take an analytical or evaluative approach to determine how to implement technology in the classroom” (edtechmag.com). However, some educators like Mr. Daley, who is the Chief Academic Officer at High Tech High, recognize that “technology is not the solution to the challenges of American education, and by just adding new technology to schools it will not necessarily improve the quality of teaching” (edtechmag.com). I agree with Mr. Daley, since technology is only the instrument or tool to facilitate teaching and learning experiences. However, before we can improve the schools, we must insure that children and adults can get to the schools and have the support necessary to encourage them to further their education. That is not to say that technology improvements, access, and upgrades to schools and educational programs should not continue, but they must be made with the participation of both the government and the citizens of the communities involved. Education should prepare children and adult learners to participate in democratic life as responsible citizens by actively participating in setting direction and policies that affect their lives and the future of their children. Only than can we say that we “bridged” the digital gap that exists between cultures, age, social, political and economic conditions.
***********************************************************************************
References
Fratt, Lisa. Technology today. www.edtechmag.com/k12/issues/may-june2008
Schachter, Ron. Changing Habits. www.edtechmag.com/k12/issues/may-june2008
Sawyer, Diane. A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains. Documentary: February 13, 2009.
Abstract
The following are my reflections and reactions to what I see creating a further gap between those that are digital natives, and those that are digital immigrants. The result may not offer any simple solution and may create some mixed reactions. However, this is a topic that I often think about and as an administrator at a University; it is something that we must understand and keep in mind when advising students. We often take for granted that all individuals have the same possibilities that we do, but that in fact is not true. Some people have to work harder than others to achieve their goals, and unfortunately because life is cruel, they may never get there.
**********************************************************************************
When we talk about digital divide we often relate the term to a division between those that were born “into” the technology and those that are “immigrants” to the technology. Thus, there is a group in society that is more technology savvy than others that do not have the means or opportunity to learn using new technology, such as webcasts, online courses, blogs, video conferencing, etc. However, we must keep in mind that the term is much broader than that, and that it takes account of cultures, age, social, political and economic differences.
While it is wonderful to see how many improvements technology has made over the years especially with the sharing of information over the World Wide Web, we still have not resolved the problem of poverty. Access to technology and high quality education should be the right of every individual. However, these opportunities are not available to all, not even in our own country. We may even find it difficult to understand why some countries are lagging behind with so much technology available. However, just because technology is available, it does not mean that it is accessible, nor a priority, to all communities. In fact, if we just look at the US society, we will find that there are many communities that lack the opportunities offered by this great technology advanced nation.
While digital divide refers to lack access to technology, or knowledge of how to use the new technology, the problem is much deeper than that. For instance, last night I watched a documentary, A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains, by Diane Sawyer, about the poverty that exists in our own backyards, the Appalachian Mountains. Children and their families live in such poor economic and social conditions where food and a place to sleep are meager. How are we helping them bridge the technology gap? Many of them are living with alcoholic and drug abusive parents in very small and over-crowded trailers. The adults have no jobs, very little education if any at all (one person said that they didn't know how to read) and support their families with the little money provided by welfare, selling scrap metals, or working a nine to twelve hour shift in coal mines (six days a week). For many, welfare money does not seem to be enough to provide food on a regular basis. A 12 year old girl that was part of this documentary expressed that her wish was to have her own bed and a cupboard full of food. Where is justice and equal opportunity in all this poverty? Instead of providing a miserable welfare check, the government should step in and create low income housing, which would in turn provide construction jobs to those in the local communities; provide transportation to local schools so that all children and adults can attend some type of training. There was a young mother in the documentary, that in order to improve her condition, and that of her four daughters, decided to go back to school and get her GED. She had to walk (no transportation) 8 miles each way, which took 4 hours out of her day. The end of the documentary showed that she succeeded, however, how many of us have that type of determination? I for one admired her courage and willingness to learn so that she may end the struggles and sufferings of her family.
