Category: Opinion

  • Fixing Michigan’s Teacher Shortage Isn’t Just About Getting More Recruits – The 74

    Fixing Michigan’s Teacher Shortage Isn’t Just About Getting More Recruits – The 74

    The number of vacancies is likely an undercount, because this number does not include substitutes or unqualified teachers who may have been hired to fill gaps.

    Local news reports and job boards suggest that at least some Michigan districts are still struggling to fill open positions for the fall of 2025.

    The teacher shortage is a nationwide problem, but it is especially acute in Michigan, where the number of teachers leaving teaching and the overall teacher shortage both exceed the national average. This shortage is particularly severe in urban and rural communities, which have the most underresourced schools, and in specialization areas such as science, mathematics and special education.

    For more than two decades, my work at Michigan State University has centered on designing and leading effective teacher preparation programs. My research focuses on ways to attract people to teaching and keep them in the profession by helping them grow into effective classroom leaders.

    Low pay and lack of support

    Teacher shortages are the result of a combination of factors, especially low salaries, heavy workloads and a lack of ongoing professional support.

    A report released last year, for example, found that Michigan teachers and teachers nationwide make about 20% less compared to those in other careers that also require a college education.

    From my experience working with teachers and district leadership across the state, I know that beginning teachers – especially those in districts which have severe shortages – are often given the most challenging teaching loads. And in some districts, teachers have been forced to work without the benefit of any kind of planning time in their daily schedule.

    The shortage was made much worse by the COVID-19 pandemic, which led many educators to leave the profession. Yet another culprit is the many teachers who, in Michigan as well as nationally, were hired during the 1960s and early ’70s, when school enrollments saw a massive increase, and who in the past decade have been retiring in large numbers.

    Creating pathways to certification

    One recent strategy to address the teacher shortage in Michigan has been to create nontraditional routes to teacher certification.

    The idea is to prepare educators more quickly and inexpensively. A variety of agencies – from the Michigan Department of Education, state-level grants programs such as the Future Proud Michigan Educator program, as well as private foundations and businesses – have helped these programs along financially.

    Even some school districts, including the Detroit Public Schools Community District, have adopted this strategy in order to certify teachers and fill vacant positions.

    Other similar programs are the product of partnerships between Michigan’s intermediate school districts, community colleges and four-year colleges and universities. One example is Grand Valley State University’s Western Michigan Teacher Collaborative, which targets interested students of college age. Another is MSU’s Community Teacher Initiative, designed to attract students into teaching while they are still in high school.

    Perhaps even more visible are national programs such as Teachers of Tomorrow and Teach for America. Candidates in such programs often work as full-time teachers while completing teacher training coursework with minimal oversight or support.

    ‘Stuffing the pipeline’ is not the solution

    But simply “stuffing the pipeline” with new recruits is not enough to solve the teacher-shortage problem in Michigan.

    The loss of teachers is significantly higher among individuals in nontraditional training programs and for teachers of color. This starts while they are preparing to be certified and continues for several years after certification.

    The primary reasons for the higher attrition rates include a lack of awareness of the complexity of schools and schooling, the lack of effective mentoring during the certification period, and the absence of instructional and other professional guidance in the early years of teaching.

    How to repair the leaky faucet

    So how can teachers be encouraged to stay in the profession?

    Here are a few of the things scholars have learned to improve outcomes in traditional and nontraditional preparation programs:

    Temper expectations. Teaching is a critically important career, but leading individuals to believe that they can repair the damage done by a complex set of socioeconomic issues – including multigenerational poverty and lack of access to healthy and affordable food, housing, drinking water and health care – puts beginning teachers on a short road to early burnout and departure.

    Give student teachers strong mentors. Working in schools helps student teachers deepen their knowledge not only of teaching but also of how schools, families and communities work together. But these experiences are useful only if they are overseen and supported by an experienced and caring educator and supported by the organization’s leadership.

    Recognize the limits of online learning. Online teacher preparation programs are convenient and have their place but don’t provide student teachers with real-world experience and opportunities for guided discussion about what they see, hear and feel when working with students.

    Respect the process of “becoming.” Professional support should not end when a new teacher is officially certified. Teachers, like other professionals such as nurses, doctors and lawyers, need time to develop skills throughout their careers.

    Providing this support sends a powerful message: that teachers are valued members of the community. Knowing that helps them stay in their jobs.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Source link

  • Columbia Capitulated, Other Institutions Should Not

    Columbia Capitulated, Other Institutions Should Not

    Jin Hee LeeColleges and universities play a critical role in American democracy. By bringing together young adults, faculty, and employees to live and learn in a shared educational setting, higher education institutions shape the future citizens and leaders of our country. But they can only achieve this mission if their campuses reflect the multiracial society that we all live in. Unfortunately, Columbia’s recent settlement with the Trump administration calls into question whether it can fulfill its educational mission to foster a dynamic learning environment for its campus community. Given longstanding problems with unfair underrepresentation and academic exclusion, Black students and faculty likely will bear the brunt of this troubling settlement. Other colleges and universities must not make the same mistake.

    Columbia’s settlement agreement with the Trump administration gives the federal government unprecedented oversight into the university’s operations. Under the agreement, Columbia will allow administration officials to review, and potentially reject, any effort by the university to advance equal opportunity through admissions, hiring, and promotion. Notably, these conditions advance the administration’s express agenda to suppress and ban efforts to ensure an inclusive and welcoming educational environment for Black students and faculty, thereby preventing them from fully contributing their expertise and lived experiences to the larger campus community.

