Noticias relacionadas con la Innovación Educativa
Eight elite private high schools in the Washington area this morning announced that they are dropping out of the Advanced Placement program.
In a joint statement, they said that they were responding to "the diminished utility of AP courses and the desirability of developing our own advanced courses that more effectively address our students’ needs and interests. Collectively, we believe a curriculum oriented toward collaborative, experiential, and interdisciplinary learning will not only better prepare our students for college and their professional futures, but also result in more engaging programs for both students and faculty. We expect this approach will appeal to students’ innate curiosity, increase their motivation, and fuel their love of learning."
The high schools making the announcement are institutions known for educating the children of the powerful of Washington. The schools are Georgetown Day, Holton-Arms, Landon, Maret, National Cathedral, Potomac, St. Albans and Sidwell Friends.
The joint statement says that the schools will phase out AP courses by 2022.
To be sure, these schools are not the first to criticize the AP program. Essays and studies have done that already. In addition, as more states have pushed for the expansion of AP programs in high schools, some have noted high failure rates in schools with limited resources, and have questioned whether high schools with serious education challenges should be focusing money and attention on AP. If educators at public high schools share the concerns of the Washington private schools, some are likely to note that they lack the resources to create the kinds of advanced courses that private schools can offer. Others at public high schools have said that the AP framework, whatever its flaws, encourages high schools to provide demanding courses for top students.
Despite various criticisms, students at competitive high schools flock to AP courses. A record 1.17 million students in the high school Class of 2017 took at least one AP course.
Does AP Really Work?
The AP program, the Washington private high schools say, was started with the goal of helping students finish college early, and yet few students do so.
Many high school students believe, the statement says, that they must take as many AP courses as possible in high school to be competitive for college admissions. So the high schools did a survey of 150 colleges and found that taking AP courses has become so popular that doing so is no longer "noteworthy." Further, "we have been assured by admissions officers that this change will have no adverse impact on our students. The real question for colleges is not whether applicants have taken AP courses, but whether they have availed themselves of their high schools’ most demanding classes."
Further, the high schools argue that they can -- by creating their own advanced courses -- provide a better education than by relying on AP.
"The perception that colleges demand AP courses leads many students, perhaps reluctantly, to pass up other classes they might find more intellectually transformative and rewarding," the statement says. "Concurrently, because AP tests loom so large, faculty teaching these courses often feel pressed to sacrifice in-depth inquiry in order to cover all the material likely to be included on the test. This runs counter to the fact that college courses demand critical thinking and rigorous analysis. AP courses, by contrast, often stress speed of assimilation and memorization. While we acknowledge the recent attempts to develop more skill-based AP tests, we are convinced that focusing on a timed standardized test does not promote inquiry or higher-level discussion among students. Moving away from AP courses will allow us to offer a wider variety of courses that are more rigorous and enriching, provide opportunities for authentic engagement with the world, and demonstrate respect for students’ intellectual curiosity and interests."
A spokesman for the College Board provided this statement on the schools' decision: “Over the past decade, the students at just these D.C.-area independent schools have earned more than 39,000 credit hours at the colleges to which they sent their AP scores. That equates to nearly $59 million in tuition savings at highly selective colleges, not to mention the head start these students received in their majors -- particularly in STEM disciplines. At a time when the placement, credit and admission benefits of AP have never been greater, it’s surprising that these schools would choose to deny their students these advantages.”
Susanna A. Jones, head of school at Holton-Arms, said via email that educators there "have been thinking about the efficacy of APs for almost 10 years."
She said that the college curricula at institutions her graduates attend have changed such that students need "courses that emphasize depth over breadth, critical thinking, research, and interdisciplinary and experiential approaches."
Jones said it was true that one or more of the high schools could have acted independently. But she said that "when we realized that we were all interested in taking this important step because we believe it is what will serve our students best, we immediately recognized the power of collective action. Together, our decision carries more weight as we add our voices to the national discussion of this issue; it also may assuage parental concerns about the impact of the change."
Holton-Arms and the other schools reached out to parents just prior to going public with the plan to drop AP. Jones said that school profiles to be sent to colleges "will include information about our advanced curricula and students’ transcripts will reflect the rigor of their coursework. We conducted our own survey of admissions offices and have been assured that this change will have no adverse impact on our students’ admissions prospects."
