Swimming kids are smarter

Children who learn how to swim at a young age are reaching many developmental milestones earlier than the norm.

Researchers from the Griffith Institute for Educational Research surveyed parents of 7000 under-fives from Australia, New Zealand and the US over three years.

A further 180 children aged 3, 4 and 5 years have been involved in intensive testing, making it the world’s most comprehensive study into early-years swimming.

Lead researcher Professor Robyn Jorgensen says the study shows young children who participate in early-years swimming achieve a wide range of skills earlier than the normal population.

“Many of these skills are those that help young children into the transition into formal learning contexts such as pre-school or school.

“The research also found significant differences between the swimming cohort and non-swimmers regardless of socio-economic background.

“While the two higher socio-economic groups performed better than the lower two in testing, the four SES groups all performed better than the normal population.

The researchers also found there were no gender differences between the research cohort and the normal population.

As well as achieving physical milestones faster, children also scored significantly better in visual-motor skills such as cutting paper, colouring in and drawing lines and shapes, and many mathematically-related tasks. Their oral expression was also better as well as in the general areas of literacy and numeracy.

“Many of these skills are highly valuable in other learning environments and will be of considerable benefit for young children as they transition into pre-schools and school.”

States Have Not Yet Shifted Their Focus from Building Education Data Systems to Helping People Like Parents and Teachers Use Them

The Data Quality Campaign’s (DQC) eighth annual state analysis, Data for Action 2012, shows that although states are making progress in supporting effective data use, the hardest work remains. States collect quality data and have enacted policy changes, but they have not yet focused on helping people, especially parents, teachers and students, effectively use data.

 

“States should be commended for their hard work building robust data systems. But it’s time to focus on the people side of the data equation — how this benefits teachers and students,” said Aimee Rogstad Guidera, executive director of the Data Quality Campaign. “State policymakers must actively support a culture in which all education stakeholders are actually using and learning from this crucial information to improve student achievement — not just using data for shame and blame.”

 

Without exception, every state in the country collects quality data extending beyond test scores. Yet no state has taken all of the 10 State Actions to Ensure Effective Data Use, which support making better use of the rich data states now collect. For example:

• 
  States have laid the foundation to link P–20/workforce (P–20W) data systems but lack governance structures with the authority necessary to share appropriate and limited critical data. This deficiency makes it nearly impossible to provide people the data they need to ensure that students stay on track for success in college and careers.
• 
  States are producing reports and dashboards using longitudinal data but are lagging in ensuring data access by stakeholders such as parents; there is more work to do to meet all stakeholders’ needs.
• 
  States are increasingly providing training to help stakeholders use data but have not done enough to build the capacity of all education stakeholders to effectively use data, especially teachers.

However, some states are doing cutting-edge work, proving that these challenges can be addressed now:

• 
  Kentucky has refined providing information to high schools about their graduates’ performance in college and used this information to increase college enrollment rates and reduce remediation rates for Kentucky students.
• 
  Delaware has implemented 9 of the 10 State Actions by leveraging P–20W leadership, state policy, federal opportunities and resources and can now use data to answer important policy questions like which students enroll in postsecondary institutions and whether they get jobs in the field in which they were trained.
• 
  Maine collaborated with stakeholders from critical agencies to build the policy, support and infrastructure to link data systems across the P–20W pipeline, which ensured that data collection, sharing and use are aligned with the state’s broader policy priorities aimed at improving student outcomes.
• 
  Indiana has made great progress ensuring that stakeholders have access to the data they need, developing a web-based portal and college- and career-readiness reports that provide data, resources, and tools for districts, schools, educators and families. Indiana also achieved the greatest growth on the 10 State Actions over the past year, from 3 to 8 State Actions.
• 
  Ohio has developed a strong teacher-student data link (TSDL) that has helped the state generate teacher performance data to share with teacher preparation programs, which provides them the data they need to improve their programs and ensure their graduates are prepared to enter the classroom.

Developing a comprehensive digital strategy

School, district, and state leaders must make critical decisions in the next two years involving digital learning that will shape education for decades, according to a new report from the Alliance for Excellent Education. The report, The Nation’s Schools Are Stepping Up to Higher Standards, identifies four key challenges that public school district leaders must systemically address in the next two years and outlines the essential elements for developing a comprehensive digital strategy.

The report and the webinar accompanying its release are the first steps in a major effort by the Alliance to help district leaders make smart, far-reaching decisions about implementing education technology that support teachers and improve student outcomes in K–12 public schools.