    Such unprecedented scrutiny by the federal government is especially troubling given the administration’s flawed interpretation of our constitution and civil rights laws in recent guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Justice. For example, the Trump administration believes that programs open to people of all races, such as those geared towards first-generation college students or rural areas, are unlawful if they are intended to break down unfair barriers to equal access and opportunities for disadvantaged students, including disadvantaged students of color. Thus, according to the administration, higher admissions or hiring rates of Black students and faculty, following the implementation of more equitable practices that do not rely on any applicant’s race or ethnicity, could expose Columbia to legal sanctions pursuant to the Department of Justice’s inaccurate interpretation of equal protection and civil rights laws.

    The settlement also causes Columbia to be subsumed into the Trump administration’s campaign to silence lawful protest and target immigrant communities. It requires Columbia to increase the number of employees trained and authorized to arrest and remove students for protesting in ways that the administration or Columbia, in their full discretion, deem inappropriate. Based on the settlement, student groups are subject to “sanction . . . including by defunding, suspending, or de-recognizing them” for “discriminatory conduct,” which threatens erasure of affinity spaces for underrepresented groups given the administration’s inaccurate understanding of “discrimination.”Student groups that express views disfavored by the Trump administration or Columbia’s leadership are particularly at risk. If an international student is arrested during a protest, the agreement requires Columbia to notify the Department of Homeland Security and disclose their identity.

    Such government interference with campus protest, which has been integral to expressions of dissent and the free exchange of ideas throughout American history, undoubtedly will chill the speech of many students and faculty, thus eroding their First Amendment rights. It is particularly ironic that the settlement agreement requires student protesters, including those wearing masks, to identify themselves upon request, while masked ICE officers can abduct and detain college students without even charging them with a crime. As a consequence of the agreements’ terms, Columbia’s campus will become less welcoming to students, including Black students, who already struggle with discrimination and exclusion. This, in turn, will deter many talented students and faculty from joining Columbia’s campus, thereby degrading the university’s reputation and academic scholarship.

    Other colleges and universities must not follow Columbia’s capitulation. Instead of being centers of learning, where people from diverse backgrounds can engage in a free flow of ideas, opinions, and perspectives, the current administration seeks to use these institutions to actualize an undemocratic vision of an America, where dissent is silenced and resources and opportunities are hoarded for the wealthy and powerful. In many ways, this cynical vision of America aims to turn back the clock to an era, not so long ago, when institutions of higher learning were reserved for the privileged few and either explicitly or implicitly excluded Black students and faculty as unwelcome and undeserving outsiders.

    ___________

    Jin Hee Lee is director of strategic initiatives at the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), where she leads a department that integrates litigation, policy, organizing, communications, research, and public education to advance community-centered racial justice advocacy—most notably through the Pro Truth Initiative.

     

     

     

    Source link

  • Tutoring provides a much-needed on-ramp into the teaching profession. School districts should pay attention.

    Tutoring provides a much-needed on-ramp into the teaching profession. School districts should pay attention.

    After graduating from Knox College in Illinois with a bachelor’s degree, Stephanie Martinez-Calderon’s plans were upended by the pandemic. She hadn’t planned on becoming a teacher but found an opportunity to tutor remotely for the year after college. 

    Tutoring helped her build confidence and develop instructional skills, and today she’s a middle school teacher in the Washoe County School District in Nevada. 

    Tutoring can be a powerful training ground for future educators, providing hands-on experience, confidence and a bridge into the classroom. And what might begin as a temporary opportunity can become a career path at a time when teachers are needed more than ever: A recent report noted that nearly one in five K-12 teachers plan to leave teaching or are unsure if they’ll stay. 

    Turnover remains a crisis in many districts, one that can be solved by a ready-made pipeline of young future educators with instructional experience and relationship-building skills they’ve gained from tutoring.  

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education. 

    How school districts think about tutoring should evolve. Rather than seeing it as a short-term response to pandemic-interrupted learning, they should view it as part of the fabric of school design and future educator development. This requires including tutoring in strategic plans, forming community partnerships and creating a structure to sustain programs that cultivate tutors for careers in education. To fund these programs and pay tutors, districts can redirect Title I funds, use federal work-study and create apprenticeship programs.  

    Starting as a tutor allows aspiring educators to build core teaching skills in a supportive, lower-stakes environment. Tutors learn to navigate student relationships and adapt lessons to individual needs. Without having to manage an entire classroom, they can practice asking questions that get students thinking and selecting problems to help students learn. This early practice eases the transition into teaching. 

    Tutors from Generation Z, born between 1996 and 2012, often bring fresh energy to the profession. As digital natives, they are reimagining how to engage and inspire students, leverage technology and foster creativity and new approaches to learning. 

    They are also the most ethnically and racially diverse generation yet: Many come from backgrounds historically underrepresented in the teaching force; over half of undergraduates identify as first-generation college students. Their engagement broadens the prospects for a more diverse teacher pipeline. 

    Tutor recruiters have noticed that Gen Z workers don’t just want a job — they want roles committed to social impact, professional growth and sustainable work-life balance. 

    Gen Z’s emphasis on flexibility and remote opportunities is one of the most significant workforce changes since the pandemic. They value mental health, stability and mission-driven work. Part-time, hybrid and wellness benefits help recruit young talent. 

    At our nonprofit, recruiters hear from education candidates that Gen Z appreciates the chance to try out industries, and that tutoring provides them with a window into the world of teaching. 

    Public schools could better meet the evolving needs of young professionals entering education by reimagining tutor roles to include hybrid options, mental health supports and collaborative teaching pathways for professional growth. For instance, a tutor might start off working in a part-time online tutoring role, but after interacting with students virtually and gaining more experience, they may be more excited to take on a full-time teaching role on-site.  

    For school districts, tutoring programs can serve as effective recruitment pipelines. By offering recent graduates a low-barrier entry point into education — one that doesn’t require immediate certification — districts can spark interest in teaching among candidates who may not have previously considered it. 