Perhaps the one story line in the documentary that struck me the most was the story of 18 years old, Shawn Grim. He was a high school football superstar and determined to be the first in his family to graduate from high school and attend college. To escape the poverty, alcoholism and despair of his home, he lived in a pick up truck while attending high school. He kept his clothes in the truck and showered at a friend’s house before going to school. He struggled through high school, graduated and received a scholarship to attend college. However, once in college, he realized that he did not have the means to pay for any additional costs. Shawn lacked his family's support (they are poor) and after four months into the first college semester, he dropped out. I could see and feel his broken spirit. Here was a young man who struggled to finish HS and received a scholarship to attend college and than, he caved in to the overwhelming experience of college and poverty. I see this as a failure in higher education. Where were his mentors, tutors, peer leaders? I'm sure that it was a known fact that this young man did not have any other means for support. Why did the college allow this to occur? Did they do every thing possible to encourage and support this individual? How can we bridge the technology gap when we cannot insure an education for all that want it?
As a country we offer aid to so many other foreign countries, why are we not providing more assistance to those that live in poverty in our country? Why are we not providing transportation and improving roads so that students can get to schools? Why are we not creating jobs so that individuals can support themselves and their families and feel proud of their abilities to stand on their own two feet? Why are we not providing more low incoming housing so that people do not have to live in these poor conditions? Congress approved a tremendous stimulus package for the economy and bailed out a number of companies that are spending money on staff retreats (vacations on the taxpayers) while allowing American families to live in such poor conditions. Where does the digital divide fit in all this?? How can we say that every individual should have access to the web and any new technology when what they need is housing, transportation, food, jobs, and a basic education? What is a child in the Appalachian Mountains going to do with a lap-top when they have no food? What is a child going to do with a high-tech classroom if he/she can't get there?
Therefore, the issue with digital divide is deeper than just having the access to technology and retraining the trainers, as is the case in Phillpsburg Osceola (Pennsylvania school district), where teachers “must be able to adapt technology skills and knowledge to improve instruction. It's all about quality control; teachers must take an analytical or evaluative approach to determine how to implement technology in the classroom” (edtechmag.com). However, some educators like Mr. Daley, who is the Chief Academic Officer at High Tech High, recognize that “technology is not the solution to the challenges of American education, and by just adding new technology to schools it will not necessarily improve the quality of teaching” (edtechmag.com). I agree with Mr. Daley, since technology is only the instrument or tool to facilitate teaching and learning experiences. However, before we can improve the schools, we must insure that children and adults can get to the schools and have the support necessary to encourage them to further their education. That is not to say that technology improvements, access, and upgrades to schools and educational programs should not continue, but they must be made with the participation of both the government and the citizens of the communities involved. Education should prepare children and adult learners to participate in democratic life as responsible citizens by actively participating in setting direction and policies that affect their lives and the future of their children. Only than can we say that we “bridged” the digital gap that exists between cultures, age, social, political and economic conditions.
***********************************************************************************
References
Fratt, Lisa. Technology today. www.edtechmag.com/k12/issues/may-june2008
Schachter, Ron. Changing Habits. www.edtechmag.com/k12/issues/may-june2008
Sawyer, Diane. A Hidden America: Children of the Mountains. Documentary: February 13, 2009.
Monday, February 16, 2009
EDUCATING AT-RISK STUDENTS
Running head: EDUCATION FOR AT RISK STUDENTS
Education Models and Teaching Methods for At Risk Students
Felix Cruz
Foundations of Adult Education CTGE5925001
Dr. Kathy King
February 12, 2009
Abstract
This position paper explains my thinking and details my research in the area of education for at risk students. I have also analyzed school reform models that have been proposed to deal with the huge problem of optimizing the level of education for these special needs students. I will address the School Reform Models Supported by the National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students (1998). I will also discuss the need for using technology and progressive programs in education for at-risk students.
Education Models and Teaching Methods for At Risk Students
The existing programs currently in place for students with special needs are ineffective and also create problematical situations. The present school system designates 50% or more of all students as special as “Special Needs” at some point between kindergarten and grade 12. These programs are not cost effective and are not achieving the implementation goals for the educational needs of the at-risk students. Achievement levels (based on standardized tests) for students below the 20th percentile or above the 80th percentile are identified as "low 20" or "high 20" groups for whom curriculum adaptation and/or intensive instruction are needed. Although standardized tests may not be the best way to diagnose the inability or ability of learning capacity for students with different learning styles, a 20/20 analysis may be useful in focusing the resources and manpower in the most probable groups of students who are at-risk.
