The post ‘The best time to be alive’ explains edtech entrepreneur appeared first on The PIE News.
Tag: Curriculum
-
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.
-
National AI training hub for educators to open, funded by OpenAI and Microsoft
This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.
More than 400,000 K-12 educators across the country will get free training in AI through a $23 million partnership between a major teachers union and leading tech companies that is designed to close gaps in the use of technology and provide a national model for AI-integrated curriculum.
The new National Academy for AI Instruction will be based in the downtown Manhattan headquarters of the United Federation of Teachers, the New York City affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, and provide workshops, online courses, and hands-on training sessions. This hub-based model of teacher training was inspired by work of unions like the United Brotherhood of Carpenters that have created similar training centers with industry partners, according to AFT President Randi Weingarten.
“Teachers are facing huge challenges, which include navigating AI wisely, ethically and safely,” Weingarten said at a press conference Tuesday announcing the initiative. “The question was whether we would be chasing it or whether we would be trying to harness it.”
The initiative involves the AFT, UFT, OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic.
The Trump administration has encouraged AI integration in the classroom. More than 50 companies have signed onto a White House pledge to provide grants, education materials, and technology to invest in AI education.
In the wake of federal funding cuts to public education and the impact of Trump’s sweeping tax and policy bill on schools, Weingarten sees this partnership with private tech companies as a crucial investment in teacher preparation.
“We are actually ensuring that kids have, that teachers have, what they need to deal with the economy of today and tomorrow,” Weingarten said.
The academy will be based in a city where the school system initially banned the use of AI in the classroom, claiming it would interfere with the development of critical thinking skills. A few months later, then-New York City schools Chancellor David Banks did an about-face, pledging to help schools smartly incorporate the technology. He said New York City schools would embrace the potential of AI to drive individualized learning. But concrete plans have been limited.
The AFT, meanwhile, has tried to position itself as a leader in the field. Last year, the union released its own guidelines for AI use in the classroom and funded pilot programs around the country.
Vincent Plato, New York City Public Schools K-8 educator and UFT Teacher Center director, said the advent of AI reminds him of when teachers first started using word processors.
“We are watching educators transform the way people use technology for work in real time, but with AI it’s on another unbelievable level because it’s just so much more powerful,” he said in a press release announcing the new partnership. “It can be a thought partner when they’re working by themselves, whether that’s late-night lesson planning, looking at student data or filing any types of reports — a tool that’s going to be transformative for teachers and students alike.”
Teachers who frequently use AI tools report saving 5.9 hours a week, according to a national survey conducted by the Walton Family Foundation in cooperation with Gallup. These tools are most likely to be used to support instructional planning, such as creating worksheets or modifying material to meet students’ needs. Half of the teachers surveyed stated that they believe AI will reduce teacher workloads.
“Teachers are not only gaining back valuable time, they are also reporting that AI is helping to strengthen the quality of their work,” Stephanie Marken, senior partner for U.S. research at Gallup, said in a press release. “However, a clear gap in AI adoption remains. Schools need to provide the tools, training, and support to make effective AI use possible for every teacher.”
While nearly half of school districts surveyed by the research corporation RAND have reported training teachers in utilizing AI-powered tools by fall 2024, high-poverty districts are still lagging behind their low poverty counterparts. District leaders across the nation report a scarcity of external experts and resources to provide quality AI training to teachers.
OpenAI, a founding partner of the National Academy for AI Instruction, will contribute $10 million over the next five years. The tech company will provide educators and course developers with technical support to integrate AI into classrooms as well as software applications to build custom, classroom-specific tools.
Tech companies would benefit from this partnership by “co-creating” and improving their products based on feedback and insights from educators, said Gerry Petrella, Microsoft general manager, U.S. public policy, who hopes the initiative will align the needs of educators with the work of developers.
In a sense, the teachers are training AI products just as much as they are being trained, according to Kathleen Day, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins Carey Business School. Day emphasized that through this partnership, AI companies would gain access to constant input from educators so they could continually strengthen their models and products.
“Who’s training who?” Day said. “They’re basically saying, we’ll show you how this technology works, and you tell us how you would use it. When you tell us how you would use it, that is a wealth of information.”
