Tag: story

  • A renewed commitment to welcoming international students is the story to tell

    A renewed commitment to welcoming international students is the story to tell

    The long wait for a new International Education Strategy is over.

    Widely scrutinised since its publication, there has been a mixed reception for the Strategy in the national and sector press, notably and unsurprisingly covering the ambition to grow the UK sector’s TNE coverage and provide more UK education overseas, in contrast to a numerical target for international student recruitment.

    A lot of the reaction has tended towards the disappointed and the underwhelmed, which might be more to do with the length of time we have waited for it to be launched. Personally, the Strategy has brought out my inner Pollyanna.

    In these times, it’s become common practice to explore where the deficits or the challenges lie – and there are some definite gaps, but it is important that we do not overlook the positives in this strategy.

    A welcome commitment

    I note that hardly any media coverage has led with the Strategy’s continued commitment to welcome international students to the UK. While it doesn’t set a numerical target, it does restate a commitment to international student experience, and even cites key elements such as infrastructure and housing.

    Considering that the previous strategy contained zero reference to the international student experience when first launched in 2019, this welcome retention should be what the sector and the press are widely communicating to current and prospective international students.

    We should also be celebrating the multiple references to the work of the British Council and Study UK – albeit with no mention of funding. The Council’s international network and the Study UK campaign are unique promoters of the UK sector around the world, and it’s significant that this Strategy takes several opportunities to reinforce this.

    Let’s hope that this Strategy leads to increased investment in Study UK as a result, if government is serious about ramping up its global impact and supporting the UK’s ambitions for recruitment in the UK and overseas.

    The IES reiterates a commitment to women and girls’ education, which has been a long-standing objective of successive governments. Of course, if government wants to ensure this objective is met, it’s essential that an impact assessment is carried out on recent changes to immigration policy – something we have called for consistently at UKCISA – to identify where it discriminates against women students who would benefit from studying in the UK.

    Let’s hope that the new Education Sector Action Group (ESAG) will advocate strongly for this and other missing impact assessments required for the last few years of policy changes.

    Mobility matters

    As a long-standing advocate for student mobility – and former first-in-family, full-grant-recipient Erasmus beneficiary – I was delighted to see mobility get a profile in the Strategy, albeit focused on outward mobility and less on the importance of reciprocal mobility for the UK’s ambitions in international partnerships.

    Conversely, I was disappointed that there was not a single reference to the success of the Taith programme in Wales. This seemed a wasted opportunity to profile a significant – and Labour-funded – success story.

    Sector collaboration

    UKCISA has had many opportunities to feed into the development of the Strategy, and advise government on the importance of the international student experience, so the second objective to sustainably recruit international students from a diverse range of countries is welcome, not least because it’s what our members are already working hard to do.

    Our recent #WeAreInternational Awards showcased the depth and breadth of work across the sector to provide the best possible student experience and the work already under way to ensure that this objective is being met, and we are discussing with DfE and DBT how the award-winners can help exemplify the strategy’s commitments to the international student experience.

    Our members include staff working in admissions, advice, and sponsor compliance in over 180 universities, including an active immigration compliance expert practitioner network. Staff engagement with our essential training in immigration and our invaluable information, advice, and guidance on immigration rules, guidance, and how these translate to practice demonstrates their commitment to the provision of a high-quality student experience across all aspects of student engagement.

    Student voice

    Significantly, the spirit of our #WeAreInternational Student Charter and its principles strongly feature in this part of the Strategy – a testament to the importance of the student voice in influencing policy that has an impact on them, and the influential role that UKCISA will play in the delivery of the Strategy in the long-term.

    I was delighted to see one of our first #WeAreInternational Student Ambassadors, Nebu George, share his story of being a student in the UK. Nebu’s contribution matters not because it is a feel-good case study, but because it reflects how student insight can and should shape policy.

    Through our work with students, we do not simply support them – we help ensure their lived experience is heard in the rooms where decisions are made, and reflected in the strategies that follow.

    What’s missing

    While there is much to celebrate in this Strategy, as an overall document, it is arguably too heavy on background, context, and the UK’s achievements to date and far too light on measurable objectives and a plan for supporting the sector to achieve them.

    Delegating the action plan to the Education Sector Action Group (ESAG) means that the sector is waiting a while longer to find out how this will be achieved and how success will be evaluated.

    Then there is the bizarre positioning of the international student tuition fee levy as part of a competitive offer. No student choosing the UK is going to be drawn in by a technical consultation on the levy, or the promise that their fee is going to be reinvested into grants for domestic students.

    Mentioning the levy in the strategy at all feels at best like an editing oversight, and at worst, like an ill-thought-out marketing campaign. This needs to be a priority issue for ESAG to look at, mitigating the risk of this in communications to students considering a UK education.