“As I travel across the United States talking to district leaders from large urban city centers to the most rural areas of the country, I hear the same thing: ‘We’ve come a long way, but we have so far to go in effectively using technology to benefit student learning,’” said Bob Wise, president of the Alliance for Excellent Education and former governor of West Virginia. “If you’re a school or district leader who is considering using education technology and digital learning in your schools, STOP—and go no further—until you have a comprehensive plan that addresses your district’s specific challenges and learning goals for all students.”

The four key challenges identified in the report that all school district leaders need to face include: (1) graduating all students college and career ready; (2) managing shrinking budgets; (3) training and supporting teachers; and (4) dealing with the growing technology needs of society and individual students, especially low-income students and students of color who are most at-risk of being left behind. By employing effective educational strategies that link and improve the “three Ts”—teaching, technology, and use of time—district leaders can create the conditions for whole-school reform and effective instruction, the report finds.

According to Wise and the Alliance, many school districts have already stepped up to address these challenges by developing comprehensive plans for digital learning strategies and will serve as examples to others in the next two years, while other districts are in the process of implementing aspects of digital learning. On the other hand, far too many districts have yet to begin preparation.

“Whatever stage a district is in,” Wise said, “there is real value in taking a self assessment to make sure your district’s technology strategies meet its educational needs, including changing curriculum and instruction.”

The major force driving the need to change is the move by all states to raise academic expectations by requiring students to graduate from high school ready for college and a career. For forty-six states and the District of Columbia, adopting the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) also requires using technology to prepare students for computer-administered assessments in the 2014–15 school year.

If schools and districts adopt a comprehensive digital learning strategy, the effective application of technology assists in the implementation of the CCSS by supporting profound changes to teaching and learning. Technology also plays a critical role guiding educational, administrative, budgetary, and policy decisions by providing constant data about student and school performance to educators, parents, students, and policymakers.

The Alliance, which will be partnering with national membership organizations on this initiative, has identified a framework that will provide education leaders in states and school districts with tools to make good decisions about how technology aligns with the goals and vision for their students. This growing effort, which includes access to a team of experts, a self assessment tool, and other resources, will help districts through a comprehensive planning process around seven interconnected areas within the education system where technology and digital learning can maximize the impact on student achievement:

• academic supports;

• budget and resources;

• curriculum and instruction;

• data systems and online assessments;

• professional learning;

• technology and infrastructure; and use of time.

School Programs’ Success Can Hinge on Principals Going “All In”

When principals go “all in” in terms of supporting school programs, teachers stand a better chance of successfully implementing change, according to new research published by the University of Pittsburgh and the University of Virginia (UVA).

The researchers report in Prevention Science that if school principals lack enthusiasm or show little support, they are actually viewed as a hindrance by teachers, posing “major challenges” to the success of school programs like the Responsive Classroom®, an approach boasting social-emotional learning. Additionally, apprehensive teachers fearing change are more willing to try new approaches in their classrooms if they know they have administrators’ support.

“Implementation matters,” said lead author Shannon Wanless, Pitt assistant professor of psychology in education. “When implementation is weak, school programs are not able to have as strong of an effect as they could. This spurred us to figure out why this integration is weak.”

Together with Sara E. Rimm-Kaufman, principal investigator and UVA associate professor of education, Wanless focused on implementing the Responsive Classroom approach, a program developed by the Massachusetts-based Northeast Foundation for Children, into third- and fourth-grade classrooms. In this model, a sense of community is stressed wherein students use skills like cooperation, assertiveness, and empathy to better achieve their academic goals. Such emotional connectivity is proven to promote a deeper style of learning.

For the study, the Northeast Foundation for Children provided coaches trained in the Responsive Classroom approach who worked alongside teachers and were able to answer questions when needed. Teachers viewed these coaches as important assets for helping them to understand the strategies and making sure the strategies were integrated.

“We’re going through a period when schools have become bombarded with new initiatives and programs,” said Rimm-Kaufman. “Sorting through those and creating priorities has become an increasingly challenging task for our teachers. This work calls attention to the importance of school coaches—and school leadership—in better understanding and implementing those priorities.”

All teachers involved in the study were trained in the Responsive Classroom approach and monitored over two consecutive years. In the first year, the researchers sought to determine the biggest roadblocks to successful implementations. In the subsequent year, the researchers evaluated how school personnel rated one of their own potential roadblocks: principal support.

