<![CDATA[Young Education Professionals

<![CDATA[Young Education Professionals - YEP DC Recess Blog]]>Mon, 18 May 2026 05:12:07 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[Building Consensus around the Need for School Diversity]]>Wed, 10 May 2017 19:24:46 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/building-consensus-around-the-need-for-school-diversity

Today's post was written by Kimberly Quick and Jenna Tomasello of Learn Together, Live Together. LTLT is a diverse, bipartisan coalition of youth, young adults, and parents passionate about promoting, racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity in schools. Their mission is to educate and build public and political will for voluntary efforts that promote school diversity by fostering and framing conversations, identifying and upholding research-supported best practices, and advocating for a wide-range of policies and programs at the national, state, and local levels.

Kimberly is a policy associate at The Century Foundation, where she writes and conducts research on student assignment processes, school desegregation, tracking and within-school segregation, school disciplinary disparities, and voucher use and civil rights violations. She also provides guidance and support to school districts and charter networks who currently have or are interested in implementing diversity initiatives. Jenna is a policy associate at the American Youth Policy Forum, where she develops learning events and disseminates policy and practice guidance to frame issues, inform policy, and convene conversations that improve education and the lives of disadvantaged students and youth. Follow them on Twitter @KQuickTCF and @jenna_tomasello .

Most American students learn about the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education. We recall the facts of Brown presented like this: prior to Brown, schools were segregated by race; there were white schools and black schools; there were white water fountains and “colored” water fountains. We learned Brown overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” doctrine, deeming “separate educational facilities inherently unequal” and segregation illegal.

As a student, Jenna couldn’t imagine a world of separate schools or water fountains. The thought of the handful of black kids in her school using separate bathrooms, standing in separate lunch lines, and working at separate desks was absurd. How could this have ever been okay? Wow, she thought, I’m sure glad to be alive today and not during the 1950s. We have come so far.

Kimberly’s reaction was vastly different. Her father had integrated his middle school as a 12-year-old black boy in Greensboro, North Carolina, after much prayer on the part of his family and a great deal of vitriol from his community. As she looked around her own middle school thirty years later, Kimberly saw a school building where children of different races and classes walked through the same schoolhouse doors but learned in different classes, ate lunch at different lunch tables, and seemed to be disciplined by different policies. When she thought about Brown, she wondered, Is this really what my father fought for?

Despite our different perspectives, neither of us knew the severity and pervasiveness of school segregation today when we learned about Brown. We were taught the decision had taken care of that racist practice. But in reality, the 1950s were not that long ago, and the struggle to achieve the spirit of Brown didn’t end with the banging of a judge’s gavel.

The truth is that school segregation is alive and well today. In fact, we’ve both lived some version of it. Growing up in a predominately white working-class suburb and attending a predominately white public school, Jenna realized later that having only a handful of black peers was an indication of her school’s lack of diversity. And even though Kimberly’s school was slightly more diverse, she remembers feeling isolated in her advanced classes, oftentimes as the only black student.

Significant progress has been made since the Jim Crow era. But to say school segregation ended with Brown because it is no longer legal to separate students by race is misguided.

Nationwide, more than one-third of all black and Latino students attend schools that are more than 90 percent nonwhite, and for white students, those statistics are reversed: more than a third of white students attend schools that are over 90 percent white. Our schools are also stratified by socioeconomic status. The percentage of schools that were both high poverty and 75 to 100 percent Black and Hispanic rose from 9 percent in the 2000-2001 academic year to 16 percent in the 2013-2014 academic year.

The increasing prevalence of “double segregation” (students isolated by both race and class) and “triple segregation” (isolation by race, class, and language) is alarming. We live in a nation where we not only see stark racial and income inequality but also divides on how we talk to and hear one other, empathize with one another, and regard one another through our actions or through the policies for which we advocate.

DC is in no way immune to these patterns. In fact, as the city becomes more racially and economically diverse, it is not leading to diverse learning environments for children. Nearly 71 percent of black public school students in DC go to “apartheid schools” – schools that are either completely non-white or within one percent of absolute segregation. A typical black student attends a school that is over two-thirds low income, whereas white students in DC and the surrounding suburbs typically attend schools that are not only substantially white, but where around 75 percent of their classmates come from middle class or more affluent families.

Diverse schools are more than just a social justice imperative. Desegregation is also a concrete method to improve academic outcomes for marginalized students, begin to remedy past inequities, and bolster our social and economic future. Socioeconomically and racially diverse schools improve student achievement, reduce racial bias, promote critical thinking, and encourage creativity.

The racial achievement gap in K-12 education narrowed more rapidly during the peak years of school desegregation during the 1970s and 1980s than it has during the last 30 years, when desegregation has been deemphasized and replaced by accountability policies. And the gap didn’t narrow under desegregation because white achievement declined, but because minority achievement rose.

This data makes sense given that integration leads to more equitable access to important resources such as structural facilities, highly qualified teachers, challenging courses, and it also elevates rates of parent volunteerism, funding, and social and cultural capital.

We need leaders in education, across the political spectrum, to recognize that school diversity is an important and effective strategy to improve the social, emotional, civic, and academic outcomes of all students. While integration has been long perceived to be a court-mandated, top-down process, many local education agencies and school districts have begun to voluntarily diversify their schools. Beyond that, the millennial generation of young thinkers, advocates, parents, and students increasingly believe that diversity matters.

Our new organization, Learn Together Live Together (LTLT), was founded to seize this moment and organize those leaders. LTLT envisions a world where all children have access to diverse, equitable, and inclusive learning environments that will allow them to flourish academically, socially, and as adults in an increasingly diverse world. Our mission is to educate the public and build political will for voluntary efforts that promote school diversity by fostering and framing conversations, identifying and upholding research-supported best practices, and advocating for a wide-range of policies and programs at the national, state, and local levels.