While many students have assumed AP is the best college preparation, Jones said that these schools are committed to providing a better educational experience. "As independent schools, we have the freedom to create our own curriculum," she said. "We aim to do much more than get students into college; we want them to thrive in college and find success thereafter."Editorial Tags: AdmissionsBreaking NewsHigh schoolsIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending:
Un niño de cinco años rompe una estatua de 113.000 euros mientras sus padres disfrutaban de una boda
The federal government will not require colleges to publicly disclose data about their vocational programs' graduate employment rates or debt levels -- requirements under the Obama-era “gainful-employment” rule -- until after U.S. Department of Education can rewrite the regulation.
The department announced in a filing Friday that it will postpone the gainful-employment disclosures, which had been scheduled to go into effect next month, until July 2019. It’s the second yearlong postponement for those requirements under Betsy DeVos, the education secretary, who also in January weakened the disclosures by dropping one on graduate earnings.
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans have sought to dismantle the rule, which is based on two debt-to-earnings metrics, saying it unfairly targets for-profit colleges.
"Once fully implemented, the current rules would unfairly and arbitrarily limit students’ ability to pursue certain types of higher education and career training programs,” DeVos said in a written statement last year.
Gainful employment applies to degrees and certificate programs offered by for-profit institutions and to vocational certificate programs at community colleges and other nonprofit institutions -- but not to degree programs on the nonprofit side.
Roughly one in 10 of covered programs would have failed under the rule, the department said in January 2017, just before the Trump administration took over. Fully 98 percent of failing programs were at for-profits.
The Obama administrations worked for years to enact the rule, arguing it would help prospective students make informed decisions about which career education programs are worth the investment and which ones “might leave them worse off than when they started,” as John B. King Jr., then Obama administration's Education Secretary, said in 2017.
A federal court threw out portions of the rule's first draft. But the final version withstood legal challenges, and the courts held that the federal government was within its rights to seek to hold career educational programs accountable with the rule.
DeVos announced the planned do-over for gainful employment one year ago, while also rolling back borrower-defense regulations, which for-profit college advocates and some representatives from historically black and other private colleges had criticized.
The department then appointed negotiators to hash out a revised gainful-employment rule. But the session ended in March without a consensus. So the Trump administration will release its own version to replace the rule by November.
The Education Department said Friday in the Federal Register that it was giving colleges the additional year while it works through the "utility" of requirements under gainful employment.
“As part of this rulemaking process, the department continues to evaluate the efficacy of these disclosures to students, including the manner in which the gainful employment regulations would require institutions make these disclosures, and the burden associated with the implementation of these requirements,” the department said.
Steve Gunderson, the president and CEO of Career Education Colleges and Universities, said his group, which represents for-profit colleges, supports the department's delay while it works on a new rule he anticipates will include "more meaningful and less onerous" disclosure requirements.
"Under the current rule, institutions are still required to provide students and consumers with important program-level data using the department’s approved disclosure template," Gunderson said in a written statement. "This delay simply acknowledges that the various methods for disseminating this information to students under the current rule are not useful for students and burdensome for institutions."
The department's justifications for the delays don't hold water, said Debbie Cochrane, vice president of the Institute for College Access and Success.
When it announced the last postponement, the department said it needed more time to evaluate the use of requirements. "Isn't a year long enough?" Cochrane said. And she noted that the department's inspector general found last year that the burden of the disclosure provisions would be negligible.
"This is simply another step in the department’s efforts to dismantle student protections," Cochrane said in a written statement. "What good are disclosures if you don’t have to show them to anyone? How are students supposed to decide between career education programs if they aren’t given basic information like how much a program costs and how many graduates get jobs?"
Not everyone involved with for-profit higher education will be happy with the latest disclosure delay, said Trace Urdan, an expert on for-profits and managing director at Tyton Partners, a consulting firm.
Urdan said investors want this information and that responsible colleges already are measuring it and managing against it.
