Tag: Training

  • Judge blocks cuts to Education Department teacher training grants

    Judge blocks cuts to Education Department teacher training grants

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    The U.S. Department of Education cannot terminate three educator training grant programs, a federal judge ordered on Monday.

    Specifically, the Education Department is enjoined from ending any grants provided through the three congressionally appropriated programs — the Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant Program, the Teacher Quality Partnership Program, and the Teacher and School Leader Incentive Program, according to the ruling from Judge Julie Rubin of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

    In addition to the injunction, the three plaintiffs — teacher preparation groups that sued the Education Department for making cuts to over 70 of these federal grant programs in February — must have their grant awards reinstated within five business days of the March 17 order.

    Rubin wrote that the cuts to the teacher training grant programs are “likely unlawful” under the Administrative Procedure Act.

    The plaintiffs in the case are the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, National Center for Teacher Residencies, and Maryland Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

    The order means that grantees affiliated with the plaintiff organizations can soon “draw down funds without any restrictions,” AACTE said in a Monday statement. 

    “We are thrilled that the court has ruled in favor of preserving funding for TQP, SEED, and TSL grants, which have a transformative impact on our nation’s education system,” said AACTE President and CEO Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy. 

    “I commend the unwavering dedication that led to this decision and remain hopeful that institutions, nonprofits, and partners across America can continue to strengthen our educator workforce, and address critical shortages while ensuring that every child in our nation has access to exceptional educators and a high-quality educational experience.”

    Last week, eight attorneys general had an initial victory in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts with a similar lawsuit over the Education Department’s cuts to millions of dollars in teacher training grants. That lawsuit only mentioned the SEED and TQP grants.

    When announcing the cuts on Feb. 17, the Education Department said the $600 million in withdrawn funds had been allocated to “divisive” teacher training grants. The department did not initially name the specific grants it slashed, but it later confirmed to K-12 Dive that the cuts included SEED and TQP.

    Source link

  • Curtain call on traditional time-intensive drama training

    Curtain call on traditional time-intensive drama training

    Recent closures of renowned actor training courses, including the Bristol Old Vic Theatre School’s undergraduate provision and the abrupt collapse of the Academy of Live and Recorded Arts, have laid bare a crisis in drama training. This isn’t only about funding shortfalls; it’s about the very structures and traditions of training, which risk shutting out those able to succeed.

    The financial strain on institutions is undeniable. The historical freeze in undergraduate tuition fees and the high-intensity delivery required in drama and other forms of intensive arts training like dance and music education have made traditional models almost unsustainable. Specialist institutions, unable to cross-subsidise, have stretched themselves to the limit – expanding course offerings, increasing intakes, internationalisation and growing postgraduate provision, where costs can be better covered. Meanwhile, government support through welcome specialist funding streams such as Institution Specific Funding have proven insufficient to address the root challenges.

    These efforts, while necessary, have unintended consequences. Over-speedy expansion creates great challenges for the quality of the learning experience, while institutional survival strategies rarely address the deeper, systemic issues at play. The question is not just how to survive in this increasingly precarious environment, but how to rethink the system entirely.

    The hidden barrier of time poverty

    The financial barriers to entering drama training are well-documented, but there is a more insidious form of exclusion that demands urgent attention: time-poverty.

    As highlighted in a recent Unipol and HEPI report, the average cost of student rent in London now exceeds the maximum maintenance loan, leaving students struggling to make ends meet. This financial reality forces many to take on part-time work, but the intensive nature of traditional actor training – 30-40 hours a week, often with irregular schedules – leaves little room for paid employment. The result? Only those who can afford not to work can afford to train.

    Traditional training models require high levels of physical presence and stamina. While these methods have been celebrated for their rigour, they exclude those with caring responsibilities, disabilities requiring time flexibility, or the need to support themselves financially. This isn’t just a financial issue – it’s a fundamental inequity in how time is valued in training.

    Addressing time-poverty isn’t about making marginal adjustments; it requires a paradigm shift. Drama schools must reimagine training models to prioritise accessibility and sustainability without compromising quality. Flexible delivery methods, guaranteed non-contact periods for work or rest, and rethinking the necessity of long, traditional schedules are all potential starting points. If we are to be equitable in the way almost all drama schools claim as a value, we must redesign what “intensity” in training means for excellent students who do not arrive with the economic means required. The current system is exclusionary.

    Some institutions are already leading the way. Identity School and Access All Areas have successfully adapted their training processes to accommodate a broader range of students. The Collective Acting Studio excels at balancing time pressures with rigorous training, redefining how intensity can be delivered. These organisations boast impressive alumni who are actively working successfully in the industry. Notably, Sally Ann Gritton, Principal of Mountview, emphasises in her book, The Independent Actor, that long, gruelling days are neither effective nor beneficial for students. These examples prove that change isn’t just possible – it’s essential if we want the arts to become more inclusive.