Many educators and policymakers are also concerned that introducing AI into the classroom could endanger student data and privacy. Racial bias in grading could also be reinforced by AI programs, according to research by The Learning Agency.
Additionally, Trevor Griffey, a lecturer in labor studies at the University of California Los Angeles, warned the New York Times that tech firms could use these deals to market AI tools to students and expand their customer base.
This initiative to expand AI access and training for educators was likened to New Deal efforts in the 1930s to expand equal access to electricity by Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s chief global affairs officer. By working with teachers and expanding AI training, Lehane hopes the initiative will “democratize” access to AI.
“There’s no better place to do that work than in the classroom,” he said at the Tuesday press conference.
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
For more news on AI training, visit eSN’s Digital Learning hub.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all) -
PBLWorks Announces its 2025 Award Winners
Novato, CA – The Buck Institute for Education (dba PBLWorks), a national provider of professional development and curriculum for high-quality Project Based Learning (PBL), has announced the recipients of its 2025 PBL Champions and John Larmer “JL” Lifelong Learning Awards.
The recipients were honored during the organization’s 2025 PBL World conference in Napa Valley, California.
The 2025 PBL Champions
The PBL Champions program recognizes an individual, a school, and a school district that have demonstrated a commitment to PBL; have done quality, lasting work; and have shown evidence of impact on students. The 2025 recipients are:
- District PBL Champion: Lynn Public Schools in Lynn, Massachusetts
This 16,000-student district is transforming teaching and learning through its implementation of PBL. In a little over a year, the team at Lynn established high-functioning district and school leadership teams and trained a cadre of educators who have designed more than 70 projects for students. The district has implemented PBL at all seven of its secondary schools with a goal of having all students participate in two or more high-quality PBL experiences per year by the end of the 2029-30 school year.
- School PBL Champion: University Prep Academy (UPA) High School in Detroit, Michigan
University Prep Schools (UPrep) stands among Detroit’s earliest and longest-running charter school networks. Known for its unwavering commitment to student success, UPrep (UPA) has proudly upheld its signature “90/90 promise”—ensuring that at least 90% of students graduate from high school and 90% of those graduates go on to enroll in college. UPA teachers and leaders have leveraged PBL as a way that empowers students to be a part of the future of their city – from working on keeping their unhoused population warm in the winter through a physics project on heat transfer, to urban gardens that allowed students to provide farm-to-table food to local food pantries and shelters. PBL has opened their eyes to the challenges students face, encouraged them to see and explore those challenges through the lens of solutionists, and has brought UPA closer to the community it serves.
- Individual PBL Champion: Kim Mishkin, Head of School at the Hudson Lab School (HLS) in Hastings, New York
Kim Mishkin has been instrumental in embedding Project Based Learning as the foundation of the school’s curriculum. As both an educator and school leader, she has built structures, cultivated partnerships, and championed interdisciplinary, real-world learning experiences that empower students and educators alike. Through her leadership, HLS has become a model for how schools can integrate PBL at every level, ensuring that learning is not just about content, it is about empowering students to be problem-solvers, leaders, and changemakers.
The John Larmer “JL” Lifelong Learning Award
The John Larmer “JL” Lifelong Learning Award, named after PBLWorks’ Senior Fellow John “JL” Larmer, recognizes educators who are impacting and expanding the work of Project Based Learning. A significant advocate and thought leader in the field, JL has dedicated decades to advancing high-quality PBL and is the author of several foundational books that have shaped how educators design and facilitate high-quality PBL. This award celebrates those who carry forward that legacy with passion, purpose, and an unwavering commitment to deeper learning. The 2025 recipients are:
- Rue Graham, Project Based Learning lead advisor and coach at the Pagosa Peak Open School, Archuleta County School District in Pagosa Springs, Colorado
- Stephanie Tuttle, fourth grade teacher at Fairfield Elementary School, Rockbridge County Public Schools in Rockbridge, Virginia
“Project Based Learning is an incredibly powerful way to engage students and ignite their passion for learning – and it all starts with having administrators and teachers who are committed to its success,” said PBLWorks CEO Bob Lenz. “Our awards programs recognize the incredible passion and hard work demonstrated by schools, districts, and individuals in implementing PBL. Congratulations to our 2025 award recipients!”