    Perhaps the most important gap is information on how ESAG – the group that holds so much responsibility for the delivery of the Strategy’s objectives – will be formed.

    I trust that government will recognise that UKCISA representation on the ESAG is critical to any action plan to deliver a high-quality student experience and build an engaged alumni community, and we look forward to working with them and colleagues across the sector to help deliver on these ambitions.

    Source link

  • What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #1 focuses on the Trump Administration’s goal of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.

    Key points:

    In light of Donald Trump assuming a second presidential term in 2025, conversations concerning dismantling the United States Department of Education have resurfaced. Supporters argue that federal involvement in education undermines state authority, while critics fear that removing the federal role could exacerbate inequities and hinder national progress. To evaluate the proposal, it is crucial to examine the federal and state roles in education, the historical and constitutional context, and the potential benefits and challenges of such a shift.

    The federal role in education

    The United States Constitution does not explicitly grant the federal government authority over education. As Lunenberg et al. (2012) noted, “Education is not a function specifically delegated to the federal government” (p. 327). Instead, under the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states (McCarthy et al., 2019). This leaves education primarily under state jurisdiction, with federal involvement historically limited to indirect support rather than direct control.

    The United States Department of Education was established in 1979. It is responsible for overseeing federal funding for schools, enforcing federal laws in education, and ensuring equal access for students across the country.  Furthermore, it has played a significant role through legislation such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its successors: NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and ESSA (the Every Student Succeeds Act). These laws link federal funding to specific requirements, which aim to address inequities in education. Currently, federal contributions account for approximately 8 percent of funding for elementary and secondary education, with the remaining 92 percent coming from state and local sources (“The Federal Role,” 2017).

    The role of state and local control in education

    Education policy and administration have traditionally been state functions. States determine funding formulas, establish teacher certification requirements, and oversee curricula through their departments and boards of education (Lynch, 2016). Governors and state legislatures allocate funds, which are often distributed to schools based on enrollment, need, or specific programs (Lunenberg et al., 2012).

    Local school boards also play a critical role, managing day-to-day operations and responding to community needs. This decentralized structure reflects a longstanding belief that local authorities are better positioned to address the diverse needs of their communities. However, it has also led to significant disparities between states and districts in terms of funding, resources, and student outcomes.

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education 

    One of the most compelling arguments for dismantling the United States Department of Education lies in the principle of localized control. Critics argue that education is best managed by state and local governments because they are closer to the specific needs of their communities. Localized governance could allow schools to tailor their policies, curriculum, and resource allocation in ways that best fit the unique demographics of their regions. For example, schools in rural areas may have vastly different needs than those in urban centers, which is why local authorities are likely better equipped to address these disparities without the interference of federal oversight.

    The concern extends beyond general education. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is enforced by the United States Department of Education, mandates that students with disabilities receive free and appropriate public education (FAPE) along with necessary services and accommodations. Similarly, the department oversees federal programs that support English Language Learner (ELL) students by helping schools provide tailored instruction and resources to students who are not native English speakers. Without federal oversight, it is possible that these programs could lose funding or be inconsistently applied across states, causing vulnerable populations to be without critical support.

    Advocates of dismantling the United States Department of Education also point to the financial burden of maintaining a federal agency. They argue that billions of dollars allocated to the department could be redirected to state education budgets, thereby allowing for more impactful initiatives at the forefront. By eliminating bureaucratic layers, states could potentially deliver education funding more efficiently, thereby focusing resources directly on teachers, classrooms, and students.

    Another critical function of the United States Department of Education is establishing and enforcing national education standards. Programs such as NCLB and ESSA aim to hold schools accountable for student performance and ensure consistency across states (albeit, there are arguments those programs have led to a culture of “teaching to the test” and have stifled creativity in the classroom), but allowing states and local districts to have greater freedom to design their own standards and assessments may fostering innovation while also leading to the quality of education varying dramatically from state to state and can cause challenges for students in transient populations due to a lack of cohesion disrupting their education and limiting their opportunities.

    Keeping the United States Department of Education 

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education raises significant concerns about equity. The department plays a crucial role in addressing disparities in funding education, as well as in funding access. Federal programs (i.e., Title I, free meals, counseling, after-school programs, etc.) provide additional resources to schools serving high numbers of low-income students, many of which are located in inner-city areas. Without the United States Department of Education, these programs might be eliminated or left to the discretion of states that have historically struggled to prioritize funding for underserved communities.