Our stories – Jenna’s surprise upon discovering the durability of school segregation and Kimberly’s firsthand experience with poorly devised diversity policies – are not unique. However, they don’t have to be perpetuated. Together, we can start a movement that teaches about where we have been, makes clear how far we have to go, and provides a path forward, paved by the next generation of researchers, community members, students, and parents who believe in the promise of school diversity.

]]><![CDATA[The Power of a Positive Interaction: Using Asset-Based Engagement Strategies]]>Wed, 03 May 2017 15:18:45 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/the-power-of-a-positive-interaction-using-asset-based-engagement-strategies

Today's post was written by Amanda Klein, owner of Structured Solutions, LLC, an educational consulting firm that supports schools, districts, and nonprofit organizations with their family engagement efforts and attendance interventions. Follow her on Twitter @akleinedu.

When I was a middle school teacher several years ago, there was one student whose mother I could never reach. By the second year I had Christopher in class, I had yet to meet or speak with his mother even once. I naively made assumptions about why we did not have a working phone number for her or why she never attended his IEP meetings, but in general, I had no need to reach her. Like most middle school students, Christopher got into the occasional squabble with his peers, but he rarely did anything that caused a problem in class. My biggest concern with Christopher was that, well, he didn’t do much at all. I knew that he struggled academically, and while I attempted to differentiate my assignments for him, he made little progress in sixth or seventh grade.

Having already assumed that I would not reach his mom, I called home one day – to do my due diligence – and was shocked that someone picked up. I couldn’t believe that after all this time, Christopher’s mom was actually on the phone. We chuckled when we realized he had given me his personal cell phone number to prevent any calls from reaching his mom but had let her borrow his phone for the day. Christopher’s mom was lovely, and she was deeply invested in making sure that her son did the best he could in school. My assumptions about her disengagement had been totally wrong – in fact, his mom worked double shifts as a city bus driver to support her family, which was the reason she was not able to attend daytime meetings at the school. We were both grateful to connect, and we began to communicate more regularly.

While Christopher was angry at first that I had called his mom, he slowly realized that I would also call her when he had a good day in class or to tell her how hard he was working. Over time, I saw a dramatic change in his demeanor and behavior simply as a result of the positive working relationship his mom and I had developed to support him. Christopher went from being one of my most disengaged students to one who did all of his work – even though he truly struggled – and who defended me if his classmates got out of hand. As for me, my eyes had been opened to the power of family engagement and the impact it can have on our students.

Too often, teachers do not have the funny moment I did, where contact that has been prevented by a student’s scheming is initiated because of a slip-up on their part. Too often, in teachers’ minds, that absent parent begins to represent everything wrong with the school, the community, and the child. Too often, a few negative interactions with students’ parents begins to color how teachers see family engagement overall.

My work now aims to help schools, districts, and community partners challenge their assumptions about families. By taking an asset-based approach to engagement, we do not ignore challenges or weaknesses but instead highlight strengths and positive attributes in the various ways families and the community support students. This approach focuses on what families bring to the table in support of their children’s education – no matter how large or small – and leverages those contributions towards making improvements in other areas. In doing so, everyone involved feels affirmed, safe, and appreciated – and they are consequently more likely to make efforts towards strong home-school relationships.

The great thing for busy educators is that an asset-based approach to engagement requires few, if any, resources and little extra work. Instead of only sending home negative notes or making concerned phone calls, teachers can add in some celebratory outreach. Schools can applaud improvement, even on a small scale, to show students and families that their efforts are recognized and appreciated. Most importantly, educators can reframe their assumptions and attitudes about families – like I had to do – to find the positives in each situation. This will not always be easy, but it is critical for building partnerships with families around the education of their children. Families like Christopher’s taught me that a little bit of positivity yields great results, and I strive to help schools see and practice that in their daily work.

]]><![CDATA[Letter to members from the president of YEP-DC]]>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 20:49:44 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/letter-to-members-from-the-president-of-yep-dcDear YEP-DC Members,

On behalf of the YEP-DC Leadership Team, I would like to wish you and your families Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!

We are thankful for your membership! We are also thankful for your participation in many of our activities this year whether our Partnership Happy Hours, YEP- Policy to Practice Conference, Inaugural Mentorship Program, our 2 EduJob events, our inaugural Education and Equity series, our 2nd annual Next Steps Professional Development series and other events. We started an Adopt-a-School program with Payne Elementary School, where we raised $350 for books for their students. We held a survey regarding your outlook in the education world. We are thankful for our writers on Recess blog and for organizations that post on our YEP-DC Postings..

We are thankful for you for supporting these events and sharing it with your friends and colleagues. This could not have been done without you. I'm incredibly thankful for the YEP-DC Executive Board and the Leadership Team for their hard work in putting these events together.. I'm thankful for our YEP-DC Advisory Committee for their advice and assistance in providing resources to our organization.

It has been a growing year for us and we look forward to continuing many of the programs we offer year-round in order to prepare your for the next steps in your education career. We will be holding our first membership awards on Feb. 2nd as part of our YEP-DC Members Reception. We ask for your nomination of colleagues who should be recognized by YEP-DC.

We are already at work for our events such as EduJobs (Late February), Policy to Practice Conference (Early May), and other new professional development and community engagement events. Our hope as an organization is to be an assistance in your educational career. So we welcome your thoughts, let us know what events you would like to see or if you want to volunteer with us.