About PBLWorks
The Buck Institute for Education/ PBLWorks believes that all students, especially Black and Brown students, should have access to high-quality Project Based Learning to deepen their learning and achieve success in college, career, and life. Its focus is on building the capacity of teachers to design and facilitate high-quality Project Based Learning, and on supporting school and system leaders in creating the conditions for these teachers to succeed with all students.
Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all) -
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.
-
Tax Policy Belongs in Liberal Arts Curriculum (opinion)
As congressional Republicans scratched and clawed to pass President Trump’s signature policy effort, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—a sprawling, tax-heavy package celebrated as much for its branding as for its contents—it is notable how few people could explain what exactly was in it. Tax cuts for some, probably. A Social Security bonus, maybe. A gutting of public benefits, almost certainly. What is clear, though, is that the bill’s complexity was always in service of its politics: When no one understands tax policy, it’s much easier to sell whatever story you want.
That confusion is exactly why we should be teaching tax policy more broadly—not just in sparsely attended law school classes and accounting departments, but in general education curricula and first-year seminars. Tax isn’t just a technical rule-following subject; it’s a civic one. Tax policy shapes everything from fairness and inequality to the functional shape of the state itself. Yet, most students will graduate college without ever being asked to consider what tax is for—much less whom it helps, whom it harms and why it remains so easy to obscure.
That is precisely the starting point for the course I designed at Drexel University, Introduction to Tax Theory and Policy, which I teach in our innovative undergraduate law major, housed at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law. It’s not a course for aspiring tax attorneys, prospective C.P.A.s or Excel mavens—few of my students intend to practice tax law. They’re interested in criminal or family law, or they’re business majors, future social workers, engineers or undecided second-years. But they’re all taxpayers—and that’s the relevant bit.
Courses like mine aim to democratize access to legal and policy tools so that all students, irrespective of their major, can become more informed and empowered participants in civic life. In class, we don’t parse tax rates or calculate deductions. No calculators are required, and at no point is anyone expected to consider the straight-line depreciation of an apartment complex. We ask why the system is built the way it is, and we talk about the power that it reflects and protects. We talk about values: what kinds of behavior the tax code encourages or punishes. We talk about trust and legitimacy: What happens when people believe the system is rigged, and what if they’re right? In short, we treat tax not as a set of arcane rules and rates to memorize, but as a lens through which we can better understand the power structures we live under.
The surprising part (at least to me, when I first taught it and admittedly just hoped I wouldn’t be lecturing to an empty room) is how much students connect with this approach. More than connect with it—they often enjoy it. I’ve received feedback from students that describes the class as life-changing and course reviews that have noted how it changed assumptions regarding what tax even is. High praise from 19- and 20-year-olds.
The course itself draws on philosophy, political theory, economics and law—but what it really cultivates is a kind of civic literacy. It asks students to think about who they are in relation to the state and how much of their future may be shaped by the tax policy they’ve never been taught to see. For many, it is the first time they’ve encountered taxation not as something to dodge, but as something to question, debate and reimagine in furtherance of their own values.
In one session, we explore how the tax code is employed as a kind of soft steering wheel in the economy—how it at turns encourages homeownership, subsidizes sports stadiums, directs corporate research and development, and shapes (or even outright creates) the market for electric vehicles. Another week, we explore estate taxes and inheritance: not just who pays, but what it means to redistribute wealth across generations and what happens when we don’t. We read Garrett Hardin’s “The Tragedy of the Commons,” engage in spirited debates about the potential for tax to solve the artificial intelligence copyright debate, and unpack why TurboTax spent two decades fighting free filing.
Over the course of the class, the question shifts away from what is a tax and toward whose values does this system reflect? That shift—from mere definitional awareness to focused critical engagement—is when I know the class is working. Students cease to see tax as someone else’s problem and begin seeing it as a potent tool of and for democracy.