Tools for Schools (April, 1998) analysis found the following: Approximately 80 percent of the students now served in "special" categorical programs such as Special Education, Title I, as well as others who are in a variety of remedial and compensatory programs, show poor achievement in basic literacy skills. Findings from research demonstrate quite clearly that these students do not need different kinds of instruction, but more intensive quality instruction. (20/20 Analysis: A Tool for Instructional Planning, ¶ 5)
Quality instruction is definitely needed to teach at-risk students but I believe that the integration of technology such as the internet, simulations, and collaboration technology would be beneficial to the development of not only academic skills but also of transferable critical thinking skills (Jonassen, et. al, 2008)
Government support for students with disabilities is evidenced when President Bush signed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, which reauthorized the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), on December 3, 2004. This support guarantees that funding is available for creative and progressive new programs that will incorporate the new technology and holistic educational ideas espoused by Snir. The use of graphics and images stimulates the higher order thinking skills in students. Visualization tools stimulate all the senses and are good for all learning styles. By using computer graphics, one can shift attention back and forth from the local to the global properties of the phenomenon and train the mind to integrate the two aspects into one coherent picture (Snir, 1995). Students with disabilities (at-risk) must be guided in such a way that they gain control of their mental models and can realize those models through the use of innovative teaching tools.
New York State Department of Education Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) established six goals for these students to meet. The main goal is that students receiving special education services will meet high educational standards. Another goal is that services provided by VESID will continually improve. This goal opens the door for holistic approaches to education such as the use of technological innovations. Adult educators are encouraged to take advantage of this situation.
Instead of treating basic skills as a hurdle that must be conquered before exposing students to more complicated and meaningful learning tasks, educators should give at-risk students the chance to learn and execute basic skills in the context of implementing authentic tasks (Means, Chelemer, & Knapp, 1991). At-risk students would be assessed on their ability to execute complex tasks and to use reflective thinking to describe the critical thinking that they experience rather than on their facility with multiple-choice tests. Research on classrooms that have used constructivist teaching and learning models into practice has shown that technology can improve student interest and productivity. Furthermore, technology raises the level of difficulty of the tasks that students implement, increases student motivation, and promotes changes in classroom roles and organization. Innovations in teaching with technology will impact the way that students learn and will affect them in developing transferable life-long learning skills.
As adult educators we should guide the students and lead them in a direction and to a point when the students become self-reliant and are willing to participate in collaborative learning tasks. We as educators must become facilitators and get away from the traditional pedagogical style of teaching. In promoting these educational reforms for at-risk students educators will not only become more reflexive teachers but will also affect the level of enthusiasm that these special needs students have in the learning process. Educators must exercise a great deal of patience and understanding for the conditions and situations that their students are in so that they can allow more time in their lesson plans.
References
David, J., Jane, H., Rose, M. M., & David, C., (2008). Meaningful learning with technology.
Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Inst. on the Education of At-Risk Students (ED/OERI). (1998). Tools for Schools: School Reform Models Supported by the National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students. Retrieved from Education Research Information Website: February 12, 2009, http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED418174&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED418174
Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Inst. on the Education of At-Risk Students (ED/OERI). (1998). Tools for Schools: School Reform Models Supported by the National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students. Retrieved from Education Research Information Website: February 12, 2009, http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED418174&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED418174
Perkins, N. D., Schwartz, L. J., & West, M. W., (1995). Software Goes to School: Teaching for Understanding With New Technologies.