    Inner-city urban schools often face unique challenges (i.e., overcrowding, insufficient funding, higher rates of poverty among students, etc.). Many of these schools also serve disproportionately high numbers of students with disabilities and ELL students, thereby making federal support even more vital. The United States Department of Education enforces civil rights protections that ensures that all students (including vulnerable subgroups) receive equitable treatment. Dismantling the department could weaken these safeguards, thereby leaving marginalized communities more vulnerable to neglect. Therefore, the loss of federal oversight is a serious concern for public education. Historically, states have not always allocated resources equitably, and urban school districts have often been underfunded compared to their suburban counterparts. Federal intervention has been essential in addressing these disparities. Without it, inner-city schools may struggle to maintain even basic standards of education, thereby exacerbating poverty and inequality.

    All schools (not just inner-city schools) will be adversely impacted by dismantling the United States Department of Education. Federal funding supports Advanced Placement (AP) courses, STEM initiatives, and dual-enrollment opportunities. Dismantling the United States Department of Education could lead to inconsistencies in college admissions processes because states might adopt different graduation requirements and assessments. This lack of standardization could complicate admissions for students applying to out-of-state or prestigious universities. Furthermore, the United States Department of Education funds research initiatives that lead to the development of new teaching methods, technologies, and curricula. These innovations often benefit all schools, but without federal support, such research might stagnate leaving schools without access to cutting-edge educational resources.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the debate pertaining to dismantling the United States Department of Education has taken on new urgency under the Trump administration in 2025. While advocates of dismantling the department argue for greater local control and efficiency, the critics highlight the potential risks to equity and access.  As the nation grapples with this issue, it is essential to prioritize the needs of students (and communities). The ultimate goal must be to create a more equitable and effective education system that serves all students regardless of their background or zip code.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • DEI in education: Pros and cons

    DEI in education: Pros and cons

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #6 focuses on DEI in education.

    Key points:

    Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become integral to educational institutions across the United States. DEI aims to foster environments where all students can thrive regardless of their backgrounds. The programs are designed to address systemic inequalities, promote representation, and create inclusive spaces for learning. However, as DEI becomes more prevalent, it also faces scrutiny and debate regarding its effectiveness, implementation, and impact on educational outcomes.

    One of the main advantages of DEI in education is the promotion of a more inclusive and representative curriculum. Students gain a broader understanding of the world by integrating diverse perspectives into course materials. This enhances critical thinking and empathy. Furthermore, the approach prepares students to navigate and contribute to our increasingly globalized society. Moreover, exposure to diverse viewpoints encourages students to challenge their assumptions and develop a more nuanced perspective on complex issues.

    DEI initiatives also contribute to improved academic outcomes by fostering a sense of belongingness amongst students. When students see themselves reflected in their educators and curricula, they are more likely to feel valued and supported. This leads to increased engagement and motivation. This sense of inclusion can result in higher retention and graduation rates (particularly among historically marginalized groups). Furthermore, diverse learning environments encourage collaboration and communication skills because students learn to work effectively with peers from different backgrounds.

    In addition to benefiting students, DEI programs can enhance faculty satisfaction and retention. Institutions that prioritize diversity in hiring and promotion practices create more equitable workplaces. This can lead to increased job satisfaction among faculty members. Mentorship programs and professional development opportunities focused on DEI can also support faculty in creating inclusive classroom environments, which further benefits students.

    Despite these benefits, DEI initiatives are not without challenges. One significant concern is the potential for resistance and backlash from individuals who perceive DEI efforts as a threat to traditional values (in other words, a form of reverse discrimination). This resistance can manifest in various ways (opposition to DEI policies, legal challenges, and political pressure). Such opposition can hinder the implementation and effectiveness of DEI programs, thereby creating a contentious atmosphere within educational institutions.

    Another challenge is the difficulty in measuring the success of DEI initiatives. Without clear metrics, it can be challenging to assess the impact of these programs on student outcomes, faculty satisfaction, or institutional culture. The lack of quantifiable data can lead to skepticism about the efficiency of DEI efforts, thus resulting in reduced support or funding for such programs. Additionally, the absence of standardized definitions and goals for DEI can lead to inconsistent implementation across institutions.

    Resource allocation is also a critical issue in the execution of DEI initiatives. Implementing comprehensive DEI programs often requires significant financial investment (funding for specialized staff, training, and support services). In times of budget constraints, institutions may struggle to prioritize DEI efforts. This may lead to inadequate support for students and faculty. Without sufficient resources, DEI programs may fail to achieve their intended outcomes thus further fueling criticism and skepticism.

    The potential for tokenism is another concern associated with DEI initiatives. When institutions focus on meeting diversity quotas without fostering genuine inclusion, individuals from underrepresented groups may feel marginalized or exploited. Tokenism may undermine the goals of DEI by creating superficial diversity that does not translate into meaningful change or equity. To avoid this, institutions must commit to creating inclusive environments where all individuals feel valued and empowered to contribute fully.

    Furthermore, DEI programs can sometimes inadvertently reinforce stereotypes or create division among student populations. For example, emphasizing differences without promoting commonalities may lead to increased social fragmentation or feelings of isolation among certain groups. Educators must carefully balance the celebration of diversity with the promotion of unity and shared values to foster cohesive learning communities.