In their final papers, students have proposed remarkably forward-looking and sophisticated tax policy reforms—reflecting both creativity and civic seriousness. One student argued that companies receiving public subsidies through tax credits, like chemical and drug manufacturers, should be barred from claiming additional credits to remediate harms their products create. Another proposed a data-collection “sin tax” aimed at discouraging exploitative surveillance practices by tech companies. These aren’t rote academic exercises. They’re thoughtful intervention proposals that treat tax as a lever for shaping society.
If tax policy determines who gets what, who pays for it and how the government keeps a hand in the marketplace, then it belongs squarely at the heart of a liberal arts education. We don’t cabin discussions of justice in law schools, and we don’t isolate questions of the public good in policy programs—why do we treat taxation, which intersects with both and innumerable other facets of modern life, as off-limits or too technical for undergraduates?
This isn’t a plea to teach undergraduates to file their own taxes—though there is probably a case to be made for that, too. It’s about ensuring curricula help them understand how the world works and how it’s been designed to work for some more than others. That means tackling the politics of Internal Revenue Service funding, exploring how “tax relief” often functions as an upstream transfer of wealth and how a positively sprawling bill like the one recently passed through Congress can obscure much more than it reveals.
If no one understands how tax policy works, how can anyone meaningfully weigh in on whether they support one revenue bill or another? On issues like immigration, abortion or education funding, many people bring at least some passing knowledge or lived experience to the conversation. Tax remains, for most, a black box. The more opaque it becomes, the more tempting it is for lawmakers to retreat into it—tucking major redistributive choices into the shadows of the tax code, where they can be shielded from public scrutiny.
On the other hand, when students come to see tax as a form of the civic superstructure—something they live within and not just under—they are empowered to not only understand tax policy but to shape it. That should be one of the goals of any serious undergraduate education.
We don’t have to, and should not, keep treating tax as one professional niche within other professional niches. If we want students to understand how tax relates to power, fairness and democratic participation, we should give them the tools to talk about it. This needn’t focus on the rates and rules but should illustrate the values taxes reflect and trade-offs they embed.
Courses like mine don’t require a background in economics, accounting or law. They require a willingness to take seriously the idea that how we tax equates to how we govern. If we can help students see tax not as a source of dread or line item on their paycheck, but as the site of collective economic decision-making, we don’t just produce better-informed graduates—we’ll also produce more engaged citizens.
-
Let’s remove the roadblocks to four-year STEM degrees for community college transfer students
In the nearly two years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down race-conscious admissions, there have been repeated calls for universities to address the resulting decline in diversity by recruiting from community colleges.
On the surface, encouraging students to transfer from two-year colleges sounds like a terrific idea. Community colleges enroll large numbers of students who are low-income or whose parents did not attend college. Black and Latino students disproportionately start college at these institutions, whose mission for more than 50 years has been to expand access to higher education.
But while community colleges should be an avenue into high-value STEM degrees for students from low-income backgrounds and minoritized students, the reality is sobering: Just 2 percent of students who begin at a community college earn a STEM bachelor’s degree within six years, our recent study of transfer experiences in California found.
There are too many roadblocks in their way, leaving the path to STEM degrees for community college students incredibly narrow. A key barrier is the complexity of the process of transferring from a community college to a four-year institution.
Related: Interested in innovations in higher education? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.
Many community college students who want to transfer and major in a STEM field must contend with three major obstacles in the transfer process:
1. A maze of inconsistent and often opaque math requirements. We found that a student considering three or four prospective university campuses might have to take three or four different math classes just to meet a single math requirement in a given major. One campus might expect a transfer student majoring in business to take calculus, while another might ask for business calculus. Still another might strongly recommend a “calculus for life sciences” course. And sometimes an institution’s website might list different requirements than a statewide transfer site. Such inconsistencies can lengthen students’ times to degrees — especially in STEM majors, which may require five- or six-course math sequences before transfer.
2. Underlying math anxiety. Many students interviewed for the study told us that they had internalized negative comments from teachers, advisers and peers about their academic ability, particularly in math. This uncertainty contributed to feelings of anxiety about completing their math courses. Their predicament is especially troubling given concerns that required courses may not contribute to success in specific fields.
