Religion in Schools

Today, I took the Pew Research Center's mini-survey on religious knowledge.  The main survey's results have already been reported in many media outlets, and the results are interesting--particularly the finding that, of all religious characterizations, those reporting religious identities as Jews, Atheists/Agnosics, and Mormons had the best overall knowledge of world religions. 

That finding aside, I noticed that, on the mini-survey, Question 10 asks, "According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to lead a class in prayer, or not?"  The correct answer to this question is "No, not permitted," and almost 90% of respondents got that one right.  However, the next question is, "According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to read from the Bible as an example of literature, or not?"  The correct answer to this question is "Yes, permitted."  Only 23% of respondents got that one right.  Those reporting their affiliation as "Jewish" or "Atheist/Agnostic" got it right at a rate of 42% and 40%, respectively, and no other group exceeded a 26% rate of correctness (achieved by White Evangelical Protestants). 

Two initial thoughts: (1) I wonder whether the occasional outcries over "kicking God out of the schools" would have as much force if people broadly understood that a literary approach to the Bible, or a comparative approach to religion in general, is perfectly constitutional, and that the only thing really prohibited is the teaching of a particular religious belief as truth (either directly or obliquely, through obvious support of the belief by teachers or other authority figures).  (2) I wonder what the results would be to a question (may be asked on the main survey--I don't know) to the effect of, "According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school student permitted to pray while in school, or not?"  The correct answer to this question is "Yes, permitted," but I would not be surprised if most people were to get it wrong. 

Are Athletic Associations Forgetting About Learning?

The UK basketball issue seems resolved, thankfully for us. But, the incident has certainly caused me to question the role of the NCAA. Of course, I'm guessing folks in Tennessee, Florida, North Carolina, Michigan, Southern California, just to name a few high profile programs, are also wondering about such things. The Reggie Bush Heisman issue, the Conference realignment this summer, or any of the other seemingly weekly national news events surrounding the NCAA keep it at the forefront of the national consciousness. 

My main question with the NCAA is, can a billion dollar entity keep students first and money second (at best)? 

Wait, you didn't know about the money? The 6 billion dollar CBS deal? That March Madness generates more revenue than the NFL playoffs, Superbowl included? 

Did you know your state high school athletic association is likely a multi-million dollar enterprise itself? There is so much money that now high school athletic associations are instituting revenue-sharing plans to redistribute the left-over money. 

Why is all this money showing up in the ledgers of non-profits? How much money does it take to assure a level-playing field for the educational benefit of students? Surely less than a 1/2 a billion a year. And, if so, then why does the NCAA continue to receive tax-exempt status? 

Anyone that reads the blog knows my historical unease with, let's say, educationally-sponsored athletics. That winning frequently overtakes learning on the priority list highly concerns me not because winning is bad, but that it should not be public schools that compete in this fashion. We should be looking to maximize learning, not the scoreboard nor the bottom line, so do we use these athletic associations as proxies to do avoid the sticky issues of educational institutions putting learning down the priority list?

So, my question today, and I'm interested in all responses (I've always said I can be convinced otherwise on this), is whether at the college and/or high school athletic association level winning (as defined in $$$) has overtaken student welfare (as defined by learning) as the priority? Let me know. 

Open Access Boost

Today, Google gave Law.gov a 2 million dollar check. It sort of helped their bottom line. 

C'mon law journals and law schools. Step up to the plate here and help us make our own law public. It should be a national embarrassment that it is not so. 

If you want to rehash my previous arguments on this topic, see my video lecture on the topic. 

"Flipping" Ed. Law Instruction

My friend Karl Fisch was featured by Daniel Pink in a story in the Telegraph on Sunday for flipping his instruction such that students do lecture at home and homework at school, instead of the more traditional lecture at school and homework at home. I thought it was a great story and I highly encourage you to read it. 

But, I wanted to use it to point out that for the last 2 years, I have been using the same model in my education law instruction and I wanted to encourage everyone else to consider doing the same.  This model of getting the content done before they come to class and doing homework and activities in class seems to work really great in our field.

First, we actually have specific content knowledge students need to know, such as what their state immunity provision says. Second, though, much of that content is quite boring (even though weirdos like me find immunity statutes fascinating). Third, that content is quite specialized so we rely heavily on textbooks. Fourth, there are few ways to assess that specialized learning outside of class, so the assignments are dull. And, fifth, that leaves us little choice but to wind up with some type of exam as the main assessment. 