Adult Education for Immigrant Populations in the United States
Running head: ADULT EDUCATION FOR IMMIGRANTS
Adult Education for Immigrant Populations in the United States
Sharon L. Burr
Fordham University
Foundations of Adult Education – CTGE5925
Dr. Kathleen King
February 13, 2009
From the first article we read for this class, The untold story of "Foreign Devil" adult educators in Shanghai Silk Factories (1920 to 1949) by Boshier and Huang, I have been thrown back in time and thinking about adult education from a different, more historical perspective. Of course, as soon as one begins to look at traditional things in new ways, it begins to open up additional avenues of thought. The story of the Shanghai Silk Factories led me to reinvestigate the settlement houses of the late 19th and early 20th centuries in America. This led me to the question “What is the equivalent of a settlement house today?” and “In a time where immigration is such a highly charged topic in America, how does adult education play into the assimilation of immigrants in the 21st century?” My reaction to all this thinking was to use the Shanghai Silk Factories as an excuse to research my questions further and determine what role adult education and immigration might have in my world of corporate training.
Historically, settlement houses were focused on what Huff (http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm) calls the “three R’s.” These were research, reform and residence. Research was the way to investigate the problems of the poor, primarily through surveys. Reform was focused not on the individual but on the political and social systems that could improve the lives of the poor and “residence” referred to the fact that settlement workers saw themselves as “neighbors” to the people they tried to serve and, in fact, frequently lived in the settlement house with which they were affiliated. In the words of Blank, “Settlement houses were characterized not by a set of services but by an approach: that initiative to correct social ills should come from indigenous neighborhood leaders or organizations. Settlement workers were not dispensing charity; they were working toward the general welfare.” (http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.soci-alworker.com/settleme.htm)
As I thought more about the settlement houses of the past, and began to look at and compare them with some of the elements of adult education today, a key point stood out for me. So called “settlement skills” places the full onus of assimilation on the immigrant and ignores the socialization and education of the existing population toward welcoming the diversity of immigrants who bring new perspective to the workplace. (Mirchandani, pg. 66) Both Blank and Huff allude to the inherent prejudices that frequently influenced the settlement workers. For example, throughout the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, the plight of the African American poor was routinely ignored. (Huff, http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm)
Neither the Tennessee study comparing adult education “integrating vs. segmenting tendencies” in Nashville nor the study of using computer-based training with Latino farm workers takes into consideration the attitudes, prejudices and stereotypes existing in the native populations into which the immigrants are trying to assimilate. Only the Canadian study, done to improve the assimilation of urgently needed workers into Canadian culture, makes mention of the responsibility of the native culture to “welcome the diversity of immigrants who bring new perspective to the workplace.” (Mirchandani, pg. 66)
The historical and modern day adult education perspectives come together for me and make sense for my work when you compare the concepts of diversity in our culture vs. inclusion. If one may define diversity as the presence of differences that make each person unique and can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another and inclusion as a culture where differences are appreciated and all people feel valued for their skills and talent, then adult education for immigrants has, for the most part, failed. Most adult education for immigrants is focused on assimilation into the native culture rather than appreciation for the unique knowledge, skills and abilities the immigrant brings to America. Until adult education can meet the assimilation needs of immigrants and fully appreciate the unique and diverse perspective that people of other cultures bring to our world we will continue to live in an “us vs. them” society.
References
Anger, W.K., Tamulinas, A., Uribe, A. and Ayala, C. (2004). Computer-Based
Training for Immigrant Latinos with Limited Formal Education. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, (46), 373-389. Retrieved February 10,
2009, from ERIC database.
Blank, B.T. (1998). Settlement Houses: Old Idea in New Form Builds
Communities (Volume 5 #3). Retrieved from the web: February 9,
2009. http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.socialworker.com/settleme.htm
Boshier, R., & Huang, Y. (2007). The untold story of "Foreign Devil" adult
educators in Shanghai Silk Factories (1920 to 1949). Adult Education
Quarterly: A Journal of Research and Theory 57 (4), 329-345.
Cornfield, D., & Arzubiaga, A. (2004, March 1). Immigrants and Education in
the U.S. Interior: Integrating and Segmenting Tendencies in Nashville,
Tennessee. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(2), 157-179. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. EJ683088) Retrieved February 10,
2009, from ERIC database.
Huff, D. (2002). Progress & Reform A Cyberhistory of Social Work’s Formative
Years. Retrieved from the web: February 9, 2009.
http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm
Mirchandani, K. (2004, January 1). Immigrants Matter: Canada's Social Agenda
on Skill and Learning. Convergence, 37(1), 61-68. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ758737) Retrieved February 10, 2009, from ERIC database.