3. Course scheduling conflicts that slow students’ progress. Two required courses may meet on the same day and time, for example, or a required course could be scheduled at a time that conflicts with a student’s work schedule. In interviews, we also heard that course enrollment caps and sequential pathways in which certain courses are offered only once a year too often lengthen the time to degree for students.
Related: ‘Waste of time’: Community college transfers derail students
To help, rather than hinder, STEM students’ progress toward their college and professional goals, the transfer process needs to change significantly. First and foremost, universities need to send clear and consistent signals about what hoops community college students should be jumping through in order to transfer.
A student applying to three prospective campuses, for example, should not have to meet separate sets of requirements for each.
Community colleges and universities should also prioritize active learning strategies and proven supports to combat math anxiety. These may include providing professional learning for instructors to help them make math courses more engaging and to foster a sense of belonging. Training for counselors to advise students on requirements for STEM pathways is also important.
Community colleges must make their course schedules more student-centered, by offering evening and weekend courses and ensuring that courses required for specific degrees are not scheduled at overlapping times. They should also help students with unavoidable scheduling conflicts take comparable required courses at other colleges.
At the state level, it’s critical to adopt goals for transfer participation and completion (including STEM-specific goals) as well as comprehensive and transparent statewide agreements for math requirements by major.
States should also provide transfer planning tools that provide accurate and up-to-date information. For example, the AI Transfer and Articulation Infrastructure Network, led by University of California, Berkeley researchers, is using artificial intelligence technology to help institutions more efficiently identify which community college courses meet university requirements. More effective tools will increase transparency without requiring students and counselors to navigate complex and varied transfer requirements on their own. As it stands, complex, confusing and opaque math requirements limit transfer opportunities for community college students seeking STEM degrees, instead of expanding them.
We must untangle the transfer process, smooth pathways to high-value degrees and ensure that every student has a clear, unobstructed opportunity to pursue an education that will set them up for success.
Pamela Burdman is executive director of Just Equations, a California-based policy institute focused on reconceptualizing the role of math in education equity. Alexis Robin Hale is a research fellow at Just Equations and a graduate student at UCLA in Social Sciences and Comparative Education.
Contact the opinion editor at [email protected].
This story about community college transfers 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.
-
8 under-the-radar digital learning resources
Key points:
Digital learning resources are transforming classrooms, and educators are always on the lookout for tools that go beyond the standard platforms. There are numerous lesser-known digital platforms that offer unique, high-quality learning experiences tailored to students’ and teachers’ needs.
Here are ten standout resources that can enhance instruction, boost engagement, and support deeper learning.
Subject areas: All subjects
Best for: Interactive learning content creationCurrikiStudio is a free, open-source platform that allows teachers to design interactive learning experiences without needing coding skills. Educators can create multimedia lessons, games, and assessments tailored to their curriculum. It’s ideal for flipped classrooms, project-based learning, or blended learning environments.
2. InqITS (Inquiry Intelligent Tutoring System)
Subject areas: Science
Best for: Developing scientific inquiry skillsInqITS offers virtual science labs where students can conduct experiments, analyze results, and receive real-time feedback. The platform uses AI to assess student performance and provide just-in-time support, making it a great tool for teaching scientific practices and critical thinking aligned with NGSS.
3. Parlay
Subject areas: ELA, Social Studies, Science
Best for: Structured online and in-class discussionsParlay enables educators to facilitate student discussions in a more inclusive and data-informed way. With written and live discussion formats, students can express their ideas while teachers track participation, collaboration, and the quality of responses. It’s an excellent tool for fostering critical thinking, debate, and reflective dialogue.
Subject areas: Geography, History, Global Studies
Best for: Geospatial learning and global awarenessGeoguessr EDU is an educational version of the popular game that drops players into a random location via Google Street View. Students use context clues to determine where they are, building skills in geography, culture, and critical observation. The EDU version allows teachers to control content and track student progress.
Subject areas: Science
Best for: Middle school science with an inquiry-based approachMosa Mack offers animated science mysteries that prompt students to explore real-world problems through investigation and collaboration. With built-in differentiation, hands-on labs, and assessments, it’s a rich resource for schools seeking engaging science content that supports NGSS-aligned inquiry and critical thinking.