Education law is a perfect candidate to be flipped. Get the content online. Record lectures (I can help you learn how, if you like) and post them. Then build readings around them. You can still rely on the textbook (although I would discourage it), but link to the Constitution. Link to cases. Link to summaries. Link to blog posts. Link to news stories. Link, link, link. Once you get enough links, you'll realize the textbook is not as important anymore. Also, let the students have their initial discussions online. Get the basic questions out of the way. If you must, like I do, build in an online quiz to assure students do the reading and the videos. 

Okay, now, all that work you would have done in class is over with. Now is when things get really fun. In the class meetings (of which you now need fewer) do the homework - the activities, the discussions, the modeling and everything else that reinforces the learning that occurred online. It is much more fun that way and the quality of the course improves. While you have them, you can build points around all those activities, so suddenly you realize you don't need an exam. There are plenty of ways to assess learning formatively in real time as the course is happening and those things add up to enough points that an exam is not necessary. 

Granted, flipping the course like this is more work. Now, instead of just lecturing, assigning textbook chapters and writing and exam, you also have to plan activities, manage technology, write on discussion boards and provide more formative feedback, among other things. But, that is the kind of work that actually takes learning to another level, from consuming to engaging. 

Anyway, I've been doing it a couple years and I am never going back. And, if you are interested, there are plenty of resources to help you ... including me personally. Hope you give it a try. 

With the California state budget in free-fall, why can’t the “Governator” charge students for AP classes?

This week the ACLU filed a lawsuit against Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California, alleging that public schools are denying students the free education guaranteed by the state constitution by forcing their families to pay fees to participate in certain classes.  The lawsuit alleges that it is a common practice for California public schools to charge students for workbooks, textbooks, and even novels that are required reading in their courses.

The lawsuit takes specific aim at charging students for participation in Advanced Placement (AP) courses to cover the College Board fee to take the AP test at the end of the course.  It should be noted that passing the course’s AP exam is required for the course to count for college credit; however, it is the school’s decision whether to credit the high school transcript for coursework if the student does not take the exam. Since state education policy requires students to pay for and take the exam as part of course completion, the ALCU alleges that students from low socio-economic backgrounds are further disadvantaged academically because of the required fees.

In California, students can still participate in courses without paying the fees, but the school does not provide the books for students who do not pay for them. The lawsuit argues that California’s policy forces low income students to either not take the classes with fees or participate in the courses without the required textbooks, workbooks or novels, which is an inherent disadvantage. The ACLU complaint also notes an instance where one student was humiliated in class by having her name written on the board for not paying for her course materials.

 In a twist that appeals to the jurisprudence of adequacy funding in education, the lawsuit contends that students who cannot afford the school fees are being denied their fundamental right to basic educational equality that is guaranteed by the California Constitution.  The ACLU is asking that the court enjoin the schools from charging the illegal fees.

Here is a link to the ALCU website that contains the complaint:

https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/103041

P20 Website & Next Generation Learning Summit

So, we launched the P20 website over the weekend. I know some of you have been wondering about it, so the new one is now out and there is space for feedback and whatnot. I'll have more news in the coming weeks about the companion network that is also launching and how to participate in it. Let me know any thoughts you have about the site. 

More importantly, though, tomorrow is a statewide superintendent summit on next generation learning. The Stupski Foundation really stepped up to the plate and worked with us to make this happen, so a big thank you to them. Also, KDE staff have been the chief organizers - even through a transition - so it really took a lot of pressure off of us at UK. Also, we also have to acknowledge the leadership of CCSSO, especially in merging the interests of Kentucky, the national priorities and the priorities of the Stupski Foundation. 

Kentucky is pretty much going all in on Next Generation Learning ... to the extent that all the new positions at KDE have it in the title. They even have a new director of innovation, David Cook, who is our primary partner in Frankfort. Our Governor, Steve Beshear, is even getting behind the effort. And, our former Commissioner who is now in Washington, Gene Wilhoit, is helping to guide the Kentucky effort. Kentucky might have been passed over by Washington, but we know what we can do here ... and we are going to do it with or without outside support. There are so many good people, so many innovators, that the surprise to me would be if Kentucky doesn't substantially move the innovation needle.  

So, tomorrow I'll be tweeting with the hashtag #kynxgl if you want to follow along and ask questions. 

Glad to get this ball rolling ... we'll see where it goes.