As we close 2016, there are changes on the horizon as we will be having a new U.S. Secretary of Education and a new DCPS Chancellor. But, this provides an opportunity for YEP-DC to be in the forefront and grow our members to be the drivers of change in education here in DC and in our nation.

We wish you the best and we look forward to having you join us at our events in 2017!

Sincerely,

Emmanuel Caudillo
YEP-DC President]]><![CDATA[The Obama Administration Made A Significant Effort to Address Sexual Assault on College Campuses. Here's How Congress Can Keep the Momentum Going.]]>Fri, 16 Dec 2016 21:11:40 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/the-obama-administration-made-a-significant-effort-to-address-sexual-assault-on-college-campuses-heres-how-congress-can-keep-the-momentum-goingCampus sexual violence has garnered increased attention since the Department of Education warned colleges and universities in 2011 that failing to appropriately handle sexual assault cases could result in the loss of federal funding. Using Title IX, which prevents any educational program that receives federal assistance from discriminating against someone based on their sex, the Obama administration worked to ensure that the issue of sexual assault on campus was being adequately addressed.

The statistics on the extent of the problem are sobering. According to the National Sexual Violence Research Center, one in five women will be sexually assaulted while in college, along with one out of every 16 men. What’s more, the vast majority of these survivors – 80 percent, to be exact – never report these incidents to the police, according to data from RAINN. Common reasons for not reporting include fear of retaliation from the perpetrator and his or her friends, a belief that the police cannot or will not do anything to help, and feeling the incident was not important enough to bring to the attention of authorities. Simply put, we have to do more not only to combat incidents of sexual violence, but also to create campus environments in which survivors feel safe coming forward.

But some worry that the incoming administration change could threaten much of the progress that has been made in the past five years to hold schools accountable for their investigations into sexual assault allegations. At this point, analysis of President-Elect Donald Trump’s priorities for education policy is mostly speculative. During his campaign, Trump rarely addressed education issues and said that the Department of Education could be “largely eliminated.” Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, has not commented on how she plans to handle campus sexual assault, but advocates are worried that, under a president who has himself been accused of sexual assault, Title IX enforcement may be at risk.

Congress, however, could still pass legislation to address the issue, and several bipartisan bills that have been introduced suggest there is genuine desire on both sides of the aisle to work toward safer campuses:

The Campus Accountability and Safety Act (CASA) (H.R. 1310/S. 590). Introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and in the Senate by Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), this bipartisan legislation would strengthen reporting requirements under the Clery Act for schools that receive federal funding. The bill would also require them to enhance their campus security policies, among other changes.
The HALT Campus Sexual Violence Act (H.R. 2680). This bipartisan legislation was introduced by Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) and Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-PA), and has garnered nearly 100 cosponsors. It would, among other things, require the U.S. Department of Education to publicly disclose schools that are under Title IX investigation, and would strengthen penalties for schools that are found to be in violation.
The SOS Campus Act (H.R. 1490/S. 706). Introduced by Rep. Susan Davis (D-CA) in the House and by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) in the Senate, this legislation would require schools that receive federal funding to have designated, independent on-campus advocates to work on sexual assault prevention and response. (Some schools have already hired such advocates on staff voluntarily.)
The Campus Sexual Assault Whistleblower Protection Act (H.R. 5972 ). Introduced by Rep. Speier, this legislation takes aim at some of the recent incidents of assault survivors being charged with and punished for “honor code” breaches. It would provide protection for students who come forward to report assault, either against themselves or others, from these violations or other forms of retaliation from school administrators.

From the broad bipartisan coalition that stood together on the House floor in June to read a victim statement in full to the more than 80 members who have signed on as supporters of the HALT Act, both parties seem to be in agreement that there is more Congress could be doing to protect students from sexual assault. And the Survivors’ Bill of Rights Act, which formally codifies the right of sexual assault survivors to receive a comprehensive forensic exam free of charge and have their rape kits preserved, passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both chambers and was signed into law.

With 114th Congress adjourned, none of the proposed legislation will pass before the next Congress convenes, but the bills could be reintroduced in 2017. The next Congress will also have the (overdue) reauthorization of the Higher Education Act on its agenda, which will present new opportunities to address campus sexual assault legislatively.

Finally – and perhaps most importantly – this is an area where Congress can only do so much. At its heart, this issue is about culture. How can we create a culture where students understand the concept of consent and know how to get ask for it? Where we don’t rush to blame a survivor by asserting that he or she must in some way be at fault? Where schools have procedures in place that allow them to fairly adjudicate cases and punish those found guilty in a meaningful way?

While the federal government, as well as state and local lawmakers, can certainly do their part to strengthen accountability measures, a good deal of this will require the collective efforts of students, parents, college faculty and administrators, and the media. These groups have already made notable progress. After sharing her story of sexual assault, for example, 17-year-old survivor Chessy Prout helped launch #IHaveTheRightTo, “a social media campaign that engages participants to be a positive force for change bringing safety and respect to pop culture.” And after an Access Hollywood recording of Donald Trump making lewd comments about sexual assault became public, author Kelly Oxford inspired more than one million women to share their stories via Twitter.

How do we go about creating cultural change? It’s easier said than done, but I would love to hear your thoughts and suggestions. Have you been involved in efforts to create safer and more accountable campuses? What do you think of the bills highlighted above? And what could we all be doing more of to ensure that no one has to spend his or her college years feeling unsafe? Feel free to comment below, or respond to me via Twitter!