6. Listenwise
Subject areas: ELA, Social Studies, Science
Best for: Listening comprehension and current eventsListenwise curates high-quality audio stories from public radio and other reputable sources, paired with interactive transcripts and comprehension questions. It helps students build listening skills while learning about current events, science topics, and historical moments. It’s especially helpful for English learners and auditory learners.
Subject areas: Media Literacy, Social Studies
Best for: Analyzing propaganda and media messagesCreated by media literacy expert Renee Hobbs, Mind Over Media teaches students to critically analyze modern propaganda in advertising, news, social media, and political content. Through guided analysis and opportunities to submit their own examples, students build essential digital citizenship and media literacy skills.
8. Brilliant
Subject areas: Math, Science, Computer Science
Best for: Problem-solving and conceptual learningBrilliant.org offers interactive lessons and puzzles that teach students how to think logically and apply concepts rather than simply memorize formulas. With content tailored for advanced middle schoolers and high school students, it’s ideal for enrichment, gifted learners, or students seeking challenge and depth in STEM topics.
Each of these digital learning tools brings something unique to the table–whether it’s fostering deeper discussion, building scientific inquiry skills, or promoting digital literacy.
As schools look to personalize learning and prepare students for a complex, fast-evolving world, these lesser-known platforms provide meaningful ways to deepen engagement and understanding across subjects.
By incorporating these tools into your classroom, you not only diversify your digital toolkit but also give students access to a wider range of learning modalities and real-world applications. Whether you’re looking for curriculum support, project-based tools, or enrichment resources, there’s a good chance one of these platforms can help meet your goals.
Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all) -
The Hidden Curriculum of Student Conduct Proceedings
For first-generation students, the hidden curriculum—the unstated norms, policies and expectations students need to know in higher education—can be a barrier to participating in high-impact practices, leaving them in the dark about how to thrive in college.
But new research aims to identify the lesser-known policies that disadvantage first-generation students and to make them more accessible. During a panel presentation at NASPA’s Student Success in Higher Education conference in June, Kristin Ridge, associate dean of students and community standards at the University of Rhode Island, discussed her doctoral research on first-generation students and how they interact with the student handbook and conduct spaces on campus.
What’s the need: First-generation students make up 54 percent of all undergraduates in the U.S., or about 8.2 million students. But only one in four first-generation students graduates with a college degree, compared to nearly 60 percent of continuing-generation students.
First-generation students are often diverse in their racial and ethnic backgrounds and come with a variety of strengths, which academic Tara Yosso describes as the cultural wealth model. But in some areas, including higher ed’s bureaucratic processes, first-gen students can lack family support and guidance to navigate certain situations, Ridge said. Her personal experience as a first-generation learner and a conduct officer pushed her to research the issue.
“It really came to a head when I was dealing with two students who had a similar circumstance, and I felt like one had a better grasp of what was going on than the other one, and that was something that didn’t sit right with me,” Ridge said. “I felt like the behavior should be what I am addressing and what the students are learning from, not their previous family of origin or lived experience.”
Conduct systems are complicated because they require a fluency to navigate the bureaucracy, Ridge said. Student handbooks are often written like legal documents, but the goal of disciplinary proceedings is for students to learn from their behavior. “If a student doesn’t understand the process or the process isn’t accessible to them, there are very real consequences that can interrupt their educational journey,” she added.
Some states require conduct sanctions to be placed on a student’s transcript or a dean’s report for transfer application. These sanctions can result in debt, stranded credits or underemployment if students are unable to transfer or earn a degree.
“Sometimes [continuing-generation] students who have parents or supporters can better understand what the implications of a sanction would be,” Ridge says. “Students who don’t have that extra informed support to lean on may unwittingly end up with a sanction that has more long-term impact than they realize.”
First-generation students may also experience survivor’s or breakaway guilt for having made it to college, which can result in them being less likely to turn to their families for help if they break the student code of conduct or fear they will be expelled for their actions, Ridge said.
Therefore, colleges and universities should seek to create environments that ensure all students are aware of conduct procedures, the content of the student handbook and how to receive support and advocacy from both the institution and their communities, Ridge said.