Townsend, R. (2008, April). Adult education, social inclusion and cultural
diversity in regional communities. Australian Journal of Adult Learning,
48 (1), 71-92. Retrieved February 10, 2009, from ERIC database.
Zhang, Weiyuan(2008). Conceptions of lifelong learning in Confucian culture:
their impact on adult learners. International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 27(5) 551 — 557. Retrieved February 13, 2009, from ERIC
database.
Adult Education for Immigrant Populations in the United States
Sharon L. Burr
Fordham University
Foundations of Adult Education – CTGE5925
Dr. Kathleen King
February 13, 2009
From the first article we read for this class, The untold story of "Foreign Devil" adult educators in Shanghai Silk Factories (1920 to 1949) by Boshier and Huang, I have been thrown back in time and thinking about adult education from a different, more historical perspective. Of course, as soon as one begins to look at traditional things in new ways, it begins to open up additional avenues of thought. The story of the Shanghai Silk Factories led me to reinvestigate the settlement houses of the late 19th and early 20th centuries in America. This led me to the question “What is the equivalent of a settlement house today?” and “In a time where immigration is such a highly charged topic in America, how does adult education play into the assimilation of immigrants in the 21st century?” My reaction to all this thinking was to use the Shanghai Silk Factories as an excuse to research my questions further and determine what role adult education and immigration might have in my world of corporate training.
Historically, settlement houses were focused on what Huff (http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm) calls the “three R’s.” These were research, reform and residence. Research was the way to investigate the problems of the poor, primarily through surveys. Reform was focused not on the individual but on the political and social systems that could improve the lives of the poor and “residence” referred to the fact that settlement workers saw themselves as “neighbors” to the people they tried to serve and, in fact, frequently lived in the settlement house with which they were affiliated. In the words of Blank, “Settlement houses were characterized not by a set of services but by an approach: that initiative to correct social ills should come from indigenous neighborhood leaders or organizations. Settlement workers were not dispensing charity; they were working toward the general welfare.” (http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.soci-alworker.com/settleme.htm)
As I thought more about the settlement houses of the past, and began to look at and compare them with some of the elements of adult education today, a key point stood out for me. So called “settlement skills” places the full onus of assimilation on the immigrant and ignores the socialization and education of the existing population toward welcoming the diversity of immigrants who bring new perspective to the workplace. (Mirchandani, pg. 66) Both Blank and Huff allude to the inherent prejudices that frequently influenced the settlement workers. For example, throughout the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, the plight of the African American poor was routinely ignored. (Huff, http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm)
Neither the Tennessee study comparing adult education “integrating vs. segmenting tendencies” in Nashville nor the study of using computer-based training with Latino farm workers takes into consideration the attitudes, prejudices and stereotypes existing in the native populations into which the immigrants are trying to assimilate. Only the Canadian study, done to improve the assimilation of urgently needed workers into Canadian culture, makes mention of the responsibility of the native culture to “welcome the diversity of immigrants who bring new perspective to the workplace.” (Mirchandani, pg. 66)
The historical and modern day adult education perspectives come together for me and make sense for my work when you compare the concepts of diversity in our culture vs. inclusion. If one may define diversity as the presence of differences that make each person unique and can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another and inclusion as a culture where differences are appreciated and all people feel valued for their skills and talent, then adult education for immigrants has, for the most part, failed. Most adult education for immigrants is focused on assimilation into the native culture rather than appreciation for the unique knowledge, skills and abilities the immigrant brings to America. Until adult education can meet the assimilation needs of immigrants and fully appreciate the unique and diverse perspective that people of other cultures bring to our world we will continue to live in an “us vs. them” society.
References
Anger, W.K., Tamulinas, A., Uribe, A. and Ayala, C. (2004). Computer-Based
Training for Immigrant Latinos with Limited Formal Education. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, (46), 373-389. Retrieved February 10,
2009, from ERIC database.