    In summary, DEI initiatives in education offer numerous benefits, but these programs also face significant challenges. To maximize the positive impact of DEI efforts, educational institutions must commit to thoughtful, well-resourced, and inclusive implementation strategies that promote genuine equity and inclusion for all members.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • The 60 Minutes Story The Trump Administration Doesn’t Want You To See (Corey Booker)

    The 60 Minutes Story The Trump Administration Doesn’t Want You To See (Corey Booker)

    [From Senator Corey Booker’s Youtube.]  

    “This is a 60 Minutes Story about how the Trump administration violated our constitution and people’s basic human dignity. Acting like this does nothing to make us safer, and in fact only makes it more likely that American citizens are put at risk.”

     

    Source link

  • Edtech teaching strategies that support sustainability

    Edtech teaching strategies that support sustainability

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #7 focuses on sustainability in edtech.

    Key points:

    Educational technology, or edtech, has reshaped how educators teach, offering opportunities to create more sustainable and impactful learning environments.

    Using edtech in teaching, educators and school leaders can reduce environmental impact while enhancing student engagement and creativity. The key is recognizing how to effectively leverage edtech learning strategies, from digitized lesson plans to virtual collaboration, and keeping an open mind while embracing new instructional methods.

    Rethinking teaching methods in the digital age

    Teaching methods have undergone significant transformation with the rise of educational technology. Traditional classroom settings are evolving, integrating tools and techniques that prioritize active participation and collaboration.

    Here are three edtech learning strategies:

    • The flipped classroom model reverses the typical teaching structure. Instead of delivering lectures in class and assigning homework, teachers provide pre-recorded lessons or materials for students to review at home. Classroom time is then used for hands-on activities, group discussions, or problem-solving tasks.
    • Gamification is another method gaining traction. By incorporating game-like elements such as point systems, leaderboards, and challenges into lesson plans, teachers can motivate students and make learning more interactive. Platforms like Kahoot and Classcraft encourage participation while reducing paper-based activities.
    • Collaborative online tools, such as Google Workspace for Education, also play a critical role in modern classrooms. They enable students to work together on projects in real time, eliminating the need for printed resources. These tools enhance teamwork and streamline the sharing of information in eco-friendly ways.

    Sustainability and innovation in education

    Have you ever wondered how much paper schools use? There are approximately 100,000 schools in this country that consume about 32 billion sheets of paper yearly. On a local level, the average school uses 2,000 sheets daily–that comes out to $16,000 a year. Think about what else that money could be used for in your school.

    Here are ways that edtech can reduce reliance on physical materials:

    • Digital textbooks minimize the need for printed books and reduce waste. Through e-readers, students access a vast library of resources without carrying heavy, paper-based textbooks.
    • Virtual labs provide another example of sustainable education. These labs allow students to conduct experiments in a simulated environment, eliminating the need for disposable materials or expensive lab setups. These applications offer interactive simulations that are cost-effective and eco-conscious.
    • Schools can also adopt learning management systems to centralize course materials, assignments, and feedback. By using these platforms, teachers can cut down on printed handouts and encourage digital submissions, further reducing paper usage.

    Additionally, edtech platforms are beginning to incorporate budget-friendly tools designed with sustainability in mind; some of these resources are free. For instance, apps that monitor energy consumption or carbon footprints in school operations can educate students about environmental stewardship while encouraging sustainable practices in their own lives.

    Supporting teachers in the shift to edtech

    Transitioning to edtech can be a challenging yet rewarding experience for educators. By streamlining administrative tasks and enhancing lesson delivery, technology empowers teachers to focus on what matters most: engaging students.

    Circling back to having an open mind–while many teachers are eager to adopt edtech learning strategies, others might struggle more with technology. You need to expect this and be prepared to offer continuous support. Professional development opportunities are essential to ease the adoption of edtech. Schools can offer workshops and training sessions to help teachers feel confident with new tools. For instance, hosting peer-led sessions where educators share best practices fosters a collaborative approach to learning and implementation.

    Another way to support teachers is by providing access to online resources that offer lesson plans, tutorials, and templates. Encouraging experimentation and flexibility in teaching methods can also lead to better integration of technology. By allowing teachers to adapt tools to their unique classroom needs, schools can foster an environment where innovation thrives.

    If you’re concerned about bumps on this road, remember teachers have common traits that align with edtech. Good teachers are organized, flexible, have communication skills, and are open-minded. Encourage a team approach that’s motivating and leverages their love of learning.

    Bringing sustainability and enhanced learning to classrooms

    The integration of edtech learning strategies into classrooms brings sustainability and enhanced learning experiences to the forefront. By reducing reliance on physical materials and introducing eco-friendly tools, schools can significantly lower their environmental impact. At the same time, teachers gain access to methods that inspire creativity and collaboration among students.