    Amid ongoing hiring challenges, particularly mid-year vacancies, tutors can offer timely solutions.  

    When tutors step into teaching roles, they bring valuable continuity — familiarity with the students and insight into progress and school culture. This seamless transition supports both student learning and district staffing needs. 

    Related: PROOF POINTS: Taking stock of tutoring 

    The idea that tutoring should be built into future educator pipelines is spreading. For example, since the launch of its Ignite Fellowship in 2020, Teach for America says that 550 of its former tutors have become full-time teachers. The program has proven to be especially effective at drawing in nontraditional candidates — those who may not have initially envisioned themselves in the classroom. In Washington, D.C., the school district launched a tutor-to-teacher apprenticeship program after success with high-impact tutoring. In Texas, teacher residents are required to work as tutors and in other support roles while co-teaching with a mentor. 

    By offering flexible, purpose-driven opportunities, districts can attract Gen Z professionals and give them a meaningful entry point into teaching. And tutoring programs can become more than academic support — they can serve as strategic talent pipelines that strengthen the future of the teaching workforce. 

    Alan Safran is co-founder, CEO and chair of the board of Saga Education; Halley Bowman is senior director of academics. 

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

    This story about tutoring was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.  

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • The Problem with Capitulating to Fascism in Higher Education

    The Problem with Capitulating to Fascism in Higher Education

    Higher education serves different purposes for different people. For some, it represents transformation and expanded horizons. For others, it remains a site of oppression—a place where white supremacy and anti-Blackness flourish while administrations proclaim commitments to diversity even as their actions contradict these stated values. The commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have long been performative at most predominantly white institutions (PWIs). Now, institutions no longer need to maintain even this pretense.

    Dr. Frederick Engram JrThe current presidential administration has made anti-Black, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ+, and anti-women policies central to its agenda. We are not approaching fascism—we are immersed in it. The fundamental problem with higher education and liberal politics more broadly is that while we all recognized the warning signs, no substantive preventative measures were taken to counter the impending assault.

    When the previous Trump administration targeted K-12 education—falsely claiming that critical race theory was being taught in elementary schools and suspending administrators in states like Texas—higher education watched passively, believing itself safe from similar attacks. Instead of mounting resistance and uniting against authoritarian overreach, higher education capitulated. Institutions cancelled classes and programs designed to educate students about historical injustices, prioritizing the comfort of white students and families while disregarding everyone else.

    As Professor Emeritus Dr. John R. Thelin documents in his seminal work A History of American Higher Education, the system was designed from its inception to serve wealthy, white, cisgender, able-bodied men. Higher education was never intended to include marginalized people of color or women. The argument that white men are now being excluded from spaces where they have always been centered would be absurd if it weren’t so dangerous.

    Anti-discrimination DEI initiatives became necessary precisely because white men were not voluntarily making space for others—supported by white women who were themselves fighting for inclusion. The notion that white men feel excluded from higher education reflects a false sense of entitlement and the sting of having their mediocrity exposed. This wounded sense of supremacy drives them to destroy institutions rather than share them.

    Fascism is not approaching—it has arrived.

    The targeted attacks on Harvard, UCLA, University of Pennsylvania, minority-serving institutions (MSIs), and historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) are rooted in anti-Black rhetoric that was explicitly outlined in Project 2025. This blueprint seeks to create a dystopian America where marginalized voices are silenced and governance is built around white anxieties and grievances.

    The worst possible response from higher education institutions is capitulation. Instead of forming coalitions, deploying legal resources, and mobilizing their extensive alumni networks, institutions are either confronting this administration in isolation or retreating into silence. Someone should inform higher education that fascism doesn’t reward compliance. It seeks total destruction and will not protect those who failed to oppose it simply because they remained quiet.

    Our institutions and academic disciplines face existential threats. Regardless of how compliant we choose to be, when the destruction is complete, nothing will remain standing. We cannot measure progressive politics by white comfort levels, nor should white feelings determine whether we defend the most vulnerable among us.

    Understanding liberation and resistance in this moment requires recognizing that active opposition is our only viable option. Millions have died, millions are dying, and millions more await death—all to satisfy the bloodlust of mediocre leaders drunk on power. Our resistance must be meaningful and sustained.

    What purpose will silence serve when we lose everything anyway?

    The time for half-measures and performative gestures has passed. Higher education must choose between principled resistance and institutional suicide. The stakes could not be higher, and history will judge our response.

    _________

    Dr. Frederick Engram Jr. is an assistant professor of higher education at at Fairleigh Dickinson University.

    Source link

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE FUTURE OF HBCUS: A CALL FOR INVESTMENT, INNOVATION, AND INCLUSION

    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE FUTURE OF HBCUS: A CALL FOR INVESTMENT, INNOVATION, AND INCLUSION

    Dr. Emmanuel LalandeHistorically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have always stood on the frontlines of educational equity, carving pathways to excellence for generations of Black students against overwhelming odds. Today, as higher education faces a shift driven by technology, declining enrollment, and resource disparities, a new opportunity emerges: the power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to reshape, reimagine, and reinforce the mission of HBCUs.

    From admissions automation and predictive analytics to personalized learning and AI-powered tutoring, artificial intelligence is no longer theoretical, it is operational. At large institutions, AI-driven chatbots and enrollment algorithms have already improved student engagement and reduced summer melt. Meanwhile, HBCUs, particularly smaller and underfunded ones, risk being left behind.

    The imperative for HBCUs to act now is not about chasing trends about survival, relevance, and reclaiming leadership in shaping the future of Black education.