"We are involved in a couple of school sales, and gainful-employment data is a core element of due diligence," he said via email. "It's true that the information is backward-looking and that there are some schools that have made responsible changes to programs where the disclosure could cause a repaired program to then fail in the marketplace, but anyone that expects the marketplace to be an effective screen for quality needs to advocate for more and better consumer information."Editorial Tags: Career/Tech EducationFederal policyFor-profit collegesImage Caption: Education Secretary Betsy DeVosIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending:
AAUP votes to censure U of Nebraska for alleged violations of academic freedom in Courtney Lawton case
The American Association of University Professors on Saturday voted to censure the University of Nebraska at Lincoln for alleged violations of academic freedom in a politically loaded case involving an adjunct lecturer.
A Symbolic Punishment
The voice vote, taken at AAUP’s annual meeting in Washington, was decisive and probably unsurprising: Nebraska’s censure seemed likely last month, when the AAUP issued an investigative report on the now locally infamous Courtney Lawton suspension. In that report, the association concluded that the university bowed to political pressure in removing Lawton, a former adjunct instructor of English and current graduate student, from the classroom after she flipped off an undergraduate student activist.
The August incident happened as the undergraduate was campaigning on campus for Turning Point USA, the self-described grassroots conservative organization behind the Professor Watchlist website, which many professors say distorts their views and threatens academic freedom.
In widely shared student video, Lawton calls the undergraduate a “neo-fascist Becky” who “wants to destroy public schools, public universities, hates DACA kids,” and puts up her middle finger.
At first, Nebraska removed Lawton from the classroom citing security concerns. But as Republican state lawmakers began to speak out against Lawton and demand “accountability” with regard to the campus political climate, Nebraska said she would not teach again.
Based on AAUP’s report, administrators now say that Lawton was permanently suspended from teaching because she physically blocked access to the student activist’s table. But Lawton and others who witnessed the incident deny that. Nebraska reportedly says it has a second security video that captures that part of the dispute, but it did not share that video with AAUP.
Stephen Ramsay, Susan J. Rosowski Associate Professor of English at Nebraska, attended the annual meeting and spoke in favor of censure prior to the vote. Identifying himself as the representative for the university’s AAUP advocacy chapter, Ramsay said that this year “has been a very difficult one for my institution.”
Yet he said he agreed with the “disquieting” conclusion of AAUP’s report, that there is "little doubt that political pressure played a significant role in the Lawton case; in one sense, it is at the very heart of it." He encouraged those presenting to vote for censure.
Nebraska has previously criticized AAUP’s report as inaccurate. Deb Fiddelke, a university spokesperson, said in a statement after the vote that AAUP erred in asserting at the meeting that Lawton was not afforded a hearing prior to her suspension.
“It’s shocking the AAUP would base its actions on such conflicting statements and glaring inaccuracies,” Fiddelke said.
AAUP’s report says that Lawton initially agreed to a suspension from teaching, but only because she believed it was for her own safety as her case began to attract attention.
Lifting Sanction and Censure
At its meeting, AAUP also lifted symbolic sanctions or censures from two other institutions.
The University of Iowa saw the removal of a sanction imposed in 2016, over concerns about a failure of shared governance in the presidential search that ended in the hiring of Bruce Harreld. AAUP found in 2015 that the Iowa Board of Regents disbanded a faculty committee involved in the search to gain control over it.
Faculty members at Iowa previously criticized the sanction, saying the campus shouldn’t be blamed for the board’s actions -- even if Harreld was unpopular.
The university referred requests for comment about the vote to Russell Ganim, a professor of world languages on campus and the current Faculty Senate president.
“We are delighted by the news of the sanction removal,” he said in a statement, describing a now-strong “partnership" between the senate, board and local AAUP chapter. “We believe to have established a model of collaboration that will benefit shared governance at [the university] not just now but in the future.”
With AAUP leaders saying they had addressed concerns that resulted in the censure of Stillman College’s administration, the association voted to take that institution off the censure list, too.
Stillman landed on the list in 2009 over concerns about the termination of Ekow O. Hayford, a longtime tenured professor of business. At the time, AAUP found that Hayford was fired without due process after he publicly criticized the president of the college, a historically black institution in Alabama. The college maintained that Hayford had violated a Faculty Handbook prohibition against spreading “malicious gossip.”