    Why it matters

    The stakes couldn’t be higher. The creative industries contribute over £100 billion to the UK economy annually, with drama training forming the backbone of the talent pipeline. Rose Bruford College alumna like Jessica Gunning, who recently won Emmy and Golden Globe awards, or Sara Huxley, whose work on Mr. Bates vs. the Post Office catalysed governmental action, exemplify the global impact of British arts education.

    However, the arts are more than an economic driver – they shape how we see ourselves, societal narratives, build empathy, and are key in defining our cultural identity. If access to training is restricted to the privileged, the stories we tell become narrower and less representative. Equity in the arts is not just an educational issue; it is a societal imperative.

    Nearly a decade ago, calls for greater class diversity in the arts sparked important conversations. In 2016, a report from the London School of Economics revealed that only 27 per cent of actors came from working-class backgrounds. While this discussion was absorbed into the broader issue of societal inequality, solutions remained vague and largely limited to the idea of increased funding. Today, with budgets tighter than ever, this approach feels increasingly out of reach.

    In recent years, established actors, including household names like Julie Walters and Christopher Eccleston have voiced concerns that they would no longer be able to afford the cost of training. Their warnings highlight a system where financial barriers stifle talent, despite the well-meaning calls for bursaries and other competitive financial support. The result? A cycle where potential is lost, and the arts grow less accessible.

    We need bold leadership across the sector. Institutions must collaborate to share best practice, experiment with alternative training models, and advocate for systemic support. There are innovative models, and we must deal with the friction preventing them from spreading. Policymakers and trainers must recognise that funding is only one part of the equation; addressing time-poverty is critical to ensuring a truly inclusive arts education.

    The arts are at their best when they reflect the richness of society. It’s time to move beyond tradition and reimagine drama training for a new generation—one where potential, not privilege, determines success.

    Anyone interested in being part of this conversation is welcome to contact the authors directly.

    Source link

  • Why higher education must take control of AI training

    Why higher education must take control of AI training

    In the rush to adopt artificial intelligence, many institutions are making a critical mistake: assuming that off-the-shelf AI solutions will seamlessly integrate into their unique academic environments. This oversight undermines the very essence of what makes each institution distinct and valuable.

    Higher education stands at a unique crossroads. Our institutions possess three powerful advantages that make us ideally suited to shape AI implementation:

    • Deep expertise in learning science and pedagogy,
    • A fundamental commitment to inclusion and accessibility, and
    • Vast repositories of specialized knowledge across disciplines.

    Consider this: Every institution has its own distinctive DNA—unique terminology, specific policies, particular processes and individualized pathways for student success. A campus chat bot trained on generic data can’t possibly understand that your first-year experience program is called Launch Pad or that your student success center is actually The Hub. These aren’t just semantic differences; they reflect your institution’s culture, values and approach to education.

    The stakes are high in an era of contracting budgets, unpredictable enrollment patterns, information overload, and increasing student needs. We cannot afford to misallocate our most valuable resource: human talent.

    The Real Power of Properly Trained AI

    When AI is trained with your institution’s specific context, it becomes more than a cost-cutting tool. It becomes a force multiplier that:

    • Handles routine queries with institutional accuracy,
    • Identifies at-risk students before they struggle,
    • Directs resources where they’re needed most, and
    • Frees staff to focus on meaningful student interactions

    AI transforms our approach from broadcasting general information to providing targeted support. Imagine AI that recognizes your unique early alert indicators, understands your specific financial aid processes, knows your specific mental health resources and protocols, and speaks in your institution’s voice and values.

    Relying on vendor-trained AI means that you are missing crucial institutional context, perpetuating generic solutions and losing opportunities for personalized support or potentially misguiding students with incorrect information.

    Higher education institutions must take an active role in training their AI systems. Remember: Every time you allow an untrained or generic AI to interact with your students, you’re missing an opportunity to provide the personalized, institution-specific support that sets your school apart.

    Breaking It Down

    A generic AI is like a new employee who has read every manual but doesn’t understand your institution’s unique culture, language or processes—it has broad knowledge but lacks specific context. Untrained AI systems, while powerful in general applications, are essentially operating on publicly available information without the benefit of the institutional expertise, proprietary processes or specific student success patterns that make your organization unique.

    Fear of Failure

    The fear of AI implementation manifests in various ways across higher education, often masquerading as practical concerns while hiding deeper anxieties. Like an untrained AI system that lacks institutional context and produces generic responses, an unprepared organization can generate resistance that undermines successful AI adoption.