Creating solutions: Some key questions conduct staff members can ask themselves, Ridge said, include:
- Is the handbook easy to access, or is it hidden behind a login or pass code? If students or their family members or supporters have to navigate additional steps to read the student handbook, it limits transparency and opportunities for support.
- Is content available in plain English or as an FAQ page? While institutions must outline some expectations in specific language for legal reasons, ensuring all students understand the processes increases transparency. “I like to say I want [students] to learn from the process, not feel like the process happened to them,” Ridge said.
- Is the handbook available in other languages? Depending on the student population, offering the handbook in additional languages can address equity concerns about which families can support their students. Hispanic-serving institutions, for example, should offer the handbook in Spanish, Ridge said.
- Who is advocating for students’ rights in conduct conversations? Some institutions offer students a conduct adviser, which Ridge says should be an opt-in rather than opt-out policy.
- Is conduct addressed early in the student experience? Conduct is not a fun office; “no one’s going to put us on a parade float,” Ridge joked. That’s why it’s vital to ensure that students receive relevant information when they transition into the institution, such as during orientation. “My goal is for them to feel that they are holding accountability for their choices, that they understand and learn from the sanctions or the consequences, but I don’t want them to be stressed about the process,” Ridge said. Partnering with campus offices, such as TRIO or Disability Services, can also ensure all students are aware of conduct staff and the office is seen less as punitive.
If your student success program has a unique feature or twist, we’d like to know about it. Click here to submit.
-
Embracing complexity in writing instruction
Key points:
Early in our careers, when we were fresh-faced and idealistic (we still are!) the prepackaged curriculum and the advice of more experienced colleagues was the go-to resource. Largely, we were advised that teaching writing was a simple matter of having students walk through and complete organizers, spending about one day for each “stage” of the writing process. At the end of the writing unit, students had finished their compositions–the standardized, boring, recreated ideas that we taught them to write.
As we matured and grew as teachers of writing, we learned that teaching writing in such simplistic ways may be easier, but it was not actually teaching students to be writers. We learned with time and experience that writing instruction is a complex task within a complex system.
Complex systems and wicked problems
Complexity as it is applied to composition instruction recognizes that there is more than just a linear relationship between the student, the teacher, and the composition. It juggles the experiences of individual composers, characteristics of genre, availability of resources, assignment and individual goals, and constraints of composing environments. As with other complex systems and processes, it is non-linear, self-organizing, and unpredictable (Waltuck, 2012).
Complex systems are wicked in their complexity; therefore, wicked problems cannot be solved by simple solutions. Wicked problems are emergent and generative; they are nonlinear as they do not follow a straight path or necessarily have a clear cause-and-effect relationship. They are self-organizing, evolving and changing over time through the interactions of various elements. They are unpredictable and therefore difficult to anticipate how they will unfold or what the consequences of any intervention might be. Finally, they are often interconnected, as they are symptoms of other problems. In essence, a wicked problem is a complex issue embedded in a dynamic system (Rittel & Webber, 1973).
Writing formulas are wicked
As formulaic writing has become and remains prevalent in instruction and classroom writing activity, graphic organizers and structural guides, which were introduced as a tool to support acts of writing, have become a wicked problem of formula; the resource facilitating process has become the focus of product. High-stakes standardized assessment has led to a focus on compliance, production, and quality control, which has encouraged the use of formulas to simplify and standardize writing instruction, the student writing produced, and the process of evaluation of student work. Standardization may improve test scores in certain situations, but does not necessarily improve learning. Teachers resort to short, formulaic writing to help students get through material more quickly as well as data and assessment compliance. This serves to not only create product-oriented instruction, but a false dichotomy between process and product, ignoring the complex thinking and design that goes into writing.
As a result of such a narrow view of and limited focus on writing process and purpose, formulas have been shown to constrain thinking and limit creativity by prioritizing product over the composing process. The five-paragraph essay, specifically, is a structure that hinders authentic composing because it doesn’t allow for the “associative leaps” between ideas that come about in less constrained writing. Formulas undermine student agency by limiting writers’ abilities to express their unique voices because of over-reliance on rigid structures (Campbell, 2014; Lannin & Fox, 2010; Rico, 1988).