    AI as a Force Aligned with the HBCU Mission

    Artificial intelligence, when developed and implemented with intention and ethics, can be one of the most powerful tools for educational justice. HBCUs already do more with less. They enroll 10% of Black students in higher education and produce nearly 20% of all Black graduates. These institutions are responsible for over 25% of Black graduates in STEM fields, and they produce a significant share of Black teachers, judges, engineers, and public servants.

    The power of AI can amplify this legacy.

    • Predictive analytics can flag at-risk students based on attendance, financial aid gaps, and academic performance, helping retention teams intervene before a student drops out.
    • AI chatbots can provide round-the-clock support to students navigating complex enrollment, financial aid, or housing questions.
    • AI tutors and adaptive platforms can meet students where they are, especially for those in developmental math, science, or writing courses.
    • Smart scheduling and resource optimization tools can help HBCUs streamline operations, offering courses more efficiently and improving completion rates.

    For small HBCUs with limited staff, outdated technology, and tuition-driven models, AI can serve as a strategic equalizer. But accessing these tools requires intentional partnerships, resources, and cultural buy-in.

    The Philanthropic Moment: A Unique Opportunity

    The recent announcement from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation that it plans to spend its entire $200 billion endowment by 2045 presents a monumental opportunity. The foundation has declared a sharpened focus on “unlocking opportunity” through education, including major investments in AI-powered innovations in K-12 and higher education, particularly in mathematics and student learning platforms.

    One such investment is in Magma Math, an AI-driven platform that helps teachers deliver personalized math instruction. The foundation is also actively funding research and development around how AI can close opportunity gaps in postsecondary education and increase economic mobility. Their call for “AI for Equity” aligns with the HBCU mission like no other.

    Now is the time for HBCUs to boldly approach philanthropic organizations like the Gates Foundation as strategic partners capable of leading equity-driven AI implementation. 

    Other foundations should follow suit. Lumina Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Kresge Foundation, and Strada Education Network have all expressed interest in digital learning and postsecondary success. A targeted, collaborative initiative to equip HBCUs with AI infrastructure, training, and research capacity could be transformative.

    Tech Industry Engagement: From Tokenism to True Partnership

    • The tech industry has begun investing in HBCUs, but more is needed.
    • OpenAI recently partnered with North Carolina Central University (NCCU) to support AI literacy through its Institute for Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Research. The vision includes scaling support to other HBCUs.
    • Intel has committed $750,000 to Morgan State University to advance research in AI, data science, and cybersecurity.
    • Amazon launched the Educator Enablement Program, supporting faculty at HBCUs in learning and teaching AI-related curricula.
    • Apple and Google have supported HBCU initiatives around coding, machine learning, and entrepreneurship, though these efforts are often episodic or branding-focused. What’s needed now is sustained, institutional investment.
    • Huston-Tillotson University hosted an inaugural HBCU AI Conference and Training Summit back in April, bringing together AI researchers, students, educators, and industry leaders from across the country. This gathering focused on building inclusive pathways in artificial intelligence, offering interactive workshops, recruiter engagement, and a platform for collaboration among HBCUs, community colleges, and major tech firms.

    We call on Microsoft, Salesforce, Nvidia, Coursera, Anthropic, and other major EdTech firms to go beyond surface partnerships. HBCUs are fertile ground for workforce development, AI research, and inclusive tech talent pipelines. Tech companies should invest in labs, curriculum development, student fellowships, and cloud infrastructure, especially at HBCUs without R1 status or multi-million-dollar endowments.

    A Framework for Action Across HBCUs

    To operate AI within the HBCU context, a few strategic steps can guide implementation:

    1. AI Capacity Building Across Faculty and Staff

    Workshops, certification programs, and summer institutes can train faculty to integrate AI into pedagogy, advising, and operations. Staff training can ensure AI tools support, not replace, relational student support.

    2. Student Engagement Through Research and Internships

    HBCUs can establish AI learning hubs where students gain real-world experience developing or auditing algorithms, especially those designed for educational equity.

    3. AI Governance

    Every HBCU adopting AI must also build frameworks for data privacy, transparency, and bias prevention. As institutions historically rooted in justice, HBCUs can lead the national conversation on ethical AI.

    4. Regional and Consortial Collaboration

    HBCUs can pool resources to co-purchase AI tools, share grant writers, and build regional research centers. Joint proposals to federal agencies and tech firms will yield greater impact.

    5. AI in Strategic Planning and Accreditation

    Institutions should embed AI as a theme in Quality Enhancement Plans (QEPs), Title III initiatives, and enrollment management strategies. AI should not be a novelty, it should be a core driver of sustainability and innovation.

    Reclaiming the Future

    HBCUs were built to meet an unmet need in American education. They responded to exclusion with excellence. They turned marginalization into momentum. Today, they can do it again, this time with algorithms, neural networks, and digital dashboards.

    But this moment calls for bold leadership. We must go beyond curiosity and into strategy. We must demand resources, form coalitions, and prepare our institutions not just to use AI, but to shape it.

    Let them define what culturally competent, mission-driven artificial intelligence looks like in real life, not in theory. 

    And to the Gates Foundation, Intel, OpenAI, Amazon, and all who believe in the transformative power of education: invest in HBCUs. Not as charity, but as the smartest, most impactful decision you can make for the future of American innovation.

    Because when HBCUs lead, communities rise. And with AI in our hands, the next 
    level of excellence is well within reach.

    Dr. Emmanuel Lalande currently serves as Vice President for Enrollment and Student Success and Special Assistant to the President at Voorhees University.

     

     

    Source link

  • Limited resources at underserved schools can keep students from getting the support they need

    Limited resources at underserved schools can keep students from getting the support they need

    As the first in my family to attend college, I felt a profound commitment to excel academically and gain admission to a top university. Growing up amid the hustle and bustle of Silicon Valley, I always envisioned a bright future ahead, with college at the forefront of my goals since elementary school.