    • Process guardians: These experienced professionals, while openly complaining about overwhelming workloads, harbor deeper concerns. They worry that AI might not just streamline their processes but potentially replace their expertise. Their resistance often appears as skepticism about AI’s accuracy or reliability—a valid concern that actually points to the need for proper AI training rather than AI avoidance.
    • Generational tensions: Some view AI adoption through a generational lens, suggesting that retirement is the solution to resistance. This perspective misses a crucial point: Seasoned professionals possess valuable institutional knowledge that should be captured and used to train AI systems, not lost to retirement. Their experience isn’t an obstacle; it’s an asset for effective AI implementation.
    • Faculty concerns: In academia, faculty members wield significant influence in approval processes. Their hesitation often stems from legitimate concerns about academic integrity and the quality of education. However, this anxiety about reopening settled decisions can be addressed through proper training and demonstration of how AI can enhance, rather than diminish, academic rigor.

    The Bottom Line

    In higher education, we don’t just need AI—we need AI that understands our individual institutional contexts, speaks our unique language and supports our specific student success goals. This level of customization only comes through intentional, institution-specific training.

    Our mission isn’t just to adopt AI; it’s to shape it into a tool that authentically represents and serves our individual institutions and students. The time and resources invested in proper AI training today will pay dividends in more effective, personalized student support tomorrow.

    The choice is clear: Either train AI to truly understand and represent your institution, or watch as generic solutions fail to meet your unique needs and challenges. In an era where personal attention matters more than ever, can we afford to leave this critical tool untrained?

    Source link

  • Career coaches fill critical gaps in Ph.D. training

    Career coaches fill critical gaps in Ph.D. training

    To the editor:

    In “The Doctoral Dilemma” (Feb. 3, 2025), Inside Higher Ed reporter Johanna Alonso describes career coaching as a “cottage industry” of “gurus” that emerged to fill critical gaps in graduate training. As a career coach cited in the article, I was disappointed to see such an inaccurate and biased portrayal of my work. 

    Coaching is a professional industry with proven methods, tools, and credentialing provided by the International Coaching Federation (ICF). Coaching is distinct from “consulting,” and it’s an intentional, strategic step for anyone seeking to change careers. This is why Johns Hopkins University employs coaches as part of its Doctoral Life Design Studio. Yet, the article portrays these university-led coaching initiatives as legitimate, structured and holistic, while describing coaching outside of the university as an opportunistic “cottage industry.” Why frame the same service in two very different ways?

    From our wide-ranging, 20-minute interview, Alonso only highlighted my hourly rate—$250/hour for a single one-to-one meeting—without any context. There is no mention of the benefits of career coaching, or whether universities like Johns Hopkins pay their coaches a similar rate. The monetary cost, presented in isolation, suggests exploitation. The reality? As a neurodivergent person, I find one-to-one meetings draining, so I’ve priced them to limit bookings. Instead, I direct Ph.D.s toward my free library of online content, my lower-cost group programs and my discounted coaching packages, all of which have helped Ph.D.s secure industry roles that double or triple their academic salaries. The article doesn’t include these details.

    The most telling sign of the article’s bias is the use of the word “guru.” Why use a loaded term like “guru” instead of “expert” to describe career coaches? As I frequently remind my clients, language shapes perception. Ph.D.s are more likely to be seen as industry-ready professionals if they use terms like “multi-year research project” instead of “dissertation” or “stakeholders” instead of “academic advisers.” The same logic applies here—calling career coaches “gurus” trivializes our work, implying we are self-appointed influencers rather than qualified professionals. I’ll never forget the professor who once tweeted, “If life outside of academia is so great, why do alt-ac gurus spend so much time talking about it? Don’t they have better things to do?”

    My response? “I wouldn’t have to do this if professors provided ANY professional development for non-academic careers.”

    Because contrary to what the article claims, I didn’t start my coaching business because I wished there were more resources available to me. I started it because, after I quit my postdoctoral fellowship for an industry career, I spent untold hours providing uncompensated career support to Ph.D.s. For nearly two years, I responded to thousands of messages, created online resources, reviewed résumés and met one-to-one with hundreds of Ph.D. students, postdocs and even tenured professors—all for free, in my leisure time. Eventually, I burned out from the incessant demand. I realized that, if I was going to continue pouring my time into helping Ph.D.s, I needed to be compensated. That’s when I started my business.

    Academia conditions us to see for-profit businesses as unethical, while “nonprofit” universities push students into a lifetime of high-interest debt. It convinces us that charging for expertise is predatory, while asking Ph.D.s to work for poverty wages is somehow noble. It forces us to internalize the idea that, if you truly care about something, you should sacrifice your well-being and life for it. But our time is valuable. Our skills are valuable. We deserve to be fairly compensated for our labor, inside and outside of academia.