    There’s also this: Edtech learning strategies are constantly evolving, so you’ll want to stay on top of these trends. While many of those focus on learning strategies, others are more about emergency response, safety, and data management,

    Investing in modern technologies and supporting teachers through training and resources ensures the success of these initiatives. By embracing edtech learning strategies, educators and administrators can create classrooms that are not only effective but also sustainable–a win for students, teachers, and the planet.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)



    Source link

  • Trump Shuts Down CBS After Feared Story Emerges (John Mearsheimer)

    Trump Shuts Down CBS After Feared Story Emerges (John Mearsheimer)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Trump Shuts Down CBS After Feared Story Emerges (John Mearsheimer)




    Source link

  • What we lose when AI replaces teachers

    What we lose when AI replaces teachers

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #8 focuses on the debate around teachers vs. AI.

    Key points:

    A colleague of ours recently attended an AI training where the opening slide featured a list of all the ways AI can revolutionize our classrooms. Grading was listed at the top. Sure, AI can grade papers in mere seconds, but should it?

    As one of our students, Jane, stated: “It has a rubric and can quantify it. It has benchmarks. But that is not what actually goes into writing.” Our students recognize that AI cannot replace the empathy and deep understanding that recognizes the growth, effort, and development of their voice. What concerns us most about grading our students’ written work with AI is the transformation of their audience from human to robot.

    If we teach our students throughout their writing lives that what the grading robot says matters most, then we are teaching them that their audience doesn’t matter. As Wyatt, another student, put it: “If you can use AI to grade me, I can use AI to write.” NCTE, in its position statements for Generative AI, reminds us that writing is a human act, not a mechanical one. Reducing it to automated scores undermines its value and teaches students, like Wyatt and Jane, that the only time we write is for a grade. That is a future of teaching writing we hope to never see.

    We need to pause when tech companies tout AI as the grader of student writing. This isn’t a question of capability. AI can score essays. It can be calibrated to rubrics. It can, as Jane said, provide students with encouragement and feedback specific to their developing skills. And we have no doubt it has the potential to make a teacher’s grading life easier. But just because we can outsource some educational functions to technology doesn’t mean we should.

    It is bad enough how many students already see their teacher as their only audience. Or worse, when students are writing for teachers who see their written work strictly through the lens of a rubric, their audience is limited to the rubric. Even those options are better than writing for a bot. Instead, let’s question how often our students write to a broader audience of their peers, parents, community, or a panel of judges for a writing contest. We need to reengage with writing as a process and implement AI as a guide or aide rather than a judge with the last word on an essay score.

    Our best foot forward is to put AI in its place. The use of AI in the writing process is better served in the developing stages of writing. AI is excellent as a guide for brainstorming. It can help in a variety of ways when a student is struggling and looking for five alternatives to their current ending or an idea for a metaphor. And if you or your students like AI’s grading feature, they can paste their work into a bot for feedback prior to handing it in as a final draft.

    We need to recognize that there are grave consequences if we let a bot do all the grading. As teachers, we should recognize bot grading for what it is: automated education. We can and should leave the promises of hundreds of essays graded in an hour for the standardized test providers. Our classrooms are alive with people who have stories to tell, arguments to make, and research to conduct. We see our students beyond the raw data of their work. We recognize that the poem our student has written for their sick grandparent might be a little flawed, but it matters a whole lot to the person writing it and to the person they are writing it for. We see the excitement or determination in our students’ eyes when they’ve chosen a research topic that is important to them. They want their cause to be known and understood by others, not processed and graded by a bot.

    The adoption of AI into education should be conducted with caution. Many educators are experimenting with using AI tools in thoughtful and student-centered ways. In a recent article, David Cutler describes his experience using an AI-assisted platform to provide feedback on his students’ essays. While Cutler found the tool surprisingly accurate and helpful, the true value lies in the feedback being used as part of the revision process. As this article reinforces, the role of a teacher is not just to grade, but to support and guide learning. When used intentionally (and we emphasize, as in-process feedback) AI can enhance that learning, but the final word, and the relationship behind it, must still come from a human being.

    When we hand over grading to AI, we risk handing over something much bigger–our students’ belief that their words matter and deserve an audience. Our students don’t write to impress a rubric, they write to be heard. And when we replace the reader with a robot, we risk teaching our students that their voices only matter to the machine. We need to let AI support the writing process, not define the product. Let it offer ideas, not deliver grades. When we use it at the right moments and for the right reasons, it can make us better teachers and help our students grow. But let’s never confuse efficiency with empathy. Or algorithms with understanding.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • You can write a great essay. But can you tell a great story?

    You can write a great essay. But can you tell a great story?

    What’s the difference between academic writing and writing a news story? How different can they be?

    I started out as a student of political science, became a journalist and then taught at university. Having started as an academic, you’d think returning to academic writing would be a snap. But it wasn’t.

    As a journalist I’d been trained to say what needed to be said in as few words as possible. My writing needed to be easily read by anybody, regardless of their level of education and whether or not they read English as a first language. But academic writing is meant to impress. An essay is written by a student to impress a teacher, or a professor to impress colleagues or a tenure committee, or by a scientist or social scientist to impress a publisher.

    Academic essays, reports and studies are meant to be ready by peers: people at the same or higher education level, who are experts in the same field of specialization and read them in their offices and classes.

    News stories are meant to be read by anyone, sitting around the breakfast table as they munch on corn flakes.

    You’d think the academic writing would be harder, no?

    Telling stories

    Imagine talking to a group of friends about something that happened in school. You don’t have to keep explaining who you are talking about or what you are talking about. They know all your references. But try telling the same story to your parents or better yet, adults who don’t know your school or community. It is a bit frustrating, because they don’t know what a stickler for rules Mr. Jackson is, or why most people avoid the third floor bathroom, or how so-and-so was dating you-know-who’s brother on the down low. You know, all that stuff that you need to know to understand why what happened at school was so significant.

    It is much more difficult to tell a story when the person you are telling it to has no context. Moreover, when you write an essay or report you expect the person you are writing it for to read it. That’s their job. But no one is expected to read a news story.

    As the author, you need to entice readers to choose your story to read. And you need to keep their attention throughout the story, because they aren’t obligated to read it to the end. So the story can’t be boring or tedious to read. Each paragraph has to have something interesting in it. It needs to be a good story worth reading.

    I learned quickly as a journalist to read my stories out loud to myself. By doing so, I could hear when my writing was getting tired and dull. I could picture the person who is hearing the story fall asleep or walk away. When that happened I hit the delete button and started the paragraph again.

    I would rethink whether the information I had included was really needed. Did my reader need to know that piece of data to understand what was happening?

    Comparing academic and journalistic writing

    To see the difference between journalistic and academic writing it is useful to look at a news story that came off of a report.

    The news organization Vox published an article 17 December about a new report on poverty that was done by researchers at four California universities.

    This is how the report began:

    We study poverty minimization via direct transfers, framing this as a statistical learning problem while retaining the information constraints faced by real-world programs. Using nationally representative household consumption surveys from 23 countries that together account for 50% of the world’s poor, we estimate that reducing the poverty rate to 1% (from a baseline of 12% at the time of last survey) would cost $170B nominal per year.

    Would you choose to read that with your corn flakes?

    Here is how Vox reporter Sara Herschander begins the story:

    When it comes to fixing the world’s worst problems, it’s easy to pretend that we’re helpless.

    We tell ourselves that global poverty is just too big, too distant and too intractable an issue for us to solve. If the world could afford to solve it, or something like hunger, then surely somebody else would have done it already.

    But, it turns out, that’s simply not true. According to a new report by a group of anti-poverty researchers that uses AI tools to achieve unusually granular data of the picture on the ground, the price tag for completely ending extreme poverty would be just $318 billion per year.

    Writing that is clear and concise

    The researchers didn’t worry that most people wouldn’t understand the terms “poverty minimization”, “direct transfers”, “statistical learning problem” or “information constraints”.

    But try sticking those terms into a story you tell friends in the school hall and they’ll tune you out.

    There is another big difference between news stories and academic essays and reports. Journalists don’t footnote sources. That’s because you wouldn’t have footnotes in a story you tell out loud. Just try it.

    So instead, when a journalist needs to cite a source they write something like, “that’s according to data from the U.S. Census” or, “a recent study out of Harvard found that.” The journalist would likely hyperlink to the actual study for readers who might want to read it, as I did above for both the Vox article and the report. The idea is that the citation should be as short as possible and it should not break into the story.

    The real challenge for a journalist is that the average reader has a very short attention span. Any break in a story is like an exit door. It is the chance for the reader to leave that depressing story about poverty to go to a more uplifting story about football or Bad Bunny.

    The importance of revision

    That’s why journalists write several drafts of a story before it gets published. In the first draft they just try to get all the information they have onto a page. In the second draft, they think about whether the information is needed and start taking things out and adding in others they might have forgotten. In the third, they try to close all those exit doors — all the places in the story that are tedious.

    There are some tricks to doing this. It helps to round up or down numbers that have a lot of digits. A number like $1,569,345 is tedious to read. It takes 13 words to say it out loud. Instead, saying about $1.6 million will do the trick. That’s just five words out loud.

    And it helps to use analogies and metaphors people can recognize. In a story I once wrote about the volatility of the stock market (doesn’t that sound like a yawner?) I likened the stock chart to Bart Simpson’s hair. For a story about an old technology company that kept getting sold and resold, I likened it to a secondhand sofa not moldy enough to toss into a skip.

    But reaching for these analogies isn’t easy; it takes a little extra time and mental effort. In some ways journalists are translators. In general, translators take something in one language and turn it into another — from Japanese to English, for example. A journalist takes something from the language of the boring and tedious and obscure and turns it into the language of interesting and understandable.

    It’s kind of like a jigsaw puzzle. You start with a bunch of pieces that seem to make little sense, but if you put them together in the right way you get a clear picture from it. But sometimes to do that you have to keep moving the different pieces around and sometimes you find you have to undo an entire section because something just doesn’t fit.

    The result, when you are done, though, is pretty satisfying.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why are news stories so different from essays?

    2. In what ways are journalists translators?

    3. What do you think makes a story interesting to read or hear?

    Source link

  • Chronic absenteeism could derail K-12 education

    Chronic absenteeism could derail K-12 education

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #9 focuses on chronic absenteeism.

    Key points:

    The biggest problem in education is that kids aren’t showing up to school. Last year, 26 percent of students missed a month of class or more, leading to dramatic declines in academic performance. Chronic absenteeism accounted for 27 percent of the drop in math scores and 45 percent of the decline in reading scores from 2019 to 2022. Students who are chronically absent are 7x more likely to drop out before graduating, and while state and district leaders are scrambling for solutions, kids are falling further behind.

    Why chronic absenteeism is hard to solve

    In 2019, only 13 percent of students in the U.S. were chronically absent. Typically, these students missed school because of significant personal reasons–long-term illness, gang involvement, clinical depression, working jobs to support their families, lacking transportation, drug use, unplanned pregnancy, etc.–that aren’t easily fixed.

    However, since the pandemic, the rate of chronic absenteeism has doubled from 13 percent to 26 percent.

    The change is cultural. For the last hundred years, it was drilled into the American psyche that “school is important.” A great effort was made to provide bussing to any child who lived too far to walk, and the expectation was that every child should come to school every day. Cutting class was sure to land you in the principal’s office or potentially even lead to police showing up at your door.

    During the Covid-19 pandemic, this narrative flipped. As parents began working from home, their kids sat beside them. With lectures recorded and assignments posted online, attending class began to feel optional. When school doors reopened, many families didn’t fully come back. Common excuses like being tired, missing the bus, or simply not feeling like going were validated and excused rather than admonished. While students who skip school were once seen as delinquent, for many families it has become culturally acceptable–almost even expected–for kids to stay home whenever they or their parents want.

    Overwhelmed by the drastic rise in absenteeism, school staff are unable to revert cultural norms about attendance. And it’s not their fault.

    The root of the problem

    Each student’s situation is unique. Some students may struggle with reliable transportation, while others skip certain classes they don’t like, and others still are disengaged with school entirely. Without knowing why students are missing school, staff cannot make progress addressing the root cause of chronic absenteeism.

    Today, nearly 75 percent of student absences are “unexplained,” meaning that no authorized parent called or emailed the school to say where their children are and why they aren’t in class. This lack of clarity makes it impossible for schools to offer personalized solutions and keep students engaged. Unexplained absences only deepen the disconnect and limit schools’ ability to tackle absenteeism effectively.

    Knowing why students are missing school is critical, but also very difficult to uncover. At a high school of 2,000 students with 85 percent average daily attendance, 225 students will be absent each day without providing any explanation. In an ideal world, schools would speak with every parent to find out the reason their child wasn’t in class–but schools can’t possibly make 225 additional phone calls without 3-5 additional staff. Instead, they rely on robocalls and absence letters, and those methods don’t work nearly well enough.

    Normalize attendance again: It takes a village

    Improving attendance is about more than just allocating additional resources. It’s about shifting the mindset and fostering a culture that prioritizes presence. This starts with schools and communities making attendance a shared responsibility, not just a policy.

    First, schools must take the initiative to understand why students are missing school. Whether through modern AI-driven attendance systems or with more traditional methods like phone calls, understanding the root causes is critical to addressing the issue.

    Next, categorize and recognize patterns. Small adjustments can have big impacts. One district noticed that students who were 0.9 miles away from school were much more likely to not show up because their bussing policy was for families living 1 mile away from school or further. By changing their policy, they saw a surge in attendance. Similarly, pinpointing specific classes that students are skipping can help tailor interventions, whether through teacher engagement or offering additional support.

    Lastly, schools should focus resources on students facing the most severe challenges. These students often require personalized solutions, such as home visits for unresponsive parents or help with transportation. Targeted efforts like these create a direct impact on reducing absenteeism and improving overall attendance.