    At my Title I elementary and middle schools, student-to-teacher ratios were even higher than those listed online. There was a lack of classroom technology and resources like history textbooks. Our two middle school counselors each managed students by the hundreds, making it nearly impossible for them to keep track of individual academic progress and educational goals. Afterward, I attended a private high school, thanks to support from my family. Our caring teachers made the effort to get to know each student, and dedicated counselors advocated for me when it mattered most.

    Yet when conversations about college came around, navigating the complex system was difficult. I had to chart my own path to success through independent research, often looking at data that was scattered and inconsistent. It hindered my ability to educate myself on college-going rates, costs, outcomes and employment prospects post-graduation.

    Related: Interested in innovations in higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.

    Limited resources available at many underserved schools across the nation make it a more challenging environment for students to get support and excel, thus limiting their true academic potential.

    In my senior year of high school, after gaining newfound confidence while serving as a commissioner at-large in my county’s youth commission, I decided to try to challenge the status quo in higher education through the power of data and find a way to speak up for other first-generation students who find themselves interacting with systems not designed with their experiences in mind. My mentors at a regional food bank where I volunteered shaped me to lead with confidence and heart.

    When I received my admission letter from the University of California, Berkeley, I felt deeply honored to earn a place at one of the world’s leading research and teaching institutions.

    I am now an advisory board member of the recently formed California Cradle-to-Career Data System, the state’s longitudinal system that connects education and career outcomes data in one central place. I have learned firsthand that the resources available for students to gauge their potential postgraduate earnings often rely on self-submitted data or estimates, rather than on an accurate overview of college and career outcomes.

    Related: To better serve first-generation students, expand the definition

    As part of this work, I am now helping my state’s leaders develop tools like the Student Pathways dashboard, which provides insights on the higher education options available to students after high school.

    The tool provides information on a single website for everyone to access at any time. By streamlining access to this data, it allows students and the adults helping them to easily pinpoint which types of degrees or certifications are right for them, which may lead to employment opportunities where they live and which colleges or universities the students’ classmates are headed to.

    Students need access that can help them map out their futures — whether they hope to attend college, earn a certificate or enter the workforce directly after high school. Using data in the pathways tool can clarify how others have navigated to and through college and hopefully help students chart their own paths.

    As the youngest advisory board member, I have the opportunity to provide proposals and recommendations from a student’s perspective on how the system can engage with communities to make its data more accessible. Community engagement involves ensuring that Californians are aware of the data system, can understand and interpret the available data and have an opportunity to share their feedback.

    I often think about how the countless hours I spent trying to find information to help guide my goals and decision-making were both a burden and barrier to attending college. I know firsthand how the power of data can help build a successful future.

    Today, many first-generation and low-income college students do not have the opportunity to assess which pathways will yield the most fruit. I’m confident that with accessible facts and data for our decision-making, we can confidently forge the paths that will bring our dreams to life.

    Mike Nguyen is a rising junior studying business administration and science, technology, and society at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley. This piece was written in collaboration with Alexis Takagi, a basic needs coordinator at Santa Clara University. Both Nguyen and Takagi are advisory board members of the California Cradle-to-Career Data System.

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected].

    This story first-generation college students was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • If we are serious about improving student outcomes, we can’t treat teacher retention as an afterthought

    If we are serious about improving student outcomes, we can’t treat teacher retention as an afterthought

    In the race to help students recover from pandemic-related learning loss, education leaders have overlooked one of the most powerful tools already at their disposal: experienced teachers.

    For decades, a myth has persisted in education policy circles that after their first few years on the job, teachers stop improving. This belief has undercut efforts to retain seasoned educators, with many policymakers and administrators treating veteran teachers as replaceable cogs rather than irreplaceable assets.

    But that myth doesn’t hold up. The evidence tells a different story: Teachers don’t hit a plateau after year five. While their growth may slow, it doesn’t stop. In the right environments — with collaborative colleagues, supportive administrators and stable classroom assignments — teachers can keep getting better well into their second decade in the classroom.

    This insight couldn’t come at a more critical time. As schools work to accelerate post-pandemic learning recovery, especially for the most vulnerable students, they need all the instructional expertise they can muster.

    That means not just recruiting new teachers but keeping their best educators in the classroom and giving them the support they need to thrive.

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.

    In a new review of 23 longitudinal studies conducted by the Learning Policy Institute and published by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, all but one of the studies showed that teachers generally improve significantly during their first five years. The research review also found continued, albeit slower, improvement well into years 6 through 15; several of the studies found improvement into later years of teaching, though at a diminished pace.

    These gains translate into measurable benefits for students: higher test scores, fewer disciplinary issues, reduced absenteeism and increased postsecondary attainment. In North Carolina, for example, students with highly experienced English teachers learned more and were substantially less likely to skip school and more likely to enjoy reading. These effects were strongest for students who were most at risk of falling behind.

    While experience helps all teachers improve, we’re currently failing to build that experience where it’s needed most. Schools serving large populations of low-income Black and Hispanic students are far more likely to be staffed primarily by early career teachers.

    And unfortunately, they’re also more likely to see those teachers leave after just a few years. This churn makes it nearly impossible to build a stable, experienced workforce in high-need schools.

    It also robs novice teachers of the veteran mentors who could help them get better faster and robs students of the opportunity to learn from seasoned educators who have refined their craft over time.

    To fix this, we need to address both sides of the equation: helping teachers improve and keeping them in the classrooms that need them most.

    Research points to several conditions that support continued teacher growth. Beginning teachers are more likely to stay and improve if they have had high-quality preparation and mentoring. Teaching is not a solo sport. Educators who work alongside more experienced peers improve faster, especially in the early years.