    Career coaching isn’t the problem. The real problem is that academia still refuses to take a critical look in the mirror.

    Ashley Ruba is the founder of After Academia.

    Source link

  • Education Department staffers suspended over DEI training

    Education Department staffers suspended over DEI training

    Dozens of Education Department employees were notified Friday that they’d been put on paid administrative leave following President Trump’s executive order to root out diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in the federal government. At least some of them received the notices because of their participation in a voluntary session on diversity training, NBC News reported, noting they were encouraged to do so by Trump’s first-term education secretary, Betsy DeVos. 

    Department staffers sent the memos they’d gotten to their American Federation of Government Employees local union, Politico reported over the weekend. The union subsequently said that attendees of a two-day 2019 training for the department’s “Diversity Change Agent Program” had received the notices.

    The “change agents” who participated in the program were supposed to lead DEI training and education in the agency while working to attract and retain talent. The union said DeVos’s goal was to have 400 employees participate, though it’s unclear how many did.

    The suspended staffers were told that the “administrative leave is not being done for any disciplinary purpose.” NBC News reported that the affected employees included “a public affairs specialist, civil rights attorneys, program manager analysts, loan regulators and employees working to ensure schools accommodate special needs children with individualized education programs.” 

    The notices arrived one week after the Education Department rolled out a press release touting its “Action to Eliminate DEI.” That action included putting employees in charge of DEI  programs on paid leave and canceling more than $2.6 million in training and service contracts. The department characterized it as “the first step in reorienting the agency toward prioritizing meaningful learning ahead of divisive ideology in our schools.”

    Source link

  • Degree Apprenticeships in England: What Can We Learn from the Experiences of Apprentices, Employers, and Education and Training Providers?

    Degree Apprenticeships in England: What Can We Learn from the Experiences of Apprentices, Employers, and Education and Training Providers?

    By Josh Patel, Researcher at the Edge Foundation.

    Degree Apprenticeships (DAs) were launched in 2015, as a novel work-based learning route to obtaining a degree. On their introduction, then Prime Minister David Cameron said they would ‘give people a great head start, combining a full degree with real practical skills gained from work and the financial security of a regular pay packet’. Since then, they have taken the higher education sector by storm. Their growth has been the key factor in the expansion of higher apprenticeships from 43,800 starts in 2015/16 to 273,700 in 2023/24, a rise from 4.8% to 35% of all apprenticeships. They have stimulated innovative models of delivery and new and productive relationships between employers and providers. Former Skills Minister Robert Halfon remarked that ‘Degree Apprenticeships’ were his ‘two favourite words in the English language’.

    DAs have, however, recently come under scrutiny. Concerns persist that the growth of DAs and their high cost – reported in the media as growing from 2% of the apprenticeship budget in 2017/18 to 21% in 2021 – might crowd out opportunities for young entrants to the workforce, as DAs are primarily taken by existing employees. The suitability of DAs as instruments to improve upward social mobility has been contested. Meanwhile, the government is drawing up plans to increase the flexibility of the Apprenticeship Levy through which Degree Apprenticeships can currently be funded, asking employers ‘to rebalance their funding for apprenticeships… to invest in younger workers’.

    Our report, ‘Degree Apprenticeships in England: What Can We Learn from the Experiences of Apprentices, Employers, and Education and Training Providers?’, written in collaboration with colleagues from the Universities of Bath, Huddersfield, and Oxford, was published on Tuesday and is a timely intervention into these discussions. Here, we present the evidence for some our policy recommendations, gathered from nearly 100 interviews with stakeholders including large employers and SMEs, providers, degree apprentices, and policymakers.

    Engaging employers

    The government needs to consider a more systematic approach that serves to rationalise the way that employers are supported to offer a wide range of work-based opportunities. As Edge has identified in other programmes, such as T Levels or plans to provide universal work experience through the government’s Youth Guarantee, DAs are restricted by the number of employers willing to engage. We repeatedly heard evidence of the difficulties ‘resource-poor’ employers had in engaging with the design of apprenticeship standards and participating fully in collaboration with providers. As one SME told us contributing to the design and development of a DA ‘doesn’t give me any benefit now, and I’m impatient’.

    The government needs to develop a coherent strategy for DAs with a particular focus on support for SMEs, including improved awareness of levy transfer schemes. Involvement in DAs is often based on being ‘in the know’ and contacts with providers and local authorities. In our ‘Learning from the past’ stream of work, we reviewed Education Business Partnerships, as an example of intermediary organisations, noting both their strengths and shortcomings, which could inform effective initiatives for supporting employers.