    When communities unite to make school attendance a priority, students receive the support they need to succeed. Tackling chronic absenteeism is not an easy task, but with focused effort and a culture of engagement, we can reverse this troubling trend and give students the foundation they deserve for future success.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • An educator’s top tips to integrate AI into the classroom

    An educator’s top tips to integrate AI into the classroom

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #10 focuses on teaching strategies around AI.

    Key points:

    In the last year, we’ve seen an extraordinary push toward integrating artificial intelligence in classrooms. Among educators, that trend has evoked responses from optimism to opposition. “Will AI replace educators?” “Can it really help kids?” “Is it safe?” Just a few years ago, these questions were unthinkable, and now they’re in every K-12 school, hanging in the air.

    Given the pace at which AI technologies are changing, there’s a lot still to be determined, and I won’t pretend to have all the answers. But as a school counselor in Kansas who has been using SchoolAI to support students for years, I’ve seen that AI absolutely can help kids and is safe when supervised. At this point, I think it’s much more likely to help us do our jobs better than to produce any other outcome. I’ve discovered that if you implement AI thoughtfully, it empowers students to explore their futures, stay on track for graduation, learn new skills, and even improve their mental health.

    Full disclosure: I have something adjacent to a tech background. I worked for a web development marketing firm before moving into education. However, I want to emphasize that you don’t have to be an expert to use AI effectively. Success is rooted in curiosity, trial and error, and commitment to student well-being. Above all, I would urge educators to remember that AI isn’t about replacing us. It allows us to extend our reach to students and our capacity to cater to individual needs, especially when shorthanded.

    Let me show you what that looks like.

    Building emotional resilience

    Students today face enormous emotional pressures. And with national student-to-counselor ratios at nearly double the recommended 250-to-1, school staff can’t always be there right when students need us.

    That’s why I created a chatbot named Pickles (based on my dog at home, whom the kids love but who is too rambunctious to come to school with me). This emotional support bot gives my students a way to process small problems like feeling left out at recess or arguing with a friend. It doesn’t replace my role, but it does help triage students so I can give immediate attention to those facing the most urgent challenges.

    Speaking of which, AI has revealed some issues I might’ve otherwise missed. One fourth grader, who didn’t want to talk to me directly, opened up to the chatbot about her parents’ divorce. Because I was able to review her conversation, I knew to follow up with her. In another case, a shy fifth grader who struggled to maintain conversations learned to initiate dialogue with her peers using chatbot-guided social scripts. After practicing over spring break, she returned more confident and socially fluent.

    Aside from giving students real-time assistance, these tools offer me critical visibility and failsafes while I’m running around trying to do 10 things at once.

    Personalized career exploration and academic support

    One of my core responsibilities as a counselor is helping students think about their futures. Often, the goals they bring to me are undeveloped (as you would expect—they’re in elementary school, after all): They say, “I’m going to be a lawyer,” or “I’m going to be a doctor.” In the past, I would point them toward resources I thought would help, and that was usually the end of it. But I always wanted them to reflect more deeply about their options.

    So, I started using an AI chatbot to open up that conversation. Instead of jumping to a job title, students are prompted to answer what they’re interested in and why. The results have been fascinating—and inspiring. In a discussion with one student recently, I was trying to help her find careers that would suit her love of travel. After we plugged in her strengths and interests, the chatbot suggested cultural journalism, which she was instantly excited about. She started journaling and blogging that same night. She’s in sixth grade.

    What makes this process especially powerful is that it challenges biases. By the end of elementary school, many kids have already internalized what careers they think they can or can’t pursue–often based on race, gender, or socioeconomic status. AI can disrupt that. It doesn’t know what a student looks like or where they’re from. It just responds to their curiosity. These tools surface career options for kids–like esports management or environmental engineering–that I might not be able to come up with in the moment. It’s making me a better counselor and keeping me apprised of workforce trends, all while encouraging my students to dream bigger and in more detail.

    Along with career decisions, AI helps students make better academic decisions, especially in virtual school environments where requirements vary district to district. I recently worked with a virtual school to create an AI-powered tool that helps students identify which classes they need for graduation. It even links them to district-specific resources and state education departments to guide their planning. These kinds of tools lighten the load of general advising questions for school counselors and allow us to spend more time supporting students one on one.

    My advice to educators: Try it

    We tell our students that failure is part of learning. So why should we be afraid to try something new? When I started using AI, I made mistakes. But AI doesn’t have to be perfect to be powerful. Around the globe, AI school assistants are already springing up and serving an ever-wider range of use cases.

    I recommend educators start small. Use a trusted platform. And most importantly, stay human. AI should never replace the relationships at the heart of education. But if used wisely, it can extend your reach, personalize your impact, and unlock your students’ potential.

    We have to prepare our students for a world that’s changing fast–maybe faster than ever. I, for one, am glad I have AI by my side to help them get there.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link