Year One: High Fidelity

During the first year of the study, the team collected data from only third-grade teachers. Participants in the study hailed from the mid-Atlantic United States, and the number of participating teachers ranged from two to eight in 13 different schools across one district.

The research team looked specifically at the fidelity of implementation—how well the teachers introduced practices in the manner in which they were intended. After the first year of teaching with Responsive Classroom, teachers were asked to reflect on barriers and gateways.

“We found that some teachers were afraid to shift out of what felt tried and true—afraid of the chaos that comes with initially trying new programs,” said Wanless. “However, when they felt a sense of empowerment or support from their administrators, they were more likely to successfully implement the program.”

Wanless said teachers noted that they could tell when the principal was “behind something”—specifically through their motivation, consistency in use of related practices, and the accommodations they provided to teachers. At the same time, a lack of support also was noticeable and viewed as a barrier.

Year Two: Put Me In, Coach

In a subsequent study, the research team decided to take a different look at the rating system. They again focused on principal support, this time studying how the perceptions of this level of support varied amongst those in different roles. There were four raters: principals, teachers, intervention coaches for teachers, and an intervention coach for principals.

All 48 fourth-grade teachers in 13 schools participated during their second year of teaching with the Responsive Classroom approach. Teachers rated their principals’ level of support based on why they thought the principals wanted them to be trained. Coaches rated principals based on indicators such as how often principals initiated contact with them. Principals rated their own involvement with the approach, and principal coaches rated how invested the principals seemed.

The intervention coaches for teachers and principals provided a unique perspective unseen by the teachers or administrators. They could most accurately rate the level of administrator support—or lack thereof.

“The coaches’ ratings were the most predictive of actual implementation of the program,” said Wanless. “This indicates a need to consider changing the way we gather data in schools, including an external person to collect this type of information.”

“The study points to the critical role that school leaders and coaches play in predicting the implementation of the Responsive Classroom approach,” said Rimm-Kaufman. “The work calls attention to the importance of school leadership in producing school change. As with any intervention, this approach only relates to positive outcomes if teachers are actually using the practices in their classrooms. The work helps shed light on what school leaders can do to set the stage for success of new interventions.”

The paper, “Setting-Level Influences on Implementation of the Responsive Classroom Approach,” was published Oct. 14 by Prevention Science.

Youth with autism gravitate toward STEM majors in college — if they get there

It’s a popularly held belief that individuals with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) gravitate toward STEM majors in college (science, technology, engineering and mathematics).

A new study, co-authored by Paul Shattuck, PhD, assistant professor at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis, confirms that view yet finds that young adults with an ASD also have one of the lowest overall college enrollment rates.
The study, “STEM Participation Among College Students with an Autism Spectrum Disorder,” was published online Nov. 1 in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.

“STEM careers are touted as being important for increasing both national economic competitiveness and individual career earning power,” Shattuck says. “If popular stereotypes are accurate and college-bound youth with autism gravitate toward STEM majors, then this has the potential to be a silver lining story for a group where gloomy predictions about outcomes in adulthood are more the norm.”

The study provides the first national picture of college enrollment and STEM participation for young adults with an ASD, compared with 10 other disability categories, including learning disabilities; speech/language impairment; intellectual disabilities; emotional disturbances; hearing impairment; visual impairment; orthopedic impairment; other health impairment; traumatic brain injury; and multiple disabilities.

The study found that 34.3 percent of students with an ASD gravitated toward STEM majors. That’s not only higher than their peers in all 10 other disability categories, but also higher than the 22.8 percent of students in the general population who declared a STEM major in college. Science (12.1 percent) and computer science (16.2 percent) were the fields most likely to be chosen by students with an ASD.

But the study also learned that young adults with ASD have one of the lowest overall college enrollment rates when compared with students in other disability categories. Factors such as gender, family income and ability to carry on a conversation played a role in whether or not the individual with ASD attended college.

“Clearly, only a subset of youth with autism will head to college after high school,” Shattuck says. “A low family income puts these young people at a disadvantage even if they are cognitively capable. We need to get better at connecting students with financial aid to help them achieve their highest potential and be contributing members of society.”

The study says the tide may be turning. Advances in early identification and treatment of ASDs are likely to increase college enrollment rates, and with it increased participation in STEM majors.

“More and more children are being identified as having autism,” Shattuck says, “children who grow up to be adults. With the majority of a typical lifespan spent in adulthood, that phase of life is the one we know least about when it comes to autism spectrum disorders.