    Reducing complexity

    With the creation of Skills England, the government should take the opportunity to review and simplify the process of design, delivery and quality assurance for DAs, and ensure regulatory elements work together. DAs currently draw in a large number of bodies including the OfS, IfATE, regulatory bodies, professional bodies and Ofsted. Providers told us that this had created a complex landscape of ‘many masters’ where lines of accountability are blurred and innovation is stifled. Providers described ‘overregulation’ as limiting ‘our ability to go off-piste’, and while the process could be constructive, providers were unconvinced of its added value. ‘Does that add to the quality?’ one provider asked. ‘I don’t think it necessarily does’.

    Skills England’s remit includes shaping technical education to respond to skills needs, and its incorporation of IfATE has already begun. As a first exercise, it could review the regulatory requirements to remove any duplication and contradictions and then consult with the sector to devise a simpler, clearer mechanism for providers to report.

    Increasing flexibility

    These difficulties meant that, while we found examples of excellent integration of academic learning and the workplace, concerns persisted as to the vocational relevance and obsolescence of learning, particularly in fast-moving sectors such as IT and mental health provision. One employer involved in delivery said they told their apprentices: ‘we have to teach you this so you get through your apprenticeship, but actually in practice that is not the way it’s done any longer’.

    In other countries, such as the Netherlands, a proportion (up to 20-25%) of an apprenticeship standard is kept flexible to be agreed between the employer and provider so that it can take better account of the current and changing situation in that particular industry, location and employer – such flexibility could be piloted in the UK.

    …without compromise

    The government’s commitment to adapting the levy into a ‘Growth and Skills Levy’, offers opportunities to improve DA delivery. Diversification was not a major consideration for the majority of employers when recruiting, though we certainly did hear evidence from those with a strong sense of their social corporate responsibility. As one SME put it:

    there are too many people in the IT industry that are like me. So we’re talking middle-aged white guys. […] Now, DAs allow people who don’t necessarily, wouldn’t consider getting into this industry from a variety of backgrounds, creeds, colours…

    We recommended in our Flex Without Compromise report that the government should take a measured approach to levy reform to minimise the risk that a broadening of scope diminishes the opportunities available particularly for younger people and newer entrants to the labour market. It should consider modelling the impact of differentiating levy funding available for DAs by either or both age and staff status, and diversification of the workforce. This could be a powerful mechanism to encourage employers to focus DA opportunities on younger people and on new recruits but would need to be considered carefully to allow for continued expansion of DAs.

    These initiatives might help address existing challenges and enhance the efficacy of Degree Apprenticeships in fostering equitable access and meeting the needs of learners and employers.

    To find out more about Edge and to read the report in full, visit www.edge.co.uk

    Source link

  • Marian High School Chooses BenQ’s LK936ST Golf Simulator Projector for New Golf Training Lab

    Marian High School Chooses BenQ’s LK936ST Golf Simulator Projector for New Golf Training Lab

    COSTA MESA, Calif. — BenQ, an internationally renowned provider of visual display and collaboration solutions, today announced that Marian High School in Omaha, Nebraska, selected and installed two BenQ LK936ST 4K HDR short-throw golf simulator projectors for its golf sim Golf Training Lab at the Marian Athletic Center. In 2024, the Marian girls’ golf team became the undefeated Nebraska State Champions in Class A golf. Designed to help analyze and improve the golfers’ swings and give them the ability to practice in all weather conditions, the Marian Golf Training Lab provides the girls’ high school and junior teams with an immersive and realistic golf course environment. Based on research and recommendations from golf simulation experts, Marian High School chose the BenQ LK936ST for its exceptional color accuracy, powerful brightness, and maintenance-free operation.

    Head Coach Robert Davis led the effort to build the Golf Training Lab, which includes two golf simulator bays featuring Carl’s Place 16×10 impact screens and ProTee VX launch monitors. Seeking a high-performance projector that could deliver realistic course visuals, bright images in a well-lit environment, and long-term, maintenance-free operation, Davis consulted with golf simulator manufacturers and reviewers. After thorough research, BenQ’s LK936ST emerged as the top choice.

    “Our athletes benefit from an experience that’s as close as you can get to being on an actual course,” said Davis. “When we pull up courses, you can see distinct leaves on the trees. That level of realism not only makes training more effective but also more enjoyable.”

    The BenQ LK936ST’s 4K UHD resolution, combined with BenQ’s exclusive Golf Mode, ensures a highly detailed, true-to-life golfing experience. Its 5,100 lumens of brightness allow it to perform exceptionally well in the Marian Athletic Center’s brightly lit environment, ensuring clear visuals even without dimming the lights. Additionally, its short-throw lens and advanced installation tools — such as digital shrink, lens shift, and keystone correction — allow for a flexible and seamless setup within the limited space of the simulator bays.

