, ,

Teachers and Students of California: Samantha

Samantha

“My bubble was bursted. No matter what was happening in their lives or at school, the students knew they could come to me and I’d be there to listen. I would talk to them. They would always try to come to school and if they weren’t doing their homework we would work together to find out why. I feel that they (the students) need to have that loving, caring place – almost like being a family – because you don’t know where these kids are coming from. You don’t know where they wake up. You don’t know what happens in their life. You’re not walking in their shoes at that moment. But if they have somewhere safe then it can start. It can build their security and make them feel empowered, and want to come to school,and want to do work. And you can build up from there.”

Samantha is one of the twenty-six thousand teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District that deal with chronic absenteeism in K-12 classrooms. The teacher turnover rate is almost 40-50 percent according the laschoolreport.com and that equates to approximately $2.2 billion in funding that is lost per year.

CoolSchool Central offers a solution. It Changes Futures.

Names and identifying details have been changed to protect the privacy of individuals.
Special thanks to Pexels for providing the stock image.
And special thanks to laschoolreport.com (http://laschoolreport.com/commentary-the-hidden-crisis-of-teacher-turnover-in-los-angeles-public-schools/)
Founded by SOMAmetrics Marketing Analyst, Winson Truong

winson@somametrics.com

/by
, , ,

Survey: School Social Climate and Bullying

In conducting an initial bullying survey of 92 respondents, we sought to better understand the social climate present within different school campuses, in addition to the currently existing initiatives and challenges schools face in implementing successful SEL and anti-bullying programs. We also gauged the potential interest schools may have in implementing Cool School, a program which combines SEL and anti-bullying.

Of the survey respondents, 83.78% were principals and 14.86% were assistant principals. A majority, 70.27%, worked in elementary schools, while 28.38% worked in middle schools. In surveying the social climate, morale, and absenteeism in schools, the ratings given by respondents was fairly mixed among all grade levels.

Overall Findings

Overall, ratings were leaning more positively toward extremely good and fairly good. In rating social climate, there were no respondents that felt their school’s climate to be extremely bad, indicated by a rating of 5.

School Social Climate

A quarter of respondents found their school climate to be extremely good (24.68%; rating 1), and 48.05% found their social climate to be fairly good (48.05%; rating 2).

In terms of morale, 54.55% of respondents felt that the morale of school staff as a whole was fairly good (rating 2), with 20.78% of respondents finding it to be extremely good (rating 1).

Student Morale

The evaluation of the morale of students was positively skewed towards fairly good as well (53.25%; rating 2), with the second highest rating being extremely good (27.27%; rating 1).

Absenteeism

In regards to absenteeism, other than a single respondent, most of the survey takers indicated experiencing low levels of absenteeism within their school districts (42.86%; rating 2 and 27.27%; rating 1).

SEL Initiative

In terms of currently operating SEL programs and general school funding, half of respondents stated that their school had an SEL initiative program currently in place. For the 50% that had an SEL program, 64.29% of them had an SEL program at the district wide level.

School Funding

Nearly half of respondents (45.45%) stated that state funding for their school was based solely on attendance, while 36.36% stated that it was attendance and enrollment in tandem. It should be noted, however, that the 82.43% of respondents from California gave mixed and occasionally contrasting responses on how state funding was issued and utilized in their state.

Bullying

When surveyed on bullying issues and programs, 44.59% of respondents felt that bullying presented a somewhat serious challenge in their school district. It should be noted that this marked recognition of bullying as a problem in schools contrasts sharply with respondents positively rating the social climate of their facilities.

Despite nearly three quarters of respondents evaluating their school’s climate as extremely good or fairly good, bullying is still identified as a severe issue in nearly half of these same respondents.

Survey takers stated that the types of bullying that concerns them the most is verbal (78.38%), spreading rumors (52.70%), cyber (44.59%), physical (39.19%), exclusion (31.08%), and threats (27.03%). Approximately 7% participants showed concern in almost all categories (excluding damage).

Bullying Prevention Programs

Having recognized bullying as a notable challenge, nearly three quarters of respondents (70.27%) have already implemented programs to prevent bullying in their schools. Of the remaining respondents, 20.27% are currently in the process of implementation and an additional 6.76% have yet to implement a program in their school, but would like to in the near future. Of the programs already in place, 89.86% are ongoing programs.

The majority of schools with one-time programs would like to change over to an ongoing program.

In regards to who the program is designed for, respondents were fairly divided in terms of which grade levels programs were directed towards (8.57% for K-2, 31.43% for 3-4, 27.14% for 5-6, and 32.86% for 6+).

Accessibility of Bullying Prevention Programs

Over half of respondents (61.43%) noted that a significant challenge for these programs in their districts is a lack of accessibility for students and parents. Of the programs currently in operation, 60.98% were accessed only in the classroom through either one-on-one counseling (17.07%) or through PBIS/group counseling (17%). An additional factor barring accessibility is the fact that many schools (81.82%) received no state funding for their program. Of the schools receiving funding, monetary sources that were identified included funding from the district (41.67%) and from grants (25%).

Measuring Outcomes

In measuring the effectiveness of these programs, 64.18% already measure the outcome of their program, while 26.87% do not but would like to. In terms of frequency of measurement, 69.05% measure the outcome of their programs more frequently than once a year, and 19.05% measure annually. There are various ways that schools measure their programs. 35.71% measure the outcome through ongoing evaluation, 26.19% through analyzing changes of other data they gather, and 16.67% use other measures like discipline referrals or a combination of surveys, ongoing evaluation, and data analysis.

Cost of Programs and Lack of Funding

When prompted if they had any potential interest in a complementary program to their existing ones, 68.75% of respondents were not interested. Reasons for not wanting to complement the program included the additional cost/lack of funding, already having several other programs in place, or the need for district approval. However, 43.08% of respondents stated that they would be interested in a program combining SEL and anti-bullying. For the 56.92% that were not interested in this combined program specifically, reasons included the costs of implementing a new program or the existence of an already working program.

/by
, , ,

Addressing Teacher Turnover in Public Schools

Teacher Turnover rates are at an all-time high in public schools, and they are disproportionately impacting kids from low-income households.

“When I applied for my job there were 70 applicants; when we advertised for new teaching positions last year there were three. The drop in numbers is scary – maths and English are struggling to recruit…” remarks Jonathan, teacher and head of his department for five years. Yes, it is getting harder and harder to recruit teachers for our public schools.

Here is what the Federal data tells us:

  • Over 17% of new teachers leave their jobs within four years. Over a quarter of these teachers leave involuntarily due to budget constraints or performance levels.
  • Teachers are more likely to leave if they are over the age of thirty and in their second career.
  • Male teachers are also more likely to leave their careers, as well as Alternative Certification Program teachers. For example, in the year 2011-2012, twenty-one percent of the Alternative Certification Programs teachers left their careers verses the sixteen percent of traditionally certified teachers.
  • Teachers with their first year in a high-poverty area are also more likely to quit or transfer to a more affluent area.

One of the problems that new teachers encounter is the stark contrast between what they envisioned their lives would be as a teacher verses the reality of actually teaching in our public schools. New teachers become overwhelmed by the basic fundamentals of the education system including standards, formal assessments, benchmark tests, collection of data & analysis, phone calls to parents, variability within student comprehension & ability, and advance curriculum planning.

To the new teachers, there seems to be an improper balance between time spent teaching, paperwork, and personal time—creating disillusionment, particularly for new teachers.

Gaby Proctor, 22, former teacher-in-training who quit after three months in the program says, “Now I’m going to work, doing my work and working hard, and I can go home and I don’t have to worry about it at home. There was no downtime with teaching. You have to take it home with you, you don’t have a choice. I have mental health issues anyway, with depression and anxiety disorders, and I found it made them so much worse. The pressure, it’s crazy.”

The Tragedy of Poverty

The real problem, however, is lack of funding, which is especially apparent in poorer areas.

“Low-income students need extra support and resources to succeed, but in far too many places, policies for assigning teachers and allocating resources are perpetuating the problem rather than solving it,” says former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.

The highest teacher turnover rates happen in the very areas that need good teachers—high-poverty areas in inner cities and rural districts.

For example, one reason well-funded schools attract highly qualified teachers is better work conditions. The schools are cleaner, well maintained, and well-provisioned with teaching supplies.

In the Teachers College Record Study of Teaching Conditions in Massachusetts Schools, it was found that 53% of the teachers in more affluent areas believed that their school is “a good place to work and learn,” while only 32% of teachers in the areas with the highest degree of poverty believed the same.

Unfortunately, far too often, socio-economic conditions become reliable predictors of student success.

Experienced Teachers are Leaving

Many teachers within high-poverty districts are leaving these schools. Often, these teachers relocate to school districts in more affluent areas, with better performing students, and less ethnic diversity. In 2013, The American Educational Research Journal stated that this “…results in organizational instability and concentration of less experienced, lower performing teachers, both of which hurt student achievement.”

Low Salary

The “Public School Teacher Attrition and Mobility in the Five Years,” study focused on new teachers that began their careers in 2007-2008. A growing percentage of the teachers did not choose to continue their careers: 10% of teachers did not continue teaching in 2008-2009. This increased to 12% in 2009-2010, then 15%in 2010-2011, and 17% in 2011-2012.

A big reason for the turnover was salary. The study observed that 97% of teachers whose salary their first year was $40,000 or more continued teaching in 2008-2009. Furthermore, 89% of these teachers continued teaching into 2011-2012.

By contrast, only 89% of teachers whose salary their first year was less then $40,000 continued teaching in 2008-2009. This number dropped further to 80% of teachers who continued teaching into 2011-2012.

Wealthier schools with proper funding were able to afford to provide higher salaries. Therefore, they were able to attract and retain more qualified teachers. This further translated to better stability and moral, eventually resulting in more successful students – a sharp contrast to their cohorts in poorer areas.

The Vicious Cycle of Lack of Funding

Lack of funding creates a vicious cycle for schools in lower-income districts:

  • Because of the way schools are funded through local property taxes, these schools already start with less funding when compared with their counterparts in more affluent suburbs.
  • As a result, they have difficulty providing the salary or the working conditions necessary to attract high-quality teachers, or retain them once hired.
  • This high turnover of teachers only exacerbates the truancy rates that these schools already experience. The higher truancy now costs these schools sorely needed Federal funding.
  • With still lower funding, these schools continue to struggle, and lose teachers
  • This results in classroom disruptions, bullying and harassment, further leading to penalties and more truancy.

And the vicious cycle spirals down.

A Solution with a Catch

What can our public schools do to reverse this trend, and attract and retain high-quality teachers?

We know mentoring by seasoned older teachers helps. It is not unusual for new teachers to feel overwhelmed by the amount of work they have to do each day, without seeming to make any apparent impact.

“If I was having a problem with a child, someone would come into the room to observe and give me advice. I felt like they had my back,” says Jennifer Scoggins, 32, a teacher in New York, who is also on her way towards getting her Ph.D.

There is research evidence to support that mentoring programs work. In 2008-2009, 92% of teachers with mentors continued teaching into their second year compared to 84% without mentorship. In 2011-2012, these numbers 86% compared to 71% without a mentor. The results of this study induced the Federal Government to invest $21 million to create twenty-eight teacher-residency programs that provide prospective teachers with hands-on experience.

However, there is catch here. An increasing number of experienced teachers are leaving their teaching careers, resulting in a shortage of mentors for the programs.

“I can’t see myself doing this until the current retirement age. I can see teachers, working early mornings, late nights, demanding days, at 68 years old… I can see teachers dying in the classroom, I really can,” says Graham, 30, teacher and assistant head of her school.

So, what now?

Changing the Social Climate

As discussed above, schools in poorer areas have especially hard time recruiting and retaining high quality teachers. We also showed that this creates a vicious cycle that only deteriorates with time. So, how can these schools turn this situation around?

We know the answer lies in better funding, which would help create a better environment for both students and teachers. However, clearly there is not much that schools can do about  state and local funding. That formula is out of their control.

These schools, however, can do something about Federal Funding–if they can reduce their truancy and bullying rates. In California, public schools lose over $1 billion in funding each year to truancy alone. The vast majority of the schools that lose such funds are in low-income areas. Keeping this funding would go a long way in creating the climate that is conducive to high quality education.

The key is to create a positive social climate that is attractive to both teachers and students. But, how do we do that?

What if we get these kids to want to come to school and stay in class without disrupting? How can we make learning more accessible and more fun?

One way this can be done is through an emerging concept called Interactive Learning, which is more engaging and more effective than traditional teaching methods. Through the use of interactive animations and video modeling, students are able to grasp complex concepts and place them in real world situations, building strong cognitive skills. With interactive learning, real-life concepts become balanced and aligned with a thriving classroom atmosphere that includes teamwork and positive behavior, improving the educational climate for teachers and students.

This is why interactive learning has been proven to be an effective mechanism for delivering Social Emotional Learning (SEL), which can ultimately change behavior within the student population, leading to a reduction in bullying, classroom disruption, and absenteeism. Improve absenteeism and reduce bullying, and funding will begin to improve.

About Us

CoolSchool develops video based interactive lessons for teaching Social Emotional Learning, reducing bullying and absenteeism in public elementary schools.

Contact us today for a demo of the suite of products that significantly reduce both absenteeism and bullying.

/by
, , ,

Interactive Learning Is Here

cute elementary schoolboy using a tablet computer in classroom

Recent advancement in teaching methodology has created a new phenomenon called “interactive learning.”

Although, traditional teaching methods have generally claimed the foreground of the education system, there is a visible notion of change that has created a pathway for “interactive learning” to develop and expand.

Beginning at a young age, students are encouraged to use physical practices of memorization.

“Copy each word five times.”

Often, students are assigned to draft a set of words and definitions a particular number of times. If you’re familiar with the American School System, you probably remember doing this yourself. There is, in fact, no beneficial agenda behind this mundane, repetitive work. The theory remains that the physical movement (writing) enhances recollection, as it begins to include not only your brain but your body, as well.

Although this practice has been in place for countless years, critics of this theory still remain at large.

Interactive learning is more effective than traditional learning. Recent studies and reports support this claim.

An article by Richard E. Mayer[1], “Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?” observes and explores the idea of effective interactive learning. Mayer examines the best way to explain “cause-and-effect systems” to University students – for example: “how a pump works, how the human respiratory system works, or how lightning storms develop.” One idea that he draws upon is “multimedia presentation of explanations in visual and verbal formats.” Mayer illustrates this concept by explaining how a pump works through both visual and verbal representations. He goes on to collect data to support the use of this technique.

In support of the effectiveness of his technique, Mayer finds that students who were shown visual and verbal formats produced “75% more creative solutions on problem-solving transfer tests than did students who received verbal explanations alone”. His next review, including 10 studies, showed a result of “50% more creative solutions to transfer problems when verbal and visual explanations were coordinated (integrated group) than when they were not coordinated (separated group).” His last review also supports these findings, but additionally finds that these effects were most significant on students with “low prior knowledge and high spatial ability”. Mayer’s studies prove that the best way  to explain cause-and-effect to students is through verbal and visual multimedia combination.

Another research study[2], “Boys’ and Girls’ Use of Cognitive Strategy When Learning to Play Video Games” by Fran C. Blumberg and Lori M. Sokol, proposes that children also use a significant amount of cognitive strategies when they interact with media, for example video games. In this study 2nd & 5th grade students were asked what they did to learn the video game that they were provided with. Their responses were recorded as either “external” or “internal,” regarding whether they looked within themselves for answers or sought out other sources for help “(i.e., reading a manual vs. asking for help, respectively)”. Children who played these games more often, as well as older children in general, became more likely to use internal problem-solving skills, supporting the idea that video learning promotes self-sufficiency.

/by
,

Addressing Bullying with SEL

Statistics from 2013-14 report more than 6 million students (13% of the population or 1 in 8 students) were absent 15 or more days of school.  Over 500 school districts reported absenteeism of up to 30%  for at least 15 days a year.

Unfortunately, this is a nationwide problem.

Out of an estimated sum of more than 600,000 secondary students:

  • One-quarter of high school student report acts of bullying in the past 12 months
  • 5% of students missed one or more days of school in concerns for their safety in the past 30 days

Bullying Laws

  • 46 states have incorporated bullying laws into their legal system, enforcing school districts to enact anti-bullying policies, 3 of which do not provide the definition of the term “bullying”
  • 36 states include “cyberbullying” or any form of bullying over electronic media, as a part of these bullying laws
  • 13% of states assert the authority of the school system to behavior of students off-campus, when it begins to create a “hostile” environment.
  • 41 states have bullying policies, 12 of which are not mandated under law
  • Schools located in places where the legislation is more complex school policies pertaining bullying than those that are not

Laws are a Beginning but More is Needed

A study by the American Institute for Research creates a correlation between SEL programs and decrease in bullying, bringing an emphasis on “school-wide” programs that target not only the “victims” or “bullies,” but also bystanders and educators, from teachers to administrative staff. With everyone playing an active role in SEL and anti-bullying prevention, the core values of these programs integrate into situations beyond the classroom, such as the “hallway, cafeteria, playground,” and home.

There are a number of categories of social and emotional skills that these programs address:

  1. Self-awareness & Self-management:
    • “Recognize and manage emotions in order to respond to conflict in calm and assertive ways.”
  2. Social awareness:
    • “Be tolerant and appreciative of differences, and interact empathetically with peers.”
  3. Relationship skills
    • “Initiate and sustain friendships and other relationships.”
    • “Resist social pressure to enable, encourage, or directly participate in bullying, and actively defend victims.”
    • “Be able to seek help from peers or other adults when needed.”
  4. Responsible decision-making
    • “Think through and resolve social problems effectively and ethically.”

There are reasons why the SEL approach is a beneficial way to looking at anti-bullying tactics.

For one, studies show that “bullying is actually a group phenomenon,” attributing responsibility to the bystanders, as well as the bully and victim. This perspective allows the situation to be analyzed as a whole, evaluating the problem from the individual-, peer-, school-, community-, and familial-level to balance the factors that contribute to bullying.

SEL brings a focus on the “social, emotional, and moral climate of the school, as well as on the social and emotional competence of the entire school body,” becoming the more effective way to prevent bullying, through “a combination of school-wide rules and sanctions, teacher training, classroom curricula, conflict resolution training, and individual counseling.”

How can we improve the situation in our schools?

  • By adding Social Emotional Learning (SEL) and Positive Behavior Systems (PBIS) into our school system.
  • Incorporating positive behavior and effective communication into our children at a young age, prevent future incidents of bullying and preparing them to take action against such behavior. Therefore, increasing their chance of finishing education, later on.

About Us

Cool School, by The Social Express, is the next generation of Social Emotional Learning

and Anti-Bullying solutions.  Cool School was developed by psychologists and is based on proven video modeling techniques, which engage students while providing a safe place for students to learn how to communicate effectively.

Sources:

  • http://www2.ed.gov/datastory/chronicabsenteeism.html
  • https://www.cdc.gov/
  • https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/bullying/state-bullying-laws/state-bullying-laws.pdf
/by
, ,

Educational Funding and our Public Schools

Do you know which sector of the US economy is worth $1.3 trillion dollars? Here’s a hint: it is the second largest economic sector in the United States, claiming almost 9% of the US GDP.

Yes, it is the education sector, comprising of 100,000 public schools, 30,00 private schools, and 4,000 charter/other k-12 schools—all leading into a total of $1.3 trillion-dollar giant sector of our economy.

But, is that the whole story? If the education sector is worth such a large monetary number, why are especially public school educators feeling the pinch of the budget in their schools? How much of this money is actually being allocated to individual districts and schools? Why are there inconsistencies with the values of these numbers and the district-level experiences?

Whether schools have sufficient funding to successfully fulfill their mission of educating students depends on at least the following factors:

  • The Sources of Funding
  • Factors that affect the allocation of these funds

Both have their own challenges and we will examine each in turn.

Variability in the Availability of Funding

According to Marguerite Roza, Director of the Edunomics lab at Georgetown University, the amount of dollars that school districts spend is more a function of available dollars than actual cost of educating students. School Districts typically will spend what they get and that depends on sources of funds. If a school districts funding source is more State than local government (property tax), the school district will likely get less funding, and spend less. Therefore, the largest spending school districts are in areas of high-property tax value.

The unit of measure of public school funding is money allocated per pupil. The chart below shows the funding rates from 2006 through 2014 (adjusted for inflation in 2014 dollars. Source: The US Census)

US k-12 Education Spending Per Student

US k-12 Education Spending Per Student

This chart holds true for nearly every state—funding was highest during the early days of the Great Recession due to the impact of the Recovery Act, and slipped down each year after that.

Where the state provides the vast majority of funding for schools, the disparity between school districts is minimal. For example, in Vermont, the State provides 87.3% of the funding for public schools.

On the other, the state of Illinois only provides 32.5% of the funding and schools have to obtain the rest from local sources. In such a case, the school districts in the more affluent neighborhoods with higher property tax rates are significantly more funded than those in poor neighborhoods. For example, Fairfax VA public schools received only $2,764 per pupil from the State, but provided nearly $10,000 per student, while Price William County, while receiving the same funding level from the State of VA, was able to provide only $4,813 per student.

Unless states change their funding model, this disparity between school districts found in rich and poor neighborhoods will continue to persist.

The balancing story so far has come from Federal aids that target these poor communities.

Why This Matters

According to the a 2012 report by the Alert Shanker Institute, author of the report and Rutgers University Professor Bruce Baker stated, “Sustained improvements to the level and distribution of funding across local public school districts can lead to improvements in the level and distribution of student outcomes.” The report continues, “Schooling resources that cost money, including smaller class sizes, additional supports, early childhood programs and more competitive teacher compensation (permitting schools and districts to recruit and retain a higher-quality teacher workforce), are positively associated with student outcomes.”

Clearly, more funding for schools generally means better outcomes for students.

But the challenges that poor school districts face do not stop with just the sources of funds. It is further exacerbated by how those scarce resources are allocated.

States Consider Allocating funds by Attendance

More and more states are moving from funding based on enrollment funding which is based on student attendance.  With this change, state funding is being distributed differently throughout regional school districts, placing a numerical value on the head on each child, approximately $48.30 per student.

Unfortunately, this is a nationwide problem that is causing a drain on the education system.

What is the dollar value of each student? According to KPBS and the Watchdog Institute: $5,230.

Not just an empty seat.

  • One sophomore at Lincoln High School in Southeast San Diego is reported as having missed 87 days of school, “or nearly half of the 10th grade,” totaling a loss of -$2,464.71 of funding.
  • In one school year (2009-2010), the San Diego Public Schools have reported a loss of “at least $102 million in state funding because of absences.”
  • Five years of this chronic absenteeism has cost this school district a total of “$624 million.”

The vast majority of chronically absent kids are those who would benefit the most from attending school—children from poor households.

It is doubly daunting for school districts in poorer districts, who are already lack the funds necessary to create the ideal learning environment, further lose funds due to absenteeism, which is likely at least partially caused by the lack of funds to start with.

This is a vicious cycle within which poor schools are trapped—one problem causing another, which feeds into yet another and so on.

Net gain vs. social gain

Not only does absenteeism cause a loss funding, but also a loss of student learning potential, causing students to have lower testing scores, individually and district-wide. Studies also show that students from low-income families are “more likely to be absent from school and to experience greater losses in achievement for each missed day of school.”

What This Means

According to Sam Matteson, “consistent attendance helps students lay a foundation for the development of more complex skills. Poor student attendance is a reliable predictor of failure to graduate from high school, as well as the odds of early college success.”

The Children’s Aid Society reports

  • “75% of chronically absent sixth graders drop out before graduation”
  • “80% of juveniles arrested in New York City have a history of poor attendance”

Clearly, improving attendance and reducing chronic absenteeism is one of the most effective initiatives that schools can undertake to improve overall positive outcomes for students.

The question is: how do schools do that?

About Us

Cool School, by The Social Express, is the next generation of Social Emotional Learning

and Anti-Bullying solutions.  Cool School was developed by psychologists and is based on proven video modeling techniques, which engage students while providing a safe place for students to learn how to communicate effectively.

/by
,

Video Modeling as a Powerful Educational Tool

As technology begins to play a significant role in the education system, video modeling becomes the new and enhanced way of teaching, transforming learning into an interactive and engaging model that motivates students to learn, increasing their comprehension of the subject. Unfortunately, there is still some headway to be made. Critics of the system, claim otherwise. Researchers, however, are working hard to prove the beneficial mechanics of the video modeling system.

A study conducted by Multimedia University and Daffodil International University at the primary school Ahsania Mohila Mission High School in Dhaka, Bangladesh tested these statements. Students were taken and divided into three sections: traditional learning, visual learning, and blended learning. These three groups were taught about the solar system according to their technique, and then tested on their comprehension and attention to the subject matter. The results of this study showed that the students were “enthusiastic” about learning, and wanted to see “more” of the video, when it was stopped.

The results of the study varied as such:

  • In a traditional learning environment, eleven students gave 6-10 correct answers
  • In the video modeling system, fourteen students gave more than 5 correct answers
  • In the blended learning environment, most of the students gave 11-15 correct answers

As you can see, one significant difference is defined within the blended learning environment, where the students were exposed to the video modeling system of the solar system, as well as teacher facilitation of the material. These results are further supported by a claim, also the basis of this study, made by Rebeka Lukman , who studied “non-traditional learning methods,” suggesting that there is no difference between “face-to-face” learning and the “online system,” other than discussion facilitation. 

Not only did these children learn, but they also had fun and played along the way, engaging the children’s attention, but also making them feel more involved in the classroom. A study by Yigal Rosen , on the “effects of an animation based on-line learning environment” affirmed this outcome.  Rosen gathered four hundred and eighteen, 5th and 7th grade students for the duration of a 2-3-month study. These students then participated in a once a week, video-modeling lesson based on science and technology. The study examined the following questions:

  1. “What is the effect of the environment on transfer of knowledge, within the context of science and technology learning?”
  2. “What is the effect of the environment on motivation for science and technology learning?”

These students were then asked six questions based upon the “earth and space or materials and their properties,” and then given a short questionnaire to test the amount of interest the children showed in learning more about the subject with statements such as “I enjoy learning science and technology”, reporting on scale of 1-5, with “1= strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree.” The results of this study showed that children were not only interesting in learning about science and technology, but they changed their perception on the idea of learning, itself.

Video Modeling and Social Emotional Learning

However, the reach of video modeling is not limited to academics. Students can also benefit in grasping ideas that are a bit more abstract, such as emotional learning – becoming more confident and empathetic.

One study, by researchers at Texas Tech University, tested this statement. Researchers gathered “127 preschoolers between the ages of 2 to 6, plus one parent per child,” with “two-thirds” of the group being students from low-income families. These participants were then divided into four groups.

1.Children who watched “Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood” with their parent/guardian, and then continued to discuss the topics

2. Children who watched the show with their parents, but did not partake in discussion

3. Children who watched the show by themselves, without discussion

4. Children who watched a documentary on nature

The students were then presented with two sets of puppets and asked to point to the one they relate to the most, with statements, such as “I am good at making friends” or “I am not good at making friends” being attributed to them, and tested on their “empathy, emotional recognition and self-efficacy.” Results showed that the students that benefited the most were the children with “regular parent-child communication” about television. This statement is also true for children of poverty, as well as their parents, who benefit from learning socio-emotional skills they may have missed out on, due to a generational history of poverty. Just as children are able to identify themselves within these young characters and their new experiences, the parents are also able to model their own behavior to the adult characters in the show

These benefits continue to affect another group of children who may have problems developing their social and emotional skills, children on the autism spectrum. This is due to the design of each episode, basing its foundation on learning “a skill or experience,” by demonstrating a skill and then asking the child to partake in the experience. This was tested in a study conducted on “two high-functioning 5-year-old boys with ASD,” where they were each asked to watch Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, without any adult intervention, and observed their replication Daniel’s skill set. The results showed both of the boys attempted and succeed in carrying out the steps by Daniel, in this case, trying a new food, reinforcing the results of the other studies by showing how video modeling enhances learning and builds a critical foundation in aiding children to form cognitive and social functioning.

This set of research proves how technological advancement, such as video modeling, can help further the learning process of children and engage them in ways where traditional learning falls short.  There appears to be sufficient evidence to warrant further exploration of how video modeling can play a powerful role in General Education, especially in elementary and early childhood education.

About Us

Cool School, by The Social Express, is the next generation of Social Emotional Learning and Anti-Bullying solutions.  Cool School was developed by psychologists and is based on proven video modeling techniques, which engage students while providing a safe place for students to learn how to communicate effectively.

/by
,

Bullying and Chronic Absenteeism

Education researchers are finding out that chronic absenteeism is one of the strongest predictors of success in school, impacting not only performance but high school graduation rates. Kids who are chronically absent find it very difficult to keep up with their school work and eventually may drop out.

We are also seeing research evidence tying bullying at school with chronic absenteeism. Any strategy to combat chronic absenteeism must also include strategies for combating bullying at school.

this article describes these issues in more detail and proposes some solutions.

Defining Absenteeism

The Federal guideline states that a student is considered chronically absent if she/he misses 10 percent or more of the school year—for any reason. That is roughly 18 school days, or about a month per school year.

However, since actual attendance is taken at a local level, definitions of absenteeism vary from state to state. For example, in some states, absence as a result of observance of a religious holiday may be excused. In others, absence due to care for a family member may be excused and not count as lack of attendance. Still more complicating the definition of absenteeism is whether attendance is recorded at the beginning of the school day or at the beginning of each class.

With that said, the vast majority of schools do not really keep attendance record by student, but mostly track percentage attendance per day. Therefore, a 90% daily attendance simply means that 90% of students showed up that particular day (and perhaps didn’t stay all day). It does not in any way provide information on which students missed 10% or more of school that year.

What we know about Absenteeism

In a comprehensive study on the effects of chronic absenteeism (Balfanz, R., & Byrnes, V. (2012): Chronic Absenteeism: Summarizing What We Know from Nationally Available Data. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Center for Social Organization of Schools), raises an alarm that all educators should heed:

  • Chronic absence in kindergarten was associated with lower academic performance in first grade. The impact is twice as great for students from low-income families.
  • Chronic absenteeism increases achievement gaps at the elementary, middle, and high school levels.
  • Chronic absenteeism is most prevalent in poor and/or rural communities, regardless of race and gender.
  • The study postulates that strategies that reduce absenteeism can drive up achievement, high school graduation, and college attainment rates even more than any changes in improvements of the education system.
  • The negative impact of absenteeism on school success increases with each passing year as students who are chronically absent tend to continue this pattern year to year unless steps are taken to change this. In other words, achievement gaps worsen with each passing year as such students end up missing a year’s worth of school in a five-year period.

The study also found out that only six states—Oregon, Rhode Island, Maryland, Florida, Georgia, and Nebraska—collected any data on chronic absenteeism. The picture from this data is not encouraging. The percentage of students who are chronically absent (miss 10% or more school days in a year) are from 6% (Nebraska) to as high as 23% (Oregon).

When looked at by specific counties, rural and/or poor counties tend to have a disproportionate rate of chronic absenteeism, reaching as high as 20% to 34% of students who are chronically absent. The problems are especially more urgent in high schools, and particularly among seniors. In many of these impacted areas, half or more of the students are chronically absent, missing as much as a month or more per school year.

For example, in one county in Maryland the percentage of students who are chronically absent are 24% of elementary students; 41% of middle school students, and 67% of high school students.

Furthermore, when a cohort of sixth-graders in Florida were tracked for seven years from 1997-98 through 2003-04, 46% of the students were found to have been chronically absent at least during one year (missed at least one month) and 18% of these sixth graders missed at least two months of school that year.

This long term tracking found that while for one-third of the students the chronic absenteeism occurred only once (only in one year), for two-thirds of the students, it was more persistent, occurring at least two out of the seven years: 39% were chronically absent three years or more; 22% were absent four years or more; and 10% were absent five years or more. The last group missed an average of 171 days of school in the seven years—practically a whole year of school.

Although we have data for only six states, the numbers in Florida and Maryland are likely representative of the nation due to the diverse nature of their population. It appears that anywhere from 10-11% of students nationally are chronically absent, missing one or more months of school per year, and that half of these are likely to be chronically absent at least two years. Millions of students nationwide are missing months of school.

Who, When and Where of Chronic Absenteeism

From the John Hopkins study, we see that chronic absenteeism starts high in Kindergarten, gradually decreases to its lowest level in third and fourth grade before rising again to peak in high school. This seems to indicate that initially, children miss school as parents adjust to new circumstances, and that this adjustment has reached its peak by elementary school. The fact that absenteeism rises again especially in high school indicates that new circumstances are the cause of it later on. There seems to be a correlation between key transitions in schooling.

The John Hopkins study further showed that gender does not seem to be a factor—those that are chronically absent tend to be equally divided by gender. Nor does it seem to matter whether the school site is urban, sub-urban, or rural.

However, the study shows a high degree of correlation between poverty and chronic absenteeism—students from poor areas (regardless of gender, race, or geographic location) showed high levels of chronic absenteeism. For example, in Maryland, the study found that chronic absenteeism were three times higher for economically disadvantaged students for middle and high schools, and at least twice as high for high school students. Similar results were shown for Oregon, Nebraska, and Georgia.

What may be more revealing is that the study consistently found that chronic absenteeism seemed to be concentrated within a few schools. Whether this is solely due to concentration of disadvantaged or poor students in that school or whether there are additional factors is not clear.

Does Attendance Matter?

Now that we have a better understanding of what chronic absenteeism is and whom it impacts, the next question is: How big an impact does it really have on learning success?

Various studies show that chronic absenteeism impacts students at all stages from kindergarten through high school graduation.

  • A study by Change and Romero (“Present, Engaged, and Accounted For. The Critical Importance of Addressing Chronic Absence in the Early Grades”) showed that chronic absence in kindergarten had an immediate impact on academic performance on all children, with long term consequences being most significant for poor children. The study found that not only the chronically absent children were affected, but so were the regularly attending children due to the constant disruption and changing dynamics.
  • A 2010 paper by Douglas Ready (“Socioeconomic Disadvantage, School Attendance, and Early Cognitive Development: The Differential Effects of School Exposure”) showed that chronically absent students had 14% less literacy skills in kindergarten than regularly attending students. These gaps became more pronounced by first grade with 15% less literary skills and 12% less mathematical skills.
  • More significantly, The Ready study showed that children from low-income households with good attendance gained more literacy skills than their higher income family peers.
  • Research by Michael Gottfried (“Evaluating the Relationship between Student Attendance and Achievement in Urban Elementary and Middle Schools: An Instrumental Variables Approach”) states, “The findings support the premise that a significant and practically meaningful relationship exists between attendance and achievement across multiple grades in urban schools: students with a higher number of days present have higher GPAs. Attendance also appears to be more strongly correlated with a higher GPA as students advance through years of schooling.”
  • Research by Chicago University Allensworth and Easton (“What Matters for Staying On-Track and Graduating in Chicago Public High Schools. A Close Look at Course Grades, Failures, and Attendance in the Freshman Year”) showed that how well students did in ninth grade was a strongest predictor of high school graduations and that, in turn, attendance was found to be the strongest predictor of academic performance.

These and various researches have indicated that from kindergarten through high school, attendance is highly correlated with academic performance—regardless of gender, geographic location or socio-economic status. In fact, these studies show that regular attendance was the single most reliable antidote to performance gaps shown between students from low-income households and more students from more affluent households.

What causes Chronic Absenteeism

So far, we have examined absenteeism and the incontrovertible evidence of significant impact on k-12 academic performance. The next question becomes, what are the causes of chronic absenteeism and how do we effectively deal with these to improve student attendance?

Various studies show that there are primarily two categories of reasons why students are absent from school:

  • They cannot go to school because they are required to be elsewhere (as in working to help support family or taking care of a family member) or are too sick to attend school
  • They will not to go to school because are trying to avoid unpleasant or even dangerous situations at school or on the way to and back from school.

Considering the fact that chronic lack of attendance for any reason is highly detrimental to academic success and high school graduation, it is imperative that schools find effective strategies to deal with each type of reason for such absence. However, as the reasons for absence are different, it is important to understand that the strategies must also be customized to address the reason for absence.

In this article, we look a little further into the second reason for chronic absenteeism—why children make a conscience effort to avoid school.

Why Kids Will not Go To School

While it is true that some kids are chronically absent because they find school boring and would rather be elsewhere, a significant portion of chronically absent students who make a conscience decision to avoid school do so avoid being harassed or bullied by other kids, either in school or on their way to and back from school.

An annual report called, “Bullying in US Schools. 2014 Status Report” indicates the following:

  • About 17% of all US public school students report being involved in bullying (12% were bullied only; 3% were both bullied and bullied others; and 2% reported bullying others).
  • However, the report found that bullying was the highest among 3rd grade students who reported being involved in bullying with 4th graders being the second highest at 19%. We will recall from the section on chronic absenteeism that this was precisely when chronic absenteeism was lowest, perhaps contributing to the higher number of students reporting being bullied.
  • This could also be indicative of why absenteeism continues to rise after 4th grade as more kids try to avoid being involved in bullying.
  • The report also shows a strong correlation between bullying and liking school: in grades 3-5, one out of five students exposed to bullying reported strongly disliking school. This number goes to one out of two students involved in bullying reporting strongly disliking school.
  • The report further showed that the level of empathy for those bullied was highest among 3-5th graders, and decreased with each increase in grade—from a high of 73% of 3-5th grade girls who want to help those being bullied dropping to 48% by the time they are 9-12th graders; and from a high of 69% of 3-5th grade boys who want to help dropping down to 42% of boys by 9-12th

This report tells us two important pieces of information we need to address regarding bullying in schools:

  1. It is highest among 3-4th graders
  2. That is the age when kids have the highest sympathy or empathy for those who are being bullied.

Therefore any strategy that focuses on teaching 3-4th graders to reduce bullying—by teaching those that are bullying that it is wrong; by teaching those that are being bullied how to properly respond so they are not bullied in future; and by teaching bystanders what the appropriate way is to help those that are being bullied—will have the highest impact on reducing bullying in schools or grades going forward.

The classroom curriculum should include instructions that help kids know how to appropriately respond to being bullied so that they are less likely to be bullied again. It should further teach compassion so that other kids know how to appropriately step in and help those that are being bullied. Ultimately, the goal is to teach kids why it is wrong to bully others so those likely to bully others stop doing so.

In a bullying-free school zone, kids would have fewer reasons to dislike school and avoid it, improving attendance, which improves performance at school.

This is born by evidence. A 2011 BERC study showed a strong correlation between 6th grade attendance and high school graduation rates. For kids who missed less than 10 days of 6th grade school, the high school graduation level was 70%. On the other hand, only 13% of students who missed 40 days or more of school year in 6th grade ended up graduating from high school.

The BERC study strongly indicates that reducing the number of school days missed at an early age increases high school graduation rates. Any effort that goes towards reducing absenteeism increases graduation and overall academic success.

Effective Anti-bullying programs for Schools

The most effective anti-bullying programs for schools should focus on very young children that are between kindergarten and 4th grade. It is especially most effective when taught to 3rd and 4th graders precisely because that is when bullying truly begins and kids at that age also have the highest empathy levels for other kids.

At a minimum, the characteristics of an effective anti-bullying program should look as follows:

  • It is directed primarily at young children
  • It teaches by example and is engaging, utilizing the medium that children prefer such as video animation
  • It does not create a burden for the teacher or the school, but enables the homeroom teacher to easily weave the program into the normal curriculum
  • It is builds on lessons so that students increasingly understand why bullying is wrong, why they should not engage in it, and why they cannot be just bystanders but must act appropriately to stop it. The program must be offered on an ongoing basis from year to year throughout elementary grades.
  • It is data driven and measures the effectiveness of the program, enabling teachers and administrators to see the effect and adjust the program as necessary
  • It should be inexpensive enough for every school to purchase, implement, train teachers and administrators, and continue to use the program from year to year

Conclusion

This article has documented the research done to show the impact of chronic absenteeism on overall academic performance and high school graduation levels.

It has also shown that a major contributing factor to chronic absenteeism is a need on the part of the student to avoid harassment and bullying in school. The article further shows studies on bullying that provide strong linkage between bullying and the dislike of school.

More importantly, the article makes the case that the right time to prevent bullying and increase classroom attendance is very early in elementary grades, where the likelihood of the of the effectiveness of programs are the highest.

/by