An objective process lens: A wicked solution
The use of writing formulas grew from a well-intentioned desire to improve student writing, but ultimately creates a system that is out of balance, lacking the flexibility to respond to a system that is constantly evolving. To address this, we advocate for shifting away from rigid formulas and towards a design framework that emphasizes the individual needs and strategies of student composers, which allows for a more differentiated approach to teaching acts of writing.
The proposed framework is an objective process lens that is informed by design principles. It focuses on the needs and strategies that drive the composing process (Sharples, 1999). This approach includes two types of needs and two types of strategies:
- Formal needs: The assigned task itself
- Informal needs: How a composer wishes to execute the task
- “What” strategies: The concrete resources and available tools
- “How” strategies: The ability to use the tools
An objective process lens acknowledges that composing is influenced by the unique experiences composers bring to the task. It allows teachers to view the funds of knowledge composers bring to a task and create entry points for support.
The objective process lens encourages teachers to ask key questions when designing instruction:
- Do students have a clear idea of how to execute the formal need?
- Do they have access to the tools necessary to be successful?
- What instruction and/or supports do they need to make shifts in ideas when strategies are not available?
- What instruction in strategies is necessary to help students communicate their desired message effectively?
Now how do we do that?
Working within a design framework that balances needs and strategies starts with understanding the type of composers you are working with. Composers bring different needs and strategies to each new composing task, and it is important for instructors to be aware of those differences. While individual composers are, of course, individuals with individual proclivities and approaches, we propose that there are (at least) four common types of student composers who bring certain combinations of strategies and needs to the composition process: the experience-limited, the irresolute, the flexible, and the perfectionist composers. By recognizing these common composer types, composition instructors can develop a flexible design for their instruction.
An experience-limited composer lacks experience in applying both needs and strategies to a composition, so they are entirely reliant on the formal needs of the assigned task and any what-strategies that are assigned by the instructor. These students gravitate towards formulaic writing because of their lack of experience with other types of writing. Relatedly, an irresolute composer may have a better understanding of the formal and informal needs, but they struggle with the application of what and how strategies for the composition. They can become overwhelmed with options of what without a clear how and become stalled during the composing process. Where the irresolute composer becomes stalled, the flexible composer is more comfortable adapting their composition. This type of composer has a solid grasp on both the formal and informal needs and is willing to adapt the informal needs as necessary to meet the formal needs of the task. As with the flexible composer, the perfectionist composer is also needs-driven, with clear expectations for the formal task and their own goals for the informal tasks. Rather than adjusting the informal needs as the composition develops, a perfectionist composer will focus intensely on ensuring that their final product exactly meets their formal and informal needs.
Teaching writing requires embracing its complexity and moving beyond formulaic approaches prioritizing product over process. Writing is a dynamic and individualized task that takes place within a complex system, where composers bring diverse needs, strategies, and experiences. By adopting a design framework, teachers of writing and composing can support students in navigating this complexity, fostering creativity, agency, and authentic expression. It is an approach that values funds of knowledge students bring to the writing process, recognizing the interplay of formal and informal needs, as well as their “what” and “how” strategies; those they have and those that need growth via instruction and experience. Through thoughtful design, we can grow flexible, reflective, and skilled communicators who are prepared to navigate the wicked challenges of composing in all its various forms.
These ideas and more can be found in When Teaching Writing Gets Tough: Challenges and Possibilities in Secondary Writing Instruction.
References
Campbell, K. H. (2014). Beyond the five-paragraph essay. Educational Leadership, 71(7), 60-65.
Lannin, A. A., & Fox, R. F. (2010). Chained and confused: Teacher perceptions of formulaic writing. Writing & Pedagogy, 2(1), 39-64.
Rico, G. L. (1988). Against formulaic writing. The English Journal, 77(6), 57-58.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Sharples, M. (1999). How we write : writing as creative design (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203019900
Waltuck, B. A. (2012). Characteristics of complex systems. The Journal for Quality & Participation, 34(4), 13–15.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)