    “The golf simulation market has grown rapidly as more schools, athletes, and enthusiasts seek ways to improve their game year-round,” said Bob Wudeck, senior director of business development at BenQ America Corp. “With the LK936ST, we’ve provided everything a golf simulator needs to deliver a truly immersive experience. Its 4K resolution, high brightness, and laser-powered color accuracy ensure that golfers can see every detail with precision, whether it’s the grain of the greens or the clear blue sky. By combining these features, we’ve created a projector that meets the high standards required for today’s golf training environments.”

    The BenQ LK936ST is engineered to provide a truly immersive and precise golf simulation experience, making it an ideal choice for Marian High School’s Golf Training Lab. With a 4K UHD resolution powered by Texas Instruments’ DLP chip technology, it delivers razor-sharp visuals and a stunning 3,000,000:1 contrast ratio, which allows for enhanced graphics and a lifelike recreation of the world’s top golf courses. Its exclusive Golf Mode, designed specifically for golf simulation, reproduces the vivid greens and brilliant blues of fairways and skies, offering 92% of the Rec. 709 color gamut for true-to-life color accuracy. This unprecedented visual fidelity helps golfers maintain their focus and engagement, simulating real-world conditions to perfect their game.

    In addition to its color and image quality, the LK936ST is designed to excel in challenging environments. The projector’s short-throw lens (0.81-0.89) and 1.1x zoom capacity make it easy to install outside of the swing zone, projecting a large image without casting shadows on the screen. Digital shrink, offset, lens shift, keystone correction, and corner fit provide advanced installation flexibility, enabling perfect alignment with the screen, even in tight or unconventional spaces like garages, basements, or smaller training rooms.

    Built for long-lasting, maintenance-free operation, the LK936ST features a sealed IP5X-rated dustproof optical engine, eliminating the need for filter changes and ensuring optimal performance even in dusty environments. Its laser light source guarantees 20,000 hours of use with consistent color and brightness, far outlasting traditional lamp-based projectors. The projector also offers instant power-up without the need for warm-up or cool-down times, allowing golfers to jump straight into their training. With multiple HDMI inputs and networking options, it integrates easily with other entertainment or training components, making it a versatile centerpiece for not only golf simulations but also home theater and gaming setups.

    More information on the BenQ LK936ST 4K HDR short-throw golf simulator projector is available at bit.ly/3na585n.

    About BenQ America — Business & Education Solutions
    The No. 1 selling global projector brand powered by TI DLP technology, according to Futuresource, the BenQ digital lifestyle brand stands for “Bringing Enjoyment and Quality to Life,” fusing ease of use with productivity and aesthetics with purpose-built engineering. BenQ is a world-leading human technology and professional solutions provider serving the enterprise, education, and entertainment markets. To realize this vision, the company focuses on the aspects that matter most to users, redefining traditional technology with innovative capabilities that increase efficiency, enhance learning, and amplify entertainment — all while ensuring a healthy, safe, and intuitive user experience. BenQ’s broad portfolio of professional installation solutions includes digital, laser, and interactive projectors; premium flat panels; and interactive large-format displays that take visual enjoyment to new heights in corporate offices, classrooms and lecture halls, and home theaters. The company’s products are available across North America through leading value-added distributors, resellers, and retailers. Because it matters. More information is available at www.BenQ.com.

    All trademarks and registered trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.

    Image Link:
    www.ingearpr.com/BenQ_Marian_High_School_Golf_Lab_2.jpg
    www.ingearpr.com/BenQ_Marian_High_School_Golf_Lab_1.jpg
    www.ingearpr.com/BenQ_Marian_High_School_Golf_Lab_4.jpg
    www.ingearpr.com/BenQ_Marian_High_School_Golf_Lab_3.jpg
    Image Caption: Marian High School Chooses BenQ’s LK936ST Golf Simulator Projector for New Golf Training Lab

    Follow BenQ America Corp.
    Blog: https://www.BenQ.com/en-us/business/resource.html?category=Trends%20and%20Knowledge
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BenQNorthAmerica
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/BenQnorthamerica/
    LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/BenQ-america/
    Twitter: https://twitter.com/BenQamerica
    YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqz1hlN9lW1mfUe4_XMEo2A/featured?

    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)



    Source link

  • The Importance of Teacher Training in Education Technology

    The Importance of Teacher Training in Education Technology

    education-technology-childhood-early-parents

    Technology is an essential aspect of teaching and learning, and the integration of technology into early childhood education classrooms is reshaping childcare. And while many of today’s early childhood teachers are comfortable with technology, many are nervous to learn something new or do things differently.