Lydia Hall is a legislative aide in the U.S. House of Representatives, where she works on education, civil rights, and other issues. A graduate of Tufts University and of Teachers College at Columbia University, where she studied sociology and education with a concentration in policy, Lydia is interested in helping to bridge the gap between Capitol Hill and the classroom. Feel free to connect with her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

]]><![CDATA[A Friendly Reminder that True Change Happens at the Local Level: YEP-DC MEMBERS WEIGH IN ON PRIORITY ISSUES FOR OUR COMMUNITY]]>Tue, 01 Nov 2016 19:49:22 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/a-friendly-reminder-that-true-change-happens-at-the-local-levelIf you’ve been feeling abnormally stressed this election season, the good news is you’re not alone. According to the American Psychological Association, 52 percent of American adults are experiencing heightened levels of stress due to the 2016 election. This campaign vitriol, which many DC residents have experienced as a low simmer over the past year, has begun to reach full boil – and this has taken a deleterious toll on our optimism. We recently conducted a survey of YEP-DC members and found that only 18 percent feel the country is on the right track (compared to 70 percent that believe the country is “somewhat” on the right track).

This is possibly due in part to the fact that, with the focus of the election fixed on the latest gaffe or scandal, neither political candidate is talking about the issues that most substantially affect our community. In the aforementioned survey, YEP-DC members widely agreed that two of the most important issues facing students today are poverty and inequity; neither has gotten much air time from the campaigns.

Poverty is an urgent concern for students and educators in Washington, DC. According to the DC Fiscal Policy Institute, 18 percent of the population in 2012 lived below the federal poverty line. For children, this finding is even more pronounced, at 27 percent. Sure, Washington, DC is growing and developing rapidly – the population is projected to surpass one million in the next 30 years, propelled by a job growth rate of 13 percent. But as Brookings points out, neighborhoods in DC – and by proxy, the jobs, services, schools and other benefits that come with development – are increasingly divided based on factors such as race, poverty and education. As DC grows, who will benefit?

Despite the best efforts of DC educators, high-quality education can only do so much to alleviate the effects of poverty. In his seminal 1966 report on education and equality, James Coleman released what was, at the time, a groundbreaking discovery: that a student’s environment and social context are stronger predictors of future success than school-based inputs such as per-pupil funding and training of personnel. What this meant for policymakers was that education alone couldn’t be the only solution for resolving issues of poverty and inequality. To truly empower students to achieve their best, schools and cities would have to create an environment that targets the most damaging effects of poverty and creates space for students to thrive.

There are already efforts underway in DC to reduce poverty and enrich educational experiences for our city’s students. Take the Flamboyan Foundation for example (full disclosure: I was formerly employed with the organization). Flamboyan has been working with DC schools through home visits and academic parent teacher team (APTT) conferences to create a family-oriented culture and empower parents to play the role of teacher at home. So far, this has had a significant impact on student outcomes. DC students whose families received a home visit had 24 percent fewer absences and were more likely to read at or above grade level than students whose families did not receive a home visit.

Family and community engagement has always been a priority for members of the YEP-DC community. In our recent survey, 94 percent of YEP-DC members said they support strategies to engage parents and families in their children’s education. What’s more, we recently launched a partnership with Payne Elementary School through the Adopt-A-School program to conduct fundraisers, support school-based learning activities, and help build community around student learning. We will release more information about our partnership later this fall.

YEP-DC members also widely support early education, at 92 percent. As a city, Washington, DC is unique in that it offers high-quality PK3 and PK4 schooling for residents. Students in Title I schools are further able to access wraparound services such as family supports, developmental screenings, assistance accessing social services, and vision, hearing, and dental screenings through their schools. These services do not alone eliminate poverty, but they do help reduce some of its effects and help students focus on what matters most: getting an education.

In a few short weeks, the 2016 election will (dare I say, thankfully?) be over. A new president will be sworn into office and begin work implementing a new policy agenda. In DC, residents will also vote for an At-Large City Council member; Council Members for Wards 2, 4, 7 and 8; and State Board of Education members for Wards 2, 4, 7 and 8. Meanwhile, the educators, administrators, researchers, analysts, lawyers and advocates that make up the education community in Washington, DC will continue working on a local education system that allows our city’s children to learn and thrive. Issues like poverty and inequity have a way of weathering presidential transitions, but so too do local efforts to address them.

Austin Estes is the Vice President of Communications and Outreach for YEP-DC and serves as a Policy Associate with Advance CTE: State Leaders Connecting Learning to Work. You can find Austin on Twitter and LinkedIn. ]]><![CDATA[Federal Movement on School Diversity: A Quick Recap]]>Tue, 13 Sep 2016 18:32:47 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/federal-movement-on-school-diversity-a-quick-recap

This post originally appeared on American Youth Policy Forum's Forum for Thought blog.

A substantial body of research demonstrates that all students benefit academically, occupationally, and socially from diverse learning environments; yet, for decades, little emphasis has been placed on promoting racially and socioeconomically diverse schools. However, in recent months, a resurgence of federal attention has been paid to school diversity. Here’s a recap of some of the highlights:

GAO Report
On May 17 – the 62-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education (1954) ruling that deemed school segregation unconstitutional – the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report that found what civil rights researchers have said for decades: that segregation has intensified across racial and socioeconomic lines in our nation’s public schools. According to the recent GAO report, not only are poor, black, and Hispanic students increasingly isolated from their affluent, white peers, but schools with high concentrations of poor students of color (i.e., more than 75 percent of children receive free or reduced-price lunch and more than 75 percent are black or Hispanic) “offered disproportionately fewer math, science, and college preparatory courses and had disproportionately higher rates of students who were held back in 9th grade, suspended, or expelled.” Moreover, the report included case studies of three school districts, located in separate areas of the country, each using different strategies to voluntarily increase racial and socioeconomic diversity, such as utilizing magnet schools, new student attendance zones, and school choice policies.