State Loopholes Stalling Progress of Physical Education Programs

The 2012 Shape of the Nation Report: Status of Physical Education in the USA, released today by the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) and the American Heart Association, finds that while 74.5 percent of states mandate physical education in elementary through high school, most still fail to require a specific amount of instructional time and nearly half allow exemptions, waivers and/or substitutions. These "loopholes" reduce the effectiveness of policy efforts to ensure the quality of physical education currently taught in the nation's schools.


"The fact that kids are being deprived of physical education in school is unacceptable, especially in a nation suffering from a childhood obesity epidemic," said Nancy Brown, American Heart Association CEO. "Making physical activity a part of the daily routine is critical to saving the next generation of Americans from heart disease, stroke, diabetes and other serious problems."

The report found that the majority of states mandate that students take physical education (43 states for elementary, 41 states for middle, and 44 states for high school). However, gaps exist in over half of these states. Thirty-three states permit schools and school districts to allow students to substitute other activities for their required physical education credit. Twenty-eight states allow schools or school districts to grant exemptions/waivers for physical education.

Other key findings include:

• Only six states (Illinois, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New York and Vermont) require physical education in every grade, K-12.

• Forty nine states plus the District of Columbia have their own state standards for physical education; only Iowa has not adopted state standards.

• Only 26 states (51 percent) require some form of student assessment in physical education.

• Only 30 states (59 percent) allow required physical education credits to be earned through online physical education courses.

• Compared to 2010, twice as many states (28 vs.14) require physical education grades to be included in students' grade point averages.

• Only 14 states (27 percent) require schools/school districts to perform fitness assessments. Only 11 states (22 percent) prohibit the practice of withholding physical activity, including recess, as punishment and prohibit the use of physical activity as punishment for inappropriate behavior or for disciplinary reasons.

NASPE and the American Heart Association recommend that schools provide 150 minutes per week/30 minutes per day of instructional physical education for elementary school children, and 225 minutes per week/45 minutes per day for middle and high school students for the entire school year. Currently, no states follow these nationally recommended guidelines at all levels. The complete list of physical education program recommendations is included in the full report.

In addition to pushing for mandatory physical education in all K-12 schools in the United States, the two associations encourage parents to be more proactive in advocating for school districts and communities to develop and promote the use of safe, well-maintained and close-to-home sidewalks, bike paths, trails, and facilities for physical activity and sport participation. More importantly, parents and other adult role models need to set good examples by being active themselves.

The Shape of the Nation Report, which surveys physical education coordinators in all 50 state education agencies and the District of Columbia, raises awareness and provides data for an ongoing evaluation of the progress made and challenges that remain in physical education policies. This year's Shape of the Nation report includes new elements that address the areas of school physical activity requirements such as recess, classroom physical activity breaks, the use of physical activity as punishment, support for the Safe Routes to School program and local school wellness policies.

Principal plays surprising role in why new teachers quit

Why do so many beginning teachers quit the profession or change schools? Surprising new research finds it’s not a heavy workload or lack of resources that has the most significant effect, but instead the relationship between teachers and their principal.

Peter Youngs, associate professor of educational policy at Michigan State University and lead investigator on the study, said the findings reinforce the need for principals to serve as strong, supportive leaders in their schools.

“The principal isn’t there just to help the novice teacher handle discipline and classroom management,” Youngs said. “What really makes a strong administrative climate is when the principal also knows the academic content well and can work with the beginning teacher on curriculum and instruction.”

Youngs and Ben Pogodzinski of Wayne State University surveyed 184 beginning teachers of grades 1-8 in 11 large school districts in Michigan and Indiana. Their study, published in Elementary School Journal, was prompted by the fact that nearly a third of teachers in their first two years either change schools or quit altogether. This can be particularly harmful to low-income urban schools that have trouble recruiting and retaining teachers, Youngs said.

The study gauged novice teachers’ intent to remain teaching and the factors that might influence that decision. Youngs said he was surprised to learn the frequency with which novices met with their school-assigned mentor teachers did not make them more or less likely to continue teaching.

In fact, the most important factor that influenced commitment was the beginning teacher’s perception of how well the school principal worked with the teaching staff as a whole. This was a stronger predictor of intent to remain teaching than having adequate resources, the amount of administrative duties the teacher had or the size of their workload.

Youngs said the findings point to a potential need for more training for principals in university or professional-development programs.

“The focus,” he said, “would be on how principals could increase their knowledge of setting a healthy, productive school climate and understanding ways that their actions and leadership can impact new teachers’ attitudes and outcomes.”