    That’s where teacher training can help. Let’s take a look at why your childcare center’s teachers must be trained to take advantage of education technology! 

    Enhancing communication with parents

    The average smartphone owner uses 10 apps per day and 30 apps each month, according to the app company Builtfire. That number is even higher for millennials, the largest group of today’s parents. Almost a quarter of this age group open an app more than 50 times a day!

    These parents expect real-time updates about what their child is doing in your daycare. Your teachers must be trained to send photos, videos, and notes throughout the day to keep families happy. Choose an app with family engagement capabilities that is easy to use and part of an all-in-one childcare software solution. Then sharing updates won’t require much training so your teachers can spend their time learning about other ways to use technology.

    Plus, this transparency creates a supportive learning environment!

    Access to a wealth of resources

    If your teachers are not trained to use education technology, they will miss out on access to educational content from around the world and children will not reap the benefits either. 

    A study by the American Academy of Pediatrics found there is “emerging evidence to suggest that interactive apps may be useful and accessible tools for supporting early academic development.” Your teachers must be trained to take advantage of these apps, while understanding that screen time must be limited.

    Online libraries, databases, and educational websites provide information on virtually any topic, allowing teachers to supplement their curriculum with up-to-date materials. This accessibility ensures that both teachers and young learners can expand their knowledge beyond traditional textbooks.

    Education technology saves time

    The 2024 Child Care Management Software Industry Trends Report from Procare Solutions found that about 30% of survey respondents said each teacher spends between three and five hours a week doing lesson planning, and a similar percentage noted their centers create their own curriculum.

    So, beyond direct instruction, technology can significantly reduce the time teachers spend on these types of tasks, and on assessments and other paperwork. Childcare management software can streamline time-intensive processes, giving teachers more time to focus on what truly matters — the children in their care. 

    A strong digital curriculum that’s easy to use supports your teachers by handling lesson planning that takes time away from children. When childcare centers equip teachers with state-of-the-art online curriculum at their fingertips, teachers and young learners reap the benefits of education technology.

    How to encourage your teachers to embrace education technology

    To maximize the benefits of technology, ongoing professional development is essential. Employee retention rates rise by 30-50% when companies prioritize staff learning!

    Workshops, webinars and websites that offer professional development and credentials can help teachers stay abreast of the latest technological advancements. 

    By investing in continuous training, your childcare center can ensure that teachers are confident and competent in integrating technology into their classrooms.

    To learn more, visit www.procaresolutions.com

    Source link

  • Quality Matters Training – Hot Lunch Tray

    Quality Matters Training – Hot Lunch Tray

    In May 2017 I completed Quality Matters Reviewer training. I completed it as part of a subscription my K12 district purchased and was the QM Coordinator for that district 2017-2022.It has been a touchstone for me as I lean into online education.

    Context

    At the time of my initial training, I was an in-person teacher trainer and professional developer working in the Technology Department. I specifically worked with classroom teachers to blend their content online the training was transformational. I have now experienced deep looks at online content and now see how extensive, how detailed a complete course review is. I realize now, I have always been starting the online content shift and never finishing it.

    Since my initial training, the QM Rubric(s) and the mindset shift has meant different things to me.

    Employment Opportunities

    Since completing the training I have added many experiences to my resume. I have been paid for all of these experiences and encourage anyone who can to become a QM certified reviewer. I teacher at two different colleges in instructional designer/technologist courses. I have contracted to create complete online courses for adult professional learning courses. I have contracted to author lectures for online courses based on course and modules objectives. I have contracted to “pre-review” course before colleges submit them for QM Certification. I contract directly with Quality Matters to complete course reviews. And I have implemented a learning management system (LMS) from the request for proposal (RFP) through a two year road map.

    Not all of these opportunities were because of my certification, but also the perspective it provided me.

    Perspective

    Thinking about online course content through the lens of the QM rubric helps me understand what I am and what I should be experiencing in on online course.

    Personally, my oldest son transitioned to an online high school in his sophomore year for his unique scheduling needs. Considering the QM rubric, his courses are what they should be; considering what I used to do in my in-person classroom I found the course experience less than…. but this helped me see what is the school learning versus what is the experience learning he has available to him.

    Now when I look at online courses I intuitively understand – and am still explaining to many K12 classroom teacher – the academic content is distilled to the most straightforward content and learner experiences only. When a in-person classroom teacher tells me “that isn’t real school” I think to myself, but it is what you say you want to do.

    In my son’s situation, school distilled down to the required learning allows he to be immersed in his in-person real world learning.