Dear Colleague Letter
On June 8, the Departments of Education (ED), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Transportation (DOT) held a half-day convening and released a joint Dear Colleague Letter calling for cross-agency collaboration to promote racial and socioeconomic diversity in schools and communities. In acknowledging the benefits of school diversity, ED, HUD, and DOT stressed to state and local agencies the need to begin breaking down the silos between education, housing, and transportation policy and planning. Given the relationship between where a child lives and attends school, and the need for reliable transportation between home and school, the Dear Colleague Letter provides examples of how the education, housing, and transportation sectors could better coordinate efforts to encourage racially and socioeconomically diverse schools and communities.

Stronger Together Bill
On July 12, both the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee and the House Education and the Workforce Committee introduced the Stronger Together School Diversity Act of 2016. The bill would amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and create a $120 million competitive grant program to support new and existing voluntary efforts that promote racial and socioeconomic diversity in schools. Grantees could use funds to “study segregation, evaluate current policies and develop evidence-based plans to address disparities; establish public school choice zones, revise school boundaries or expand bussing services; or create programs to attract students to different schools.” Stronger Together is consistent with President Obama’s 2017 budget and Secretary King’s priority to promote school diversity.

ESSA
Even the nation’s new federal education law – the reauthorized ESEA or the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) – includes language that prioritizes and could be leveraged to incentivize school diversity. As I’ve stated previously, ESSA expanded federal support for charter schools by authorizing more than $1.1 billion in competitive grants by 2020. The law grants priority to applicants that “plan to operate or manage high-quality charter schools with racially and socioeconomically diverse student bodies.” ESSA also reauthorized the Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), authorizing increased competitive grant funding for magnet schools to $4.1 million by 2020. MSAP prioritizes replicating magnet school programs that demonstrate “success in increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of minority groups… by taking into account socioeconomic diversity.” Magnets have been around since the 1960s to promote voluntary, choice-based school desegregation. In fact, the word ‘magnet’ comes from the idea that a school offering a special theme or curriculum could “attract” families to apply and leave their neighborhood school, thus creating a more racially diverse student body. However, as The National Coalition on School Diversity has noted, funding for magnet schools might be in trouble. On July 14, the House Committee on Appropriations recommended no funding for MSAP, which is currently the only federal grant program explicitly dedicated to reducing segregation. Removing the funding from MSAP would significantly limit federal support for school diversity.

As states begin to implement ESSA, mandates outlined under the new law provide another opportunity to promote school diversity. According to Kara Finnigan et al (2016), states could invest in school diversity as a “school turnaround” strategy. Since ESSA requires states to adopt evidence-based interventions for the lowest performing bottom 5 percent of schools, and school diversity is a research-supported strategy linked to improved student outcomes, (when appropriate) states could use this mandate as an opportunity to invest in these schools by turning them into high-quality racially and socioeconomically diverse magnets. Finnigan et al also point out that states could design their new school accountability systems in a way that incentivizes school diversity. My colleagues have recently talked about ESSA’s requirement to include a nonacademic “Fifth Indicator” in state accountability systems to access school quality or student success. According to Finnigan et al, states could incentivize school diversity by incorporating it as one measure of school quality and reward schools that are making progress on becoming more racially and socioeconomically diverse. See here for a summary of ED’s proposed regulations on accountability and state plans under ESSA.

What’s Next?
The recent federal movement on school diversity is exciting, but what does it all mean? Will the GAO report spur more research and awareness about the current reality of school segregation? Will the Dear Colleague Letter lead to a more coordinated effort on behalf of education, housing, and transportation agencies to promote diverse schools and communities? Will Stronger Together become law and provide funding for new and existing school diversity efforts? Will states take advantage of the opportunities available under ESSA through competitive grants and mandates that could be used to incentivize school diversity? We will have to wait and see.

Jenna Tomasello is a Policy Associate at the American Youth Policy Forum. Her work involves the development of learning events and the dissemination of policy and practice guidance to frame issues, inform policy, and convene conversations that improve education and the lives of vulnerable students and youth. Feel free to connect with Jenna on Twitter or LinkedIn.

]]><![CDATA[Beyond ESSA: Five K-12 Education Bills to Watch]]>Tue, 31 May 2016 18:01:14 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/beyond-essa-five-k-12-education-bills-to-watch

In the world of K-12 education, all eyes have been squarely fixed on the ongoing implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) since it was signed into law in December of 2015. But with about seven more months of the 114th Congress to go, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have continued to craft legislation to improve and enhance the K-12 educational experience.

Below are some of the most interesting and promising pieces of legislation that House and Senate lawmakers have recently introduced. While many or even all of these bills may never be signed into law – for reasons ranging from post-ESSA exhaustion to lack of bipartisan support to simply not enough room on Congress’ agenda in an election year – they provide insight into what our elected representatives feel are the most important levers for improving student outcomes. They also open doors for potential work during the next Congress, as ESSA implementation continues.

The STEM Gateways Act
These days, it’s hard to talk education reform – and workforce development – without mentioning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), particularly as ESSA implementation continues. It’s also been well documented that early engagement is crucial to inspiring students to continue pursuing STEM opportunities. The STEM Gateways Act, introduced by Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-MA), would create a competitive grant program for elementary and secondary schools for the development of STEM curricula. The bill also makes special mention of women and minority students and those from low-income backgrounds, who still “remain significantly underrepresented in engineering and computing occupations.” Though it has only Democratic cosponsors as of now, the legislation has earned the endorsement of organizations like the American Association of University Women (AAUW), which called it a “critical step to begin preparing the next generation of STEM professionals.”