Blank, B.T. (1998). Settlement Houses: Old Idea in New Form Builds
Communities (Volume 5 #3). Retrieved from the web: February 9,
2009. http://womenshistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.socialworker.com/settleme.htm
Boshier, R., & Huang, Y. (2007). The untold story of "Foreign Devil" adult
educators in Shanghai Silk Factories (1920 to 1949). Adult Education
Quarterly: A Journal of Research and Theory 57 (4), 329-345.
Cornfield, D., & Arzubiaga, A. (2004, March 1). Immigrants and Education in
the U.S. Interior: Integrating and Segmenting Tendencies in Nashville,
Tennessee. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(2), 157-179. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. EJ683088) Retrieved February 10,
2009, from ERIC database.
Huff, D. (2002). Progress & Reform A Cyberhistory of Social Work’s Formative
Years. Retrieved from the web: February 9, 2009.
http://www.boisestate.edu/socwork/dhuff/history/chapts/2-2b.htm
Mirchandani, K. (2004, January 1). Immigrants Matter: Canada's Social Agenda
on Skill and Learning. Convergence, 37(1), 61-68. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ758737) Retrieved February 10, 2009, from ERIC database.
Townsend, R. (2008, April). Adult education, social inclusion and cultural
diversity in regional communities. Australian Journal of Adult Learning,
48 (1), 71-92. Retrieved February 10, 2009, from ERIC database.
Zhang, Weiyuan(2008). Conceptions of lifelong learning in Confucian culture:
their impact on adult learners. International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 27(5) 551 — 557. Retrieved February 13, 2009, from ERIC
database.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Incorporating and maintaining emerging technologies into adult education
by Irene Sarno
Technology changes affecting how we live and learn have grown enormously in the last 20 years. Technology has proliferated into society from so many points of view it has become so critical to everyday life. What was not long ago viewed as science fiction is now commonplace. With more learners pursuing continuing education, whether via distance learning or in a traditional classroom, educational institutions must not only invest in the use of these technologies, but must continually reevaluate and modify their programs. Thus, educators must embrace these new technologies to help ensure the learning techniques remain relevant. Without the use of these technologies, the subject matter runs the risk of being perceived as out of date to the adult learners.
Malcolm Knowles characterizes adult learners are autonomous, self-directed, motivated, goal oriented, practical, possessive of rich experiences and a need to immediately apply what they have learned.(King,2003, 76-77). Thus, the learner should be the focal point of the learning process. Regarding technology, the adult educator must assess and understand the learner’s technological knowledge and readiness as well as the organizational philosophy toward technology in order to guide the design, and development of all programs. The development of these programs must then adhere to a well researched and thought out planning model, as set forth in Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning, using technology as alternative ways for carrying out each component of the model.” (Caffarella, 2002, p.48) In addition, NSDC Standards for Staff Development of Context, Process & Content should be implemented in order to improve the learning of all students. Thus, a sound implementation plan including support, documentation and regular upgrades is critical,
Additionally, constant interaction and evaluation must exist between the instructor and learner. “Assessing transfer of learning, along with periodic evaluation of the program for participant satisfaction and objective criteria, can be interpreted as part of continual needs assessment.” (King & Lawler, 2000, p.109) Therefore, it is imperative that trainers and educators know their audience, understand the organization culture, recognize learner strengths and weaknesses and be willing to modify sessions to conform to the environment at hand. Equally important is the need for educators to constantly invest time, personal resources and effort in upgrading their own knowledge and skills in educational technology. (King,2003, 46)
To assist in alleviating frustrations and avoid students becoming disillusioned, the NSCD recommends educators are dynamic & highly interactive with their students. During training, learners must be encouraged to use available technologies and provided with ample support. In today’s lightning fast global learning environment, access to information, networks, people, and ideas provide significant resources and opportunities for research and reinforcement. New technologies such as contributing to a wiki, participating in a blog, connecting with others using Skype, and utilizing or create alternate media forms such as podcasts and webcasts have become very effective learning enabling tools Student centered teaching approaches have become the standard, permitting the student to utilize the specific materials that can accommodate their individual learning style.
However, educators and trainers must remain cognizant of the numerous challenges emerging technologies add to the learning environment. First and foremost, the digital divide issue or imbalance of learner technical knowledge, resource availability and accessibility must be addressed and planned, since this inequality can severely inhibit learning. The educator must work to balance the use of current technologies to enhance learning not overpower it.