    Professional Learning

    In 2021, I guided our longest standing K12 online instructors in the district (Foreign Languages & Physical Education) through a Quality Matters self-review. The self-review differs from a QM review, but in this case we used the opportunity to meet as a professional learning community (PLC) to compare the QM rubric to the most mature online offering. This course had been revised over a number of years. When we applied the rubric to the course we discussed many instructor dispositions and assumptions. These discussions generated a dialogue of improvement in content creation, moving the course into alignment with the rubric. The most interesting part of the process was to listen to these course creators and practitioners discussing the way the students interacted with the content.

    As I have reviewed and created online courses I have increased my capacity to view courses from the perspective of author, teacher, and learner. I would recommend this activity to any PLC involved with online courses.

    Virtual Vanguard Homepage

    I woudl encourage all educators to consider if either a Quality Matters K12 or Higher Education reviewer course or certification is right for you.

    Source link

  • AI in Practice: Using ChatGPT to Create a Training Program

    AI in Practice: Using ChatGPT to Create a Training Program

    by Julie Burrell | September 24, 2024

    Like many HR professionals, Colorado Community College System’s Jennifer Parker was grappling with an increase in incivility on campus. She set about creating a civility training program that would be convenient and interactive. However, she faced a considerable hurdle: the challenges of creating a virtual training program from scratch, solo. Parker’s creative answer to one of these challenges — writing scripts for her under-10-minute videos — was to put ChatGPT to work for her. 

    How did she do it? This excerpt from her article, A Kinder Campus: Building an AI-Powered, Repeatable and Fun Civility Training Program, offers several tips.

    Using ChatGPT for Training and Professional Development

    I love using ChatGPT. It is such a great tool. Let me say that again: it’s such a great tool. I look at ChatGPT as a brainstorming partner. I don’t use it to write my scripts, but I do use it to get me started or to fix what I’ve written. I ask questions that I already know the answer to. I’m not using it for technical guidance in any way.

    What should you consider when you use ChatGPT for scriptwriting and training sessions?

    1. Make ChatGPT an expert. In my prompts, I often use the phrase, “Act like a subject matter expert on [a topic].” This helps define both the need and the audience for the information. If I’m looking for a list of reasons why people are uncivil on college campuses, I might prompt with, “Act like an HR director of a college campus and give me a list of ways employees are acting uncivil in the workplace.” Using the phrase above gives parameters on the types of answers ChatGPT will offer, as well as shape the perspective of the answers as for and about higher ed HR.
    2. Be specific about what you’re looking for. “I’m creating a training on active listening. This is for employees on a college campus. Create three scenarios in a classroom or office setting of employees acting unkind to each other. Also provide two solutions to those scenarios using active listening. Then, create a list of action steps I can use to teach employees how to actively listen based on these scenarios.” Being as specific as possible can help get you where you want to go. Once I get answers from ChatGPT, I can then decide if I need to change direction, start over or just get more ideas. There is no wrong step. It’s just you and your partner figuring things out.
    3. Sometimes ChatGPT can get stuck in a rut. It will start giving you the same or similar answers no matter how you reword things. My solution is to start a new conversation. I also change the prompt. Don’t be afraid to play around, to ask a million questions, or even tell ChatGPT it’s wrong. I often type something like, “That’s not what I’m looking for. You gave me a list of______, but what I need is ______. Please try again.” This helps the system to reset.
    4. Once I get close to what I want, I paste it all in another document, rewrite, and cite my sources. I use this document as an outline to rewrite it all in my own voice. I make sure it sounds like how I talk and write. This is key. No one wants to listen to ChatGPT’s voice. And I guarantee that people will know if you’re using its voice — it has a very conspicuous style. Once I’ve honed my script, I ensure that I find relevant sources to back the information up and cite the sources at the end of my documents, just in case I need to refer to them.

    What you’ll see here is an example of how I used ChatGPT to help me write the scripts for the micro-session on conflict. It’s an iterative but replicable process. I knew what the session would cover, but I wanted to brainstorm with ChatGPT.

    Once I’ve had multiple conversations with the chatbot, I go back through the entire script and pick out what I want to use. I make sure it’s in my own voice and then I’m ready to record. I also used ChatGPT to help with creating the activities and discussion questions in the rest of the micro-session.

    I know using ChatGPT can feel overwhelming but rest assured that you can’t really make a mistake. (And if you’re worried the machines are going to take over, throw in a “Thank you!” or “You’re awesome!” occasionally for appeasement’s sake.)

    About the author: Jennifer Parker is assistant director of HR operations at the Colorado Community College System.

    More Resources

    • Read Parker’s full article on creating a civility training program with help from AI.
    • Learn more about ChatGPT and other chatbots.
    • Explore CUPA-HR’s Civility in the Workplace Toolkit.



    Source link