The Safe Schools Improvement Act
In a departure from its predecessors, ESSA took into account the importance of non-academic “school climate” factors such as student engagement and safety. It remains to be seen whether that law, given its often vague wording, will decrease the number of bullying incidents reported throughout the country, and so some legislators have sought to pass legislation to more specifically address the issue. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) and Rep. Richard Hanna (R-NY) introduced a bill that would require schools receiving federal funds to create strong, effective anti-bullying programs. With more than 140 bipartisan cosponsors and counting, and the support of prominent advocacy groups like the Human Rights Campaign, the legislation’s chance of passage may be better than average.

The Youth Access to American Jobs Act
Career and technical education (CTE) programs provide a path to secure employment for many students, helping to create a stronger workforce and economy; to that end, CTE has often enjoyed bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, which is not always a given in today’s hyper-partisan environment. Introduced by Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA), this bill would create a pilot program to facilitate manufacturing-focused STEM apprenticeships for students beginning in high school. The bill would also foster partnerships between secondary schools, community colleges, and businesses. The legislation has earned the strong support of the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE), which praised Rep. Larsen for his “dedication to exploring opportunities to increase access to secondary and postsecondary CTE programs.” The bill, however, has only attracted Democratic cosponsors in the House, making its chances of passage somewhat limited.

The Financial Literacy for Students Act
Access to financial literacy education is another issue that disproportionately affects students in poverty compared to their more affluent classmates, which serves to further widen the wealth gap. To combat this, Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-PA) introduced bipartisan legislation to engage schools in the development of financial literacy skills by creating a matching grant program for state K-12 financial literacy programs. Rep. Cartwright’s bill has garnered the endorsement of the National Educational Association (NEA). Notably, President Obama has also made increasing financial literacy a key part of his efforts to create greater economic mobility for American families, speaking to the importance of “empowering every individual with the knowledge, skills, and access to the necessary tools to manage their finances effectively.”

The Counseling for Career Choice Act
A crucial part of the K-12 experience, especially as students enter their high school years, is helping them to make constructive decisions about appropriate next steps – whether they involve a two-year college, a four-year college, a career, or something else altogether. School counselors can play a critical role in guiding young people in the right direction, but students in lower-income communities are less likely than their more affluent peers to have consistent access to college and career counselors. Introduced by Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI) and Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA), the Counseling for Career Choice Act would award grants to states for the development of comprehensive postsecondary counseling programs to provide guidance on both educational and career opportunities. While this legislation has just under a dozen House supporters, it has earned the endorsement of organizations like ACTE, which noted that the bill “would help to ensure that our nation's school counselors have the resources and materials to help students make educated decisions about their future."

While election years aren't always known for being the most productive, legislatively speaking, it would be nice to see lawmakers continue with the good work on K-12 that they began with ESSA. Now I'm curious to see what you think of the above bills – and what other bills should Congress consider? Feel free to comment!

Lydia Hall is a legislative aide in the U.S. House of Representatives, where she works on education, civil rights, and other issues. A graduate of Tufts University and of Teachers College at Columbia University, where she studied sociology and education with a concentration in policy, Lydia is interested in helping to bridge the gap between Capitol Hill and the classroom. Feel free to connect with her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

]]><![CDATA[Talent and Grit are Two Sides to the Coin of Success ]]>Tue, 03 May 2016 19:38:40 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/talent-and-grit-are-two-sides-to-the-coin-of-successIn a February 2016 EdWeek article, “Why I’m Tired of Grit,” retired Kent State Professor of Education James Delisle argues that the emphasis on grit in education is misplaced and overvalued, to the detriment and exclusion of gifted and advanced students. His stance ignores the question of where talent alone gets anyone who doesn’t possess grit and sidesteps any focus on his target demographic of gifted students. Delisle’s piece is woefully myopic and witheringly vexing insofar as any pursuit of success is concerned, academic or otherwise.

He begins, “If you believe Malcolm Gladwell—he of the mindset that 10,000 hours of practice ("grit") will make even the biggest musical sow's ear into a silk purse—both the Beatles and Rory Storm and the Hurricanes should have been equally successful.”

Taking Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000 hours in gritty pursuit of a goal to mean The Beatles and Rory Storm and the Hurricanes should have been equally famous, he argues that the two bands didn’t achieve equal measures of fame because the Beatles had more talent. But Gladwell’s 10,000 hours of practice would only apply to Rory Storm and the Hurricane’s skill at their musical craft. It is not meant to guarantee that they achieve critical acclaim, popular celebrity, or financial success.

Delisle guesses that The Beatles had an “innate…musical genius” “enhanced by practice, but not determined by it” that the Hurricanes didn’t. I don’t know the Hurricanes, so that could be true, but as the majority of people who try to launch a first business know, it is rarely enough to be good at what you’re selling. It is also important to be—or have someone who is—good at selling it. Furthermore, it remains that grit played a key role in catapulting the Beatles’ musical genius to world recognition.

“The concept of grit dismisses all too casually some of the most important factors that pave the road to success” such as, in the case of education, a student’s breakfast on a given day, interest in what they’re learning, and the stigma of “acting smart.”

There is no doubt that the changing circumstances on a given day have major effects on a student’s day-to-day and aggregate success. But it is also true that the granular elements that make up a gritty character—and educators’ recognition of the former and encouragement of the latter—have important impacts on a student’s ability to withstand and overcome those hardships. Strategic and meaningful encouragement of the characteristics that constitute grit means educators must be both aware of and attentive enough to students’ circumstances to help them first identify the sources of their struggle and then to develop the skills and habits to change or work within their constraints.

“By discounting the vital role of genetically endowed abilities in virtually every human dimension—academics, the arts, athletics—advocates of grit are ignoring a century or more of psychology that points to the importance of innate abilities and talents.”