AAUP said Saturday that Stillman’s new administration had accepted its annual suggestions about bringing its faculty standards more into line with the norms of academic freedom.
Stillman did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the vote.Academic FreedomFacultyEditorial Tags: Academic freedomAdjunctsIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: University of IowaUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled 7 to 2 Friday that a law society acted reasonably in denying accreditation to a proposed Christian law school because of its policy prohibiting students and faculty from “engaging in sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”
A five-justice majority found that the decision by the Law Society of Upper Canada to deny accreditation to Trinity Western University’s proposed law school “represents a proportionate balance between the limitation on freedom of religion guaranteed” by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms “and the statutory objectives that the LSUC sought to pursue.”
"The LSUC’s enabling statute requires the Benchers [members of the governing board of the law society] to consider the overarching objective of protecting the public interest in determining whether a particular law school should be accredited. The LSUC was entitled to conclude that equal access to the legal profession, diversity within the bar, and preventing harm to LGBTQ law students were all within the scope of its duty to uphold the public interest. The LSUC has an overarching interest in protecting the values of equality and human rights in carrying out its functions," the majority wrote.
Two other justices upheld the LSUC’s decision to deny Trinity Western’s proposed law school accreditation, though they disagreed with some of the five-member majority’s reasoning.
The legal landscape in Canada differs from that of the U.S. However, the Trinity Western case addresses the same kinds of tensions between values of nondiscrimination and religious freedom that can be found at many Christian colleges in the U.S. that have similar codes of conduct prohibiting same-sex activity.
The LSUC, which recently changed its name to the Law Society of Ontario, celebrated the Supreme Court ruling as a vindication of its role in promoting equal access to legal education.
“We are particularly pleased that the court recognized that our statutory mandate to uphold the public interest includes promoting a diverse bar and ensuring that there are no inequitable barriers to those seeking access to the legal profession,” the law society’s treasurer, Paul Schabas, said in a written statement.
The Canadian Association of University Teachers also issued a statement welcoming the ruling. The association said in its statement that it had intervened in the appeals process to argue that the requirement that Trinity Western faculty subscribe to a statement of faith as a condition of employment violates academic freedom and inhibits the protection and promotion of diversity that should be expected in Canadian legal education.
“The majority of the Supreme Court accepted that there is a link between legal education and equality, diversity, and the competence of the legal profession,” said CAUT’s executive director, David Robinson. “This case underlines that it is vital that faculty and students not be constrained by any dogma or proscribed doctrine in any form, as this is the basis for promoting and protecting academic freedom.”
Trinity Western said in a statement it was disappointed in the ruling, which the university said “diminishes the value of pluralistic diversity in Canada.”
“In a very long complex ruling, with four sets of reasons, eight of nine judges agree that TWU’s religious freedom is violated but the majority still uphold the law societies' decision not to approve the law school,” the university said.
“The court ruling constrains TWU’s quest to establish a law school and offer 60 new law school seats to Canadian students.”
Trinity Western, which is located in British Columbia, first began attempting to establish a law school in 2012 but confronted opposition from the law societies in British Columbia and Ontario. The proposed law school was to offer a specialty program in charity law.
Two justices dissented in Friday's ruling, arguing that "the only proper purpose of an LSUC accreditation decision is to ensure that individual applicants are fit for licensing. Because there are no concerns relating to competence or conduct of prospective TWU graduates, the only defensible exercise of the LSUC's statutory discretion in this case would have been for it to approve TWU's proposed law school."
"Moreover, the decision not to accredit TWU's proposed law school is a profound interference with the TWU community's freedom of religion," the two dissenting justices wrote. "It interferes with that community's expression of religious belief through the practice of creating and adhering to a biblically grounded covenant. Even were the public interest to be understood broadly, accreditation of TWU's proposed law school would not be inconsistent with the LSUC's statutory mandate. In a liberal and pluralist society, the public interest is served, and not undermined, by the accommodation of difference."DiversityLegal CasesInternational Higher EducationEditorial Tags: Sexual orientationCanadaReligious collegesInternational higher educationImage Caption: Trinity Western University president Bob Kuhn at Canada's Supreme CourtIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: