Education & Pedagogy

The Ministry of Advanced Education (British Columbia) continues to work on key deliverables outlined in the "Minister's 2015/16 Mandate Letter" (see Appendix B) and the "BC Jobs Plan" to contribute to a strong economy and secure tomorrow for British Columbians. The ability of citizens to take full advantage of their growing economy is determined in part by ensuring that the right training is available at post-secondary institutions in different regions of the province. To maximize the potential of the existing and future workforce, the government is working with postsecondary institutions and other partners to implement actions outlined in "B.C.'s Skills for Jobs Blueprint: Re-engineering Education and Training." This plan outlines actions to ensure a seamless transition from high school through post-secondary education and right into the workforce, matching the skills that B.C. students acquire during their post-secondary education and training programs with labour market needs. This is one of several strategic directions shared in the Service Plan. Following the Minister's Accountability Statement, this year's Service Plan includes: (1) Purpose of the Ministry; (2) Strategic Direction and Context; and (3) Goals, Objectives, Strategies and Performance Measures (Resource Summary Table, Public Universities, Colleges and Institutes Income Statement Resource Summary), and Major Capital Projects).

The state of Washington is home to more than 566,000 children under the age of six. About 306,000 of these children have all available parents in the workforce and, thus, potentially need child care. Like many states in recent years, Washington has committed public and private resources toward multiple efforts to improve early care and education services, including early education degree and certification programs, in order to improve the preparation of their graduates to meet the complex needs of young children. Critical to these efforts is the establishment of a well-coordinated, comprehensive professional preparation and development system that can prepare and support an incoming generation of educators, while also strengthening the skills of the existing early education workforce. Institutions of higher education are crucial to meeting the evolving and increasing demands identified as improving developmental and learning outcomes for the state's young child population. This report highlights findings from the "Washington Early Childhood Higher Education Inventory" and the extent to which early childhood higher education (ECE) programs offer course content and learning experiences that are associated with effective teacher preparation. [For the narrative report, see ED614291. For the technical report, see ED614300.]

The higher education system does not work well for taxpayers, students, or higher education institutions. Student loans were expected to be such a good deal for taxpayers that their projected revenues were used to offset costs associated with the Affordable Care Act and increasing the size of Pell Grants. Less than a decade ago, the federal government projected it would net 20 cents for every dollar it lent to students; today it projects a loss. Yet despite today's increasingly dire picture for taxpayers, calls for student loan forgiveness have never been louder. This report presents four ideas conservatives could offer for the next reauthorization of the Higher Education Act to ensure student aid supports those who need it the most and directs them to useful, skills-based educational pathways that will prepare them to contribute positively to society. There is a burgeoning opportunity to realign the nation's higher education laws with Americans' desire to get the education they need for a brighter future. To do this, policymakers should incentivize outcomes and recognize the blurry line between "higher education" and "workforce development." [This report was produced by the AEI Conservative Education Reform Network (CERN).]

This hearing of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions focuses on reauthorizing the Higher Education Act through access and innovation. The following committee members presented opening statements: (1) Honorable Lamar Alexander, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; and (2) Honorable Patty Murray, Ranking Member, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington. The following witnesses presented: (1) Joe May, Chief Policy Officer, Chancellor, Dallas County Community College District, Dallas, TX (Prepared statement and Summary statement); (2) Donna Linderman, University Dean for Student Success Initiatives, City University of New York, New York, NY (Prepared statement and Summary statement); (3) Barbara Brittingham, President, Commission on Institutions of Higher Education, New England Association of School and Colleges, Burlington, MA (Prepared statement and Summary statement); (4) Deborah Bushway, Director, Independent Higher Education Consultant, and Provost, Northwestern Health Sciences University, Bloomington, MN (Prepared statement and Summary statement); and (5) Michael Larsson, Founder and President, Match Beyond, Boston, MA (Prepared statement and Summary statement). Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc. were provided by Honorable Orrin Hatch (Prepared statement for the record); Salt Lake Community College (Prepared statement); and Western Governors University (Prepared statement).

In Indiana and Minnesota, career and technical education programs are intended to provide pathways to both postsecondary education and careers after high school. Each state's education agency, higher education agency, and workforce agency collaborated to develop career and technical education courses. These agencies partnered with the Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest to examine whether high school graduates in each state who completed a large number of career and technical education courses in a single career-oriented program of study (concentrators) had different college and workforce outcomes from graduates who share many of the same characteristics but completed fewer (samplers) or no career and technical education courses (nonparticipants). The findings from the study, which are presented in this study snapshot, can inform states' efforts to develop career and technical education programs and increase participation among other students. [For the full report, see ED613044; for the study brief, see ED613045; and for the appendixes, see ED613050.]

Ageing populations and rising skill demands have heightened expectations that higher education systems will widen their offer of continuing education and training (CET) for adults aiming to renew or augment their skills at an advanced level. CET is becoming increasingly important for maintaining a highly skilled workforce also in Germany, and particularly in the state of Brandenburg. However, Brandenburg's public higher education institutions have so far been only marginal providers. To expand their offer of CET, they would require more legal certainty about the use of public funding in light of European Union (EU) state aid policy. EU state aid policy ensures public subsidies (state aid) are not used by state agencies to crowd out markets (economic activity). There are no clear EU, federal or state-level directions about whether CET is a non-economic activity and thus exempt from EU state aid rules. This report analyses the reasons for this legal uncertainty and provides recommendations to the state government and public higher education institutions in Brandenburg about how to clarify the status of continuing education and training as a state-aided activity. It also proposes pointers for interpretation and future reform of the EU framework on state aid, and provides impulses for policy action in other German states and at the federal level.

COVID-19 has exposed vast and systemic inequities, and calls for a redesigned education system are growing in number and volume. Top-of-mind issues, such as what reopening should look like, administering in-person versus remote instruction, and keeping students and staff safe, are incredibly important. But now, however, is also the time to confront long-term systemic questions about the purpose of school and how to construct it so that each child has an equal chance for a thriving future. Federal policy leaders who want to drive transformation, innovation, and equity can look to these recommendations to learn about entry points, policy levers, and a vetted path forward to revolutionize student-centered learning. This paper outlines core federal education policy issues to advance student-centered learning policies and transform education systems to meet the vast needs of future students. The eight key issues include: (1) Create Learning Ecosystems across K-12 Education, Higher Education, CTE, and the Workforce; (2) Modernize the Educator Workforce; (3) Diversify the Educator Workforce; (4) Bridge the Digital Divide; (5) Support COVID-19 Learning Recovery; (6) Advance Educational Equity; (7) Redesign Assessments; and (8) Rethink Accountability.

Physical education is considered to be an integral part of the curriculum in good elementary schools. Many inquiries come to the Office of Education concerning the role of the classroom teachers and the special teacher of physical education, the policies and procedures which school systems follow in administering the physical education program, the organization and content of the program, and the type of equipment and facilities provided for children in the elementary schools of the Nation. No comprehensive study had been made of the status of physical education for children of elementary school age; consequently, no data based on current practices were available. It was the purpose of this study to provide such information. This bulletin reports data on grades 1-6, and classifies city school systems by city size or geographically by district. The material explores four key topics: (1) Teachers--education and activities; (2) Curriculum--planning and program; (3) Children--evaluation of progress; and (4) Time, facilities, equipment, and space. A special section on comments and questions is provided, along with an appendix containing 17 tables. (Contains 39 tables and 7 footnotes.) [Best copy available has been provided.]

This report provides six mini-case studies of higher education policy reforms enacted in other states, exploring the important role that state policy leadership played in developing, promoting, and implementing these policies aimed at improving higher education outcomes, and discussing the relevance of each reform effort for California. This report follows two reports: an update of California higher education performance, "Average Won't Do," and "A New Vision for California Higher Education," an effort to engage stakeholders around a vision more suited to today's students and economic conditions than the 1960 Master Plan. Together, the reports underscore the urgency of efforts to improve leadership and policy for higher education in California, and offer ideas for how this might be accomplished. One reform is highlighted in each of the following states: (1) Colorado; (2) Indiana; (3) Maryland; (4) Oregon; (5) Tennessee; and (6) Texas. [For the above-mentioned accompanying reports, "Average Won't Do: Performance Trends in California Higher Education as a Foundation for Action," see ED574485 and "A New Vision for California Higher Education: A Model Public Agenda," see ED574486.]

Education in Ukraine is marked by integrity violations from early childhood education and care through postgraduate study. In the past decade policy makers and civic organisations have made progress in addressing these challenges. However, much remains to be done. "OECD Reviews of Integrity in Education: Ukraine 2017" aims to support these efforts. The review examines systemic integrity violations in Ukraine. These include: preferential access to school and pre-school education through favours and bribes; misappropriation of parental contributions to schools; undue recognition of learning achievement in schools; paid supplementary tutoring by classroom teachers; textbook procurement fraud; and, in higher education, corrupt access, academic dishonesty, and unwarranted recognition of academic work. The report identifies how policy shortcomings create incentives for misconduct and provide opportunities for educators and students to act on these incentives. It presents recommendations to address these weaknesses and strengthen public trust in a merit-based education system. The audience of this report is policy makers, opinion leaders and educators in Ukraine. Contains the following annexes: (1) Outline of the Review Methodology; (2) The OECD Integrity Review Team; and (3) Site Visits. Individual chapters contain references. [This report was financed by the Open Society Foundations Education Support Program and Eurasia Program Reserve Fund, working in partnership with the International Renaissance Foundation (Ukraine) and the Institute of Education Development (Ukraine).]

This Report Card is the first full assessment of the educational performance as a state, from birth through higher education. It compares performance to other states, looks at recent trends, and shows whether Illinois is meeting their obligations to all students or just a limited few. The scope of the report runs from birth through higher education. It covers a broad range of measures from student test scores to dropout rates, from the availability of preschool to the quality of learning environments in schools. This report card has three aims: (1) to outline what it means to be ready at each transition; (2) to identify the conditions in schools that lead to success; and (3) to clearly understand the results we are getting. The Report Card begins with a demographic profile of the Illinois education system. It is then organized into three sections: (1) Early Education; (2) K-12; and (3) Post-Secondary Attainment. Each section provides data on Key Outcomes, as well as relevant Conditions for Learning & Leading Indicators.

As editors Sara L. Hartman and Bob Klein acknowledge, rural places have long experienced systemic inequities that decrease rural students' access to education, yet many rural schools and communities have found creative means to make up for the dearth of outside resources. "The Middle of Somewhere" brings to light a wide variety of partnerships that have been forged between K-12 schools, communities, and postsecondary institutions to improve educational access. The book showcases collaborations that address three different areas of need: partnerships that prepare and support teacher candidates and educators who work in rural areas; partnerships that extend the work of rural education networks; and partnerships that promote equity, justice, and inclusion within rural populations. Using case studies of rural educational partnerships from communities across the United States, the book's contributors share their experiences of how strong partnerships have formed both organically and through thoughtful and intentional planning, and they recommend supportive strategies for their development and sustainment. The contributors also explore the many ways in which university-school-community partnerships incubate solutions to challenges common to rural education systems, such as access to STEM education and higher education. The programs featured here may serve as replicable models for practitioners, researchers, and policy makers who want to enrich the experiences of children in their schools and communities.

In addition to career training and preparation, institutions of higher education can foster opportunities for financial education and promote access to resources for financial decision-making. Educational experiences can play a role in preparing and informing students about their financial decisions and the impact of financial choices they face as students and later in life to set them on a path of long-term financial well-being. Members of the Financial Literacy and Education Commission (FLEC) Working Group on Higher Education, with input from other FLEC members, compiled resources to provide useful information to program leaders, educators, financial aid professionals, and students. The FLEC published higher education reports in 2015 (ED601934) and 2019 (ED601920), and this factsheet represents an update to those publications, highlighting newly-available resources. This resource is meant for students and their families as well as educational institutions that may be guiding students as they make some of these financial decisions. This document focuses on: (1) resources to assist students when making decisions about pursuing higher education, such as the cost-benefit of college, strategies to reduce student loans, and decisions about financial returns of different career paths; and (2) resources for after graduation, including guidance for managing expenses and debt servicing, and more.

"Excelencia in Education" brings to a national audience evidence-based practices situated at higher education institutions and community-based organizations across the country that are intentionally serving Latino students. The 2023 "Examples of Excelencia: What Works for Latino Students in Higher Education" selection committee recognized 19 Finalists programs who shared narratives about their work that focused on student empowerment; addressed financial barriers; created pathways to colleges and closed educational opportunity gaps. The programs are based across four levels: Associate, Baccalaureate, Graduate, and Community-Based Organizations of which four are chosen as examples that demonstrate an exemplary way of servicing their Latino students in an asset-based, culturally responsive way. These programs model what other institutions and organizations can implement in their own communities. [Funding was provided by Wells Fargo, Lumina Foundation, Bank of America, and JP Morgan Chase & Co. Additional funding was provided by Ad Astra, Precision Task Group (PTG), Arizona State University (ASU), ACT: Center for Equity in Learning, Helios Education Foundation, Lone Star College (Texas), Ascendium, Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, Texas A&M University (Kingsville), Maricopa Community Colleges (Arizona), Trellis Foundation. For the 2022 report, see ED624384.]

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides federal funds to improve elementary and secondary education in the nation's schools. ESSA requires states and Local Educational Agencies (i.e., school districts and charter schools) to take a variety of actions to ensure that all children, regardless of race, socioeconomic status, gender, disability status, primary language, or ZIP code, receive the education that they need to be prepared for success in post secondary education, careers, and citizenship. New York State receives approximately $1.6 billion annually in funding through ESSA. After more than a year of engagement with thousands of stakeholders, the New York State Education Department (NYSED) released its draft ESSA state plan on May 9, 2017 for public comment NYSED, with Board of Regents approval, submitted New York State's ESSA plan to the United States Department of Education (USDE) for review on September 17, 2018. On January 17, 2018, the United States Department of Education (USDE) approved the State's plan. This summary document outlines the stakeholder engagement process and highlights key proposals from the full plan, as revised to incorporate public feedback on the May draft, feedback from the Board of Regents, and revisions made based on discussions with USDE.