Talent will never beget personal excellence or external success without the presence of grit. A three-year-old who isn’t afraid of being upside down and can turn a crooked but confident cartwheel does not win Olympic medals without years of dedicated practice to overcome regular mistakes, injuries, failures, and sacrifices in other areas of her life.

Author, entrepreneur, and “life enthusiast” Mark Manson proposes that it’s what we are willing to struggle for that determines how successful our dreams will be. He tells the story of his dream to be a rock star, fantasizing and daydreaming about it for hours on end. But he dropped out of music classes—made excuses about it not being a good time, not having enough money, needing to finish school. In the end, he says, “I was in love with the result…I wasn’t in love with the process.”

Grit is teaching students to be in love with the process for the things they love and have talent for, to endure the process for the things they’re required to do; and ideally, to be open to the latter evolving to the former.

It is important for students to learn that they will not always have the choice to commit themselves solely to things they enjoy or that come naturally to them. In school and in life, we must all complete tasks that we don’t find enjoyable. Whether that’s a doctor who loves working with patients, but dreads the paperwork after each visit; an elementary school teacher who loves teaching science, but dreads the English grammar lessons; or a journalist who loves interviewing and writing, but is worn down by constant travel and low pay.

Renown in any field requires talent, but reaching any level of understanding and skill within them also requires grit.

“Nowadays, the mere mention of educating gifted and advanced students separately from others elicits cries of elitism, racism, classism, and too many other "isms" to name. But if you just had a little grit, then everyone could be gifted, right?”

Delisle begins to make a valid point in the idea that “[g]rit attempts to equate unequals as equals.” It is absolutely true that children and young people should be encouraged to develop as unique individuals and to recognize that they are different from the people around them, but it’s reductive to say that grit attempts to make everyone the same. As in any battle for equal rights, equality does not signify or require uniformity. Grit attempts to give every student the preparation and persistence to seize those opportunities that open as they develop and pursue their respective talents, interests, and goals.

A child who isn’t genetically athletic may never be Derek Jeter, but with the right amount of determination and practice, he could very well still become a very good high school ball player—maybe even good enough to secure himself a college scholarship. For kids in underserved communities, that gritty pursuit of a skill, despite lack of “natural” talent, could be a factor that allows them to obtain a college degree.

Gifted and advanced students are categorized by their achievement in scholastic arenas. Academic prowess may indeed be their natural talent, but some gifted and talented students may simply be tenacious in their pursuit of academic excellence and work diligently (ie. with grit!) to get the good grades that qualify them as gifted. Alternatively, they may simply be good at the processes schools often prioritize: memorization, homework completion, test taking. Whether it’s natural talent in a subject, aptitude for the school process, or hard work, gifted and talented students’ achievements are highly commendable and their efforts and talent should be cultivated. But gifted and talented students are not without limitations and in the end, they too will need their own strain of grit to push past them and to truly excel.

Grit is not a quick-fix elixir that promises to turn steel to gold or a kid who’s two years below grade level to valedictorian. It is, however, a tool that students can use to persevere through tasks that they find challenging, to pursue subjects they find exciting, and, yes, to refine and develop their natural talents.

Jennifer Pietropaoli has a background in international education and currently works in global health services. She is a mentor and tutor for secondary school students in DC and writes about assorted topics and perspectives in education.]]><![CDATA[Don’t Call it a Comeback: The Demographic Makeup of the Children of Immigrants]]>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 13:13:27 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/april-28th-2016The children of immigrants are changing classrooms around the U.S. in ways that can have deep implications for education policy in local school districts. All immigrants, regardless of citizenship status, now make up approximately 13.3% of the U.S. population (Migration Policy Institute, 2015) – the highest share of the population since the 1920’s. Their children are now the fastest growing group of youth in the country.

According to data from the American Community Survey by the Urban Institute, this growth is the result of a drop in the number of children with U.S.-born parents and the rise of the number of children with immigrant parents. In effect, the children of immigrants accounted for all of the growth in the population of children in the United States between 2006 and 2013.

But what does this mean for school districts responsible for educating these children? Here are some quick facts about the children of immigrants at a national level from the Urban Institute’s analysis:

Between 2006 and 2013, the percentage of the children of immigrants as a percentage of all youth increased from 21% to 24%.
In 2013, approximately 71% of the children of immigrants spoke another language other than English at home.
The percentage of the children of immigrants who live in linguistically isolated households – referring to households where no one above the age of 14 is proficient in English – was 22% in 2013.

The children of immigrants were also more likely than their peers with U.S.-born parents to live in poverty:

In 2013, the children of immigrants were more likely to live in poverty compared to their peers with U.S.-born parents – 26% versus 19%.
When you consider a different definition of poverty, in 2013, over half of the children of immigrants (55%) lived below 200% of the federal poverty line compared with 39% of their peers with U.S.-born parents.

Here in the DC Metro region (defined as DC, MD, VA, WV) the percentage of children who have immigrant parents as a share of all youth is higher than the national average. In 2013, approximately 37% percent of youth had immigrant parents – a 7% increase from 2006. Moreover, 62% of the children of immigrants speak a language other than English at home.

The majority of immigrant parents in the DMV come from Central America and the Spanish Caribbean, Africa, and the Middle East and South Asia (See Figure 1). This also demonstrates the linguistic diversity children bring to schools.

The case in the DC Metro region, as in many other metropolitan regions, is that due to a combination of job opportunities and affordable living more immigrants are leaving cities, and, as a result, are moving into the suburbs where schools are often less prepared to provide language support for students and their families. In fact, according the Urban Institute, nontraditional immigrant communities saw the most growth in their population of children of immigrants. Historically, these communities have educated predominantly white students, but as their school demographics change, these school districts are starting from scratch to support more diverse student populations. This means investing in translation and interpretation services, recruiting teachers certified to teach English as a second language, professional development on multi-culturalism, and much more (for example, Baltimore County has begun to make investments to support a more diverse student body).