    Teachers also improve more when they’re able to teach the same grade level or subject year after year. Unfortunately, those in under-resourced schools are more likely to be shuffled around, undermining their ability to build expertise.

    Perhaps most importantly, schools that have strong leadership and which foster time for collaboration and a culture of professional trust see greater gains in teacher retention over time.

    Teachers who feel supported by their administrators, who collaborate with a team that shares their mission and who aren’t constantly switching subjects or grade levels are far more likely to stay in the profession.

    Pay matters too, especially in high-need schools where working conditions are toughest. But incentives alone aren’t enough. Short-term bonuses can attract teachers, but they won’t keep them if the work environment drives them away.

    Related: One state radically boosted new teacher pay – and upset a lot of teachers

    If we’re serious about improving student outcomes, especially in the wake of the pandemic, we have to stop treating teacher retention as an afterthought. That means retooling our policies to reflect what the research now clearly shows: experience matters, and it can be cultivated.

    Policymakers should invest in high-quality teacher preparation and mentoring programs, particularly in high-need schools. They should create conditions that promote teacher stability and collaboration, such as protected planning time and consistent teaching assignments.

    Principals must be trained not just as managers, but as instructional leaders capable of building strong school cultures. And state and district leaders must consider meaningful financial incentives and other supports to retain experienced teachers in the classrooms that need them most.

    With the right support, teachers can keep getting better. In this moment of learning recovery, a key to success is keeping teachers in schools and consciously supporting their growing effectiveness.

    Linda Darling-Hammond is founding president and chief knowledge officer at the Learning Policy Institute. Michael J. Petrilli is president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and an executive editor of Education Next.

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected].

    This story about teacher retention was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • Autistic Students are Building Community: Colleges Just Need to Listen

    Autistic Students are Building Community: Colleges Just Need to Listen

    As dangerous myths about autism circulate on the national stage, many colleges echo a quieter, yet similarly misguided assumption: that autistic students are socially isolated or incapable of forming meaningful relationships. But the 43 autistic college students we interviewed tell a very different story—one grounded in connection, authenticity, and community, built on their own terms.

    Dr. Karly Isaacson (Ball) Three years ago, we launched the Postsecondary Education: Autistic Collegians’ Experiences of Success (PEACES) national study, drawing participants from both community colleges and four-year institutions across the U.S. We invited autistic students—both self-identified and formally diagnosed—to share their experiences through annual surveys, in-depth interviews, and photo-based storytelling activities. To date, we’ve gathered over 1300 survey responses, nearly 80 interviews, and nearly 70 photo reflections across three waves of data collection, with a fourth wave launching in fall 2025.Dr. Brett Ranon NachmanDr. Brett Ranon Nachman

    As we analyzed the second wave of interviews, one theme stood out: the central role of friendship. Again and again, students described how meaningful friendships shaped their college experiences, not in spite of their autism, but through it. We used this analysis to publish a journal article on autistic college student friendship earlier this month. In this op-ed, we describe three key ways in which autistic college students foster meaningful friendships: engaging in autistic spaces, practicing autistic authenticity, and bonding over shared interests. We hope that understanding how autistic college students think about and experience friendship can ultimately guide colleges in creating more supportive, inclusive environments for this largely misunderstood, minoritized student population.Dr. Bradley E. CoxDr. Bradley E. Cox

    1. Autistic spaces offer connection without explanation.
      Contrary to the common myth that autistic students are inherently socially disconnected, many participants in our study described finding deep connections in spaces designed by and for autistic people. Whether through formal autism support programs (ASPs), campus disability centers, or informal sensory-friendly spaces, students emphasized how these environments allowed them to engage with others who shared similar communication styles, sensory needs, and lived experiences. These spaces didn’t just accommodate difference—they affirmed it.

      Catherine T. McDermottCatherine T. McDermottFor some students, these autism affirming communities were a lifeline, especially during vulnerable transitions like receiving a new autism diagnosis or navigating the pressures of living on one’s own for the first time. One student shared how knowing there was “somewhere to turn” in these difficult periods made all the difference. Others described naturally gravitating toward autistic peers before even knowing their friends’ diagnoses, drawn together by shared ways of thinking and being. Still, not every student stumbled into connection. Several expressed frustration that their schools offered few avenues to find others like them on campus. As one student put it, “you feel like the black sheep of the campus because there’s not really anything for you.” Institutions that take autistic students seriously must prioritize not just services, but creating autistic spaces on campus that are intentional, visible, and community-driven.

    2. Practicing authenticity builds deeper relationships.
      For many autistic students, friendship flourished not when they tried to hide who they were, but when they stopped trying. Students described how letting go of masking (a strategy that some autistic people use to appear non-autistic), led to stronger, more affirming relationships. As one student put it, “the more authentic in myself that I become, the stronger my relationships become.” College, for many, provided a rare opportunity to explore what it meant to show up fully as themselves, autism and all. This wasn’t always easy. Several students shared fears of judgment or past experiences of exclusion, and some still found themselves masking in certain spaces. But when peers responded with respect and curiosity—whether during a class presentation, a theater performance, or an informal hangout—autistic students said they felt “seen,” “heard,” and “valued” when they presented their autistic characteristics and were met with acceptance. Vulnerability often became a gateway to connection. One participant recounted the anxiety of playing pool with friends, worried about motor difficulties, only to be met with patience and encouragement. These moments of openness helped students discern who was safe, who cared, and who was worth pursuing as a friend. Practicing authenticity didn’t always come without cost—but for many, it made friendship more meaningful and sustainable.
    3. Shared passions spark connection.
      While autistic spaces and identity-based connections were vital, students also emphasized another major source of friendship in doing what they love. Shared interests—from playing Dungeons & Dragons to Taylor Swift fandoms—created natural entry points for relationship-building. Nearly every autistic college student we interviewed was involved in a club, job, or hobby that helped them find “their people.” These weren’t just time-fillers or a line to add to a resume—they were genuine community builders.