Hence educators must avoid over reliance of technology.
Thus, the embracing of emerging technologies by both educators and learners can enrich the learning experience.
References
National Staff Development Council (NSDC). (2001) NSDC’s Standards for Staff Development Revised, Oxford OH:Author.
King, K.P. (2003). Keeping Pace with Technology: Volume Two: The Challenge and Promise for Higher Education. New Jersey:Hampton Press,Inc.
Lawler, P.A. & King, K.P (2000b). Planning for effective faculty development: Using Adult strategies. Malabar, FL:Krieger.
Caffarella, R.S. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners (2nd ed). SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass, pp. 203-221.
Technology changes affecting how we live and learn have grown enormously in the last 20 years. Technology has proliferated into society from so many points of view it has become so critical to everyday life. What was not long ago viewed as science fiction is now commonplace. With more learners pursuing continuing education, whether via distance learning or in a traditional classroom, educational institutions must not only invest in the use of these technologies, but must continually reevaluate and modify their programs. Thus, educators must embrace these new technologies to help ensure the learning techniques remain relevant. Without the use of these technologies, the subject matter runs the risk of being perceived as out of date to the adult learners.
Malcolm Knowles characterizes adult learners are autonomous, self-directed, motivated, goal oriented, practical, possessive of rich experiences and a need to immediately apply what they have learned.(King,2003, 76-77). Thus, the learner should be the focal point of the learning process. Regarding technology, the adult educator must assess and understand the learner’s technological knowledge and readiness as well as the organizational philosophy toward technology in order to guide the design, and development of all programs. The development of these programs must then adhere to a well researched and thought out planning model, as set forth in Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning, using technology as alternative ways for carrying out each component of the model.” (Caffarella, 2002, p.48) In addition, NSDC Standards for Staff Development of Context, Process & Content should be implemented in order to improve the learning of all students. Thus, a sound implementation plan including support, documentation and regular upgrades is critical,
Additionally, constant interaction and evaluation must exist between the instructor and learner. “Assessing transfer of learning, along with periodic evaluation of the program for participant satisfaction and objective criteria, can be interpreted as part of continual needs assessment.” (King & Lawler, 2000, p.109) Therefore, it is imperative that trainers and educators know their audience, understand the organization culture, recognize learner strengths and weaknesses and be willing to modify sessions to conform to the environment at hand. Equally important is the need for educators to constantly invest time, personal resources and effort in upgrading their own knowledge and skills in educational technology. (King,2003, 46)
To assist in alleviating frustrations and avoid students becoming disillusioned, the NSCD recommends educators are dynamic & highly interactive with their students. During training, learners must be encouraged to use available technologies and provided with ample support. In today’s lightning fast global learning environment, access to information, networks, people, and ideas provide significant resources and opportunities for research and reinforcement. New technologies such as contributing to a wiki, participating in a blog, connecting with others using Skype, and utilizing or create alternate media forms such as podcasts and webcasts have become very effective learning enabling tools Student centered teaching approaches have become the standard, permitting the student to utilize the specific materials that can accommodate their individual learning style.
However, educators and trainers must remain cognizant of the numerous challenges emerging technologies add to the learning environment. First and foremost, the digital divide issue or imbalance of learner technical knowledge, resource availability and accessibility must be addressed and planned, since this inequality can severely inhibit learning. The educator must work to balance the use of current technologies to enhance learning not overpower it.
Hence educators must avoid over reliance of technology.
Thus, the embracing of emerging technologies by both educators and learners can enrich the learning experience.
References
National Staff Development Council (NSDC). (2001) NSDC’s Standards for Staff Development Revised, Oxford OH:Author.
King, K.P. (2003). Keeping Pace with Technology: Volume Two: The Challenge and Promise for Higher Education. New Jersey:Hampton Press,Inc.
Lawler, P.A. & King, K.P (2000b). Planning for effective faculty development: Using Adult strategies. Malabar, FL:Krieger.
Caffarella, R.S. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners (2nd ed). SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass, pp. 203-221.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)