The challenge for all school districts, but particularly in places that have not traditionally educated children of immigrants, is to enact policies that:

Ensure that multilingual students have access to meaningful opportunities to develop their native languages and English skills;
Recruit teachers trained and certified to teach English as a second language; and
Facilitate immigrant parents’ participation in school PTAs and school board elections, regardless of citizenship status.

There is a tendency when discussing population shifts to suggest that we should care more about a specific group of students simply because of increases in their population. This assumes that we didn’t care, or cared less, about these students before. In the case of immigrants and their families, they have been an intricate part of the DC region’s cultural fabric for decades. These children are the future teachers, business people, mothers, fathers, and community leaders in the DC region and nationwide. Yet, despite this, these students are often linguistically segregated in schools and lack access to culturally affirming and rigorous curriculum that acknowledges and celebrates their bilingualism.

By enacting the policy outlined above, school districts with growing populations of children of immigrants have an opportunity to change their approach to educating these children to create inclusive and thriving learning environments.

Moses Palacios is an advocate for student rights and works as a Research Manager for the Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) - a coalition of urban school districts across the nation. He writes on issues regarding the children of immigrants and students learning English as a second language. His views are his own and not representative of CGCS.

]]><![CDATA[Why I'm Still Worried About Testing]]>Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:00:02 GMThttps://www.youngedprofessionals.org/yep-dc-recess-blog/why-im-still-worried-about-testingWhen I was in college, my professor told me that education reform is like a pendulum. It will swing to one side, but eventually it swings back to the other. This explanation was his attempt to offer assurance to his classroom full of pre-service teachers, who were already worried about our country’s reliance on high stakes standardized testing.

Last fall, when President Obama called for reduced testing in schools, I grew optimistic. Maybe the pendulum was finally swinging back the other way. Maybe ESSA would successfully deviate from typical testing indicators and encourage classroom observations, student portfolios and other methods of formative assessment.

Fortunately, there were some improvements. As Anne O’Brien’s article, “5 Ways ESSA impacts Standardized Testing,” lays out, states have the power to limit the amount of time spent on testing. In addition, the elimination of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) somewhat reduces the stakes of high stakes testing.

However, the problems with standardized testing are not limited to the amount of time students spend on them or how high the stakes are. The quality of the test matters, too. That’s why I’m particularly concerned about another way that ESSA changes testing: The new law allows states to use a nationally recognized test, like the SAT, instead of a state level test.

This concerns me for a number of reasons, the first is that we are further corporatizing our schools. The SATs are designed by a national corporation, College Board, rather than teams of local educators and district leaders. In turn, if schools continue to teach to the test, the curriculum will be designed by this corporation as well. As a variety of sources (Huffington Post, Nonprofit Quarterly, Columbia University) have pointed out, although the College Board is technically a non-profit, it is actually quite profitable. In fact, its CEO took home nearly $700,000 in 2014.

I wouldn’t find this quite as terrifying if the organization’s tests were highly effective measures of student learning, but they are far from it. I recall when I was studying for the SAT, and more recently for the GRE, complaining to anyone who would listen that this test was measuring, first and foremost, my ability to take this test.

Spending countless hours learning to take these tests is more than a simple waste of time though. It also perpetuates societal inequities. My time preparing for the SAT wasn’t spent vying for a computer at the local library but rather sitting at the dining room table with a private math tutor. He taught me a little bit of math, though none that I still remember, and mostly he taught me how to take the test.

This is not merely an anecdote, but rather a reflection on larger trends. In 2015, Inside Higher Ed published an article that drew attention to the major gaps between SAT performance and family income levels citing the following alarming statistic.

In each of the three parts of the SAT, the lowest average scores were those with less than $20,000 in family income, and the highest averages were those with more than $200,000 in income, and the gaps are significant. In reading, for example, the average for those with family income below $20,000 is 433, while the average for those with income of above $200,000 is 570 (Jaschik, 2015).

The article also points out that these inequalities are not limited to socioeconomics, but that on average Black and Latino students score lower on the tests than their Asian and White peers, which could be the result of cultural biases.

Colleges are beginning to realize the flaws with these entrance exams. According to the most recent update from the National Center for Open and Fair Testing, more than 850 schools no longer use the SAT/ACT to admit bachelor’s degree students to the majority of their programs. Among them, include elite colleges such as Wesleyan, NYU, GW, Wake Forest and Middlebury. You can find the complete list here.

So with all of this in mind, I’m left with this question:
If these tests are managed by a particularly profitable “nonprofit”…
If they are racially and economically biased...
If they don’t measure authentic learning linked to a rich curriculum…
And if even colleges (for which the test was designed) have begun to stop using them…

Then why are they good enough for our public schools?

In my opinion, the answer is, they’re not. These tests will not accurately measure how much students have learned in a given year. They may not even measure how prepared they are for college. What they will do is continue to provide unfair advantages to students, particularly white ones, who come from wealthy, educated families.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was first authorized in 1965, only 11 years after Brown v. Board. At its heart, the law was a commitment to equity and high quality education for all students. This new provision, seems to work in direct opposition to that goal. If we hope to close the achievement gap and create engaging learning opportunities in all schools, we need to think long and hard about what we’re measuring and why.

Rebecca Bauer is an executive assistant at character.org, and has experience working in a variety of school settings. This post was originally published on the character.org blog, What's Happening in Character Education?

]]>