    Many autistic students created their own spaces when they couldn’t find an existing affinity group or organization. One started a disability advocacy club; another launched an American Sign Language (ASL) group; a third founded a fiber arts circle. Whether through casual gaming nights, photography collaborations, or cat playdates, students built friendships by doing things they genuinely cared about—often with people who shared their pace, humor, and communication style. As one student shared, it meant everything to have even “just one person to go to coffee with who actually cared about the topic.” In these spaces, autistic passions weren’t sidelined—they were celebrated. And when peers leaned into those interests too, genuine friendships blossomed.

    In a time when public discourse too often distorts what it means to be autistic, colleges have a unique opportunity—and responsibility—to listen to autistic students themselves. Our research shows that autistic students are not only capable of forming meaningful friendships, but that they do so in ways that are intentional and creative. Colleges that invest in spaces for connection, support students in showing up authentically, and celebrate shared interests will not only dismantle outdated stereotypes—they will foster communities where all students can thrive.

    Dr. Karly Isaacson (Ball) is a Postdoctoral Research Associate at Michigan State University for Project PEACES.

    Dr. Brett Ranon Nachman is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of Research for College Autism Network. 

    Dr. Bradley E. Cox is an Associate Professor of Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education (HALE) at Michigan State University and Founder of the nonprofit College Autism Network.

    Catherine T. McDermott is a consultant for Project PEACES and Founder of McDermott Autism Services.

     

    Source link

  • The Numbers Don’t Lie: HSI Funding Delivers Results

    The Numbers Don’t Lie: HSI Funding Delivers Results

     Dr. William Casey Boland A lawsuit challenging Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) federal funding represents another figurative bomb lobbed in the current war on U.S. higher education. Galvanized by the President’s blitzkrieg on social funding and education, this assault on the alleged reverse racism of HSI funding reflects the ugly political tenor of the times in the U.S. It also conveniently ignores the evidence of the positive impact of such governmental support. 

    l’ll acknowledge my bias: I teach at a large urban college that recently received an HSI grant. Nearly all my students are students of color, with roughly half being Hispanic. Many are the first in their families to enroll in college. Most of their parents were not born in the U.S.  We are amongst the 20% of all colleges in the U.S. that are eligible to apply for an HSI grant, which are made available through the Higher Education Act of 1965 (Title III and Title V). 

    Why did we apply for this grant? State funding per student to public HSIs is $6,396.59 compared to $15,526.13 for non-HSIs. The ongoing disparities in postsecondary educational attainment based on race and ethnicity reveal more about a deficit in public policy to address the equitable distribution of resources and less about the ability of students of color to obtain a college degree. Despite modest gains over time, gaps in attainment continue. 28% of the Hispanic population in the U.S. received an associate degree or higher compared to 48% of the white population. The average graduation rate in four-year postsecondary institutions was 52% for Hispanic students compared to 65% for white students. HSI grants are made available in part to narrow this gap in college outcomes amongst Hispanic students.

    What is my college doing with its HSI grant? To advance retention, persistence, and specific course completion, the grant will improve the First Year Seminar, provide professional develop with a focus on culturally responsive pedagogy, integrate tutoring, peer mentoring, academic and career coaching, and target intervention in gateway courses.

    Many HSI-eligible colleges look like mine, but not all. They are two and four-year public and private non-profit institutions that are under-resourced, become eligible to apply when their undergraduate enrollment reaches 25% Hispanic and at minimum 50% receive some form of financial aid. The rising number of colleges eligible for HSI grants reflects the growth of the Hispanic population in the U.S. Between 2010 and 2022, the Hispanic population accounted for 34 percent of the overall increase in the U.S. population. Hispanic participation in colleges and universities rose from 14 percent in 2010 to 20 percent in 2022.

    Several characteristics are common across institutions designated as HSIs. First, Hispanics tend to enroll in HSI-designated colleges more than non-HSIs. This is largely due to Hispanic students wanting to enroll in a college close to their community. Second, Hispanic students attending HSIs are often the first in their family to seek a college degree. Third, Hispanic students enrolled in HSIs on average graduated from high schools with large classroom sizes, disproportionate levels of racially minoritized student populations, and lower standardized test scores. Many argue that HSIs offer such students an opportunity to participate in postsecondary education that they would not otherwise have.

    Evidence-based research demonstrates the ROI on the federal government’s investment in HSIs. When colleges receive HSI grants, there is a positive effect on Hispanic students. I found that grant receipt increases Hispanic bachelor’s degree completion by nearly 30 percent and associate degrees by almost 25 percent. In another study, we found a 10% increase in Hispanic students obtaining STEM associate’s degrees. We also found benefits for non-Hispanic students, with an 11% increase in the number of those students receiving STEM associate’s degrees. This echoes another study focusing on the initial year HSI STEM grants were awarded with the authors finding HSI STEM grant receipt directly led to an 8% increase in Hispanic students receiving such degrees in community colleges. 

    I doubt the architects of this recent lawsuit challenging HSI funding have ever spoken to someone who graduated from an HSI. I teach a graduate course on minority serving institutions (MSIs). Nearly all my students are students of color from the New York City metropolitan area. Most attended different MSIs as undergraduates. While experiences vary, most extol the virtues of having attended an MSI. They speak to the level of support they received, the power of being surrounded my others who shared their background, the willingness of HSIs and other MSIs to welcome students’ families and community to campus, amongst many other characteristics that made them glad they chose an HSI or MSI over a PWI.

    It is important to evaluate the effectiveness of postsecondary programs funded through tax-payer dollars. Yet recent political antagonism directed towards higher education looks more like red meat being tossed to appease the red base as opposed to thoughtful, evidence-based decision-making. Acknowledging the effectiveness of HSI funding and similar efforts would weaken the core animating principle of the current Republican mission to decimate political support for such programs and reduce the existence of government more broadly.

    Dr. William Casey Boland is an assistant professor in the Marxe School of Public and International Affairs at Baruch College-City University of New York.

    Source link

  • PRINCIPAL VOICE: Inviting families into our classrooms slashed absenteeism and raised reading levels

    PRINCIPAL VOICE: Inviting families into our classrooms slashed absenteeism and raised reading levels

    Two years ago, I bought each of the teachers at Hamilton Elementary in San Diego’s City Heights neighborhood a blue chair. I told them to put it in the back of their classrooms, and that if a parent or caregiver wanted to visit to see how their children are learning — no matter what the reason — that this would be a dedicated space for them.

    I may have earned some exaggerated eye-rolls from educators that day. After all, I can appreciate the disruption to learning that classroom visitors can sometimes cause, especially among excitable elementary schoolers.

    But school is our home, and it is our responsibility to invite families into our home and welcome them. And this was a necessary olive branch, my way of saying to families: “From here on out, things are going to be different.”

    And they were. They also can be different at other schools, because the benefits of family engagement go well beyond student achievement.

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.

    Research has long shown that when parents and caregivers are involved and engaged with their children’s education — whether that’s by attending parent-teacher conferences or participating in school events — student achievement, motivation and social-emotional well-being increase.

    Parent involvement with reading activities has a positive impact on reading achievement, language comprehension, expressive language skills and level of attention in the classroom, according to the National Literacy Trust.

    Research also shows that educators enjoy increased job satisfaction and are more likely to keep teaching at the school, families enjoy stronger relationships with their children and feel less isolated, and even school districts themselves become better places to live and raise children.

    None of this was the case when we returned to normalcy following Covid. Just 13 percent of students were reading on grade level, and 37 percent were chronically absent. I knew right away that before we even attempted to tackle academics, we needed to engage families and make them feel deeply connected and committed to the community I envisioned building here.

    Today, 45 percent of students are reading at grade-level, and chronic absenteeism, at 12 percent on the most recent official numbers, is down to 10 percent in our own tracking, with a goal of pushing it down to 8 percent in 2025-26.

    But it wasn’t easy given the distrust that had boiled over during the pandemic, with families skeptical of our ability to effectively support their children and school staff feeling defensive and exhausted.

    It was clear to me that families weren’t excited to send their kids to school, didn’t feel informed about what was happening on our campus and, moreover, didn’t feel comfortable — let alone capable — of communicating their needs to us.

    Complicating matters further was the need to share information across many languages other than English, which can make relationship-building and communicating expectations difficult.

    Roughly half of our students are English learners, and while the majority of their families are Spanish-speakers, there are growing populations of students whose first languages are Haitian-Creole, Pashto and Vietnamese.

    Related: What the research says about the best way to engage parents

    The first thing I did was establish open communication with parents using ClassDojo, a mobile app that gives families an easy, intuitive central access point to our teachers and staff, automatically translates all messages into parents’ native languages and allows us to share stories about what is happening in school.

    It became an easy way to build trust and collaboration between families and staff.

    Creating that type of visibility was key to breaking down walls between us. And in those early days, we didn’t post about literacy, math or anything related to academics. Instead, we focused solely on attendance and getting families to come inside the school as much as possible.

    We focused on relationship-building activities and joyful learning. We hosted after-school art classes and monthly family Fridays, when families could come to school to engage in a fun activity.

    We organized a Halloween costume drive with candy and fun games for kids; we hosted a Read Across America event where we passed out Play-Doh; and we organized other low-stakes events at school, rooted in building a partnership between home and school.

    Again, our goal wasn’t learning during these meet-ups. It was all in service of building trust and creating meaningful relationships with students and their families.

    Once we had the foundation in place, we added a focus on academics — though we rooted that learning in family engagement, too. For example, our schoolwide focus last year was phonics, so we sent activities home for families to complete with their children that were tied specifically to concepts the students needed reinforced, based on their individual assessments, like long vowel patterns and sight words.

    These activities were taught by the students and their teachers to family members during conferences.

    Beyond helping students, the exercise challenged a false narrative so many families had assumed — that they either didn’t know enough about what was happening in school to help, weren’t confident enough to help or didn’t have enough time.

    Today, the atmosphere at Hamilton feels radically different than when I first walked through the doors. When we first started hosting Family Fridays, about 10 family members and their children showed up.

    Now, we have roughly 200 caregivers at every meet-up. Families run most of the community-based initiatives at the school — from a boutique where families can shop among donated clothes twice a month, to a food distribution center, to a book club, English classes and a monthly meet-up where families can socialize.

    When district leaders visit, they’re always impressed by the participation. I tell them, if you care about family engagement, it has to be so deeply embedded into the system that people don’t have a choice but to do it.

    That’s why I’m constantly thinking about how to center family engagement in staff meetings, in attendance meetings, in literacy and math plans, in behavioral and counseling plans and in meetings about school procedures and budgets.

    It’s a strategy that not only involves families but also supports academic achievement and student well-being. For me, family engagement is the ultimate strategy for academics.

    Sometimes in the K-12 world we keep outreach and academics separate, but in reality, engagement is the key that unlocks our ability to hit academic goals and create a joyful school community.

    Dr. Brittany Daley is the principal of Hamilton Elementary School in San Diego, California.

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected].

    This story about family engagement was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link