Dear Commons Community,

Yesterday, Sunday morning talk shows covered President Obama and his handling of the three major scandals that have supposedly hurt his administration:  Benghazi, Department of Justice surveillance of the Associated Press, and the IRS harassment of Tea Party non-profit organizations.    Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and the McLaughlin Group all devoted significant airtime to these issues.  CNN did also but concluded its coverage with its most recent poll of President Obama’s approval rating:

“A new poll shows that recent scandals haven’t hurt President Barack Obama’s approval rating.

The poll, from CNN and ORC International, found that 53 percent of Americans approve of the job Obama is doing, while 45 percent disapprove. This number remains virtually unchanged from polls taken before the scandals hit.  The poll was taken on May 17 and 18, and has a 3 percent margin of error.   A CNN poll taken in early April showed Obama’s approval rating to be 51 percent. According to a Gallup poll taken in early May, the president’s approval rating was 50 percent.   The CNN poll also found that 71 percent of Americans believe the actions of the IRS employees who targeted tea party groups were unacceptable. However, 6 in 10 respondents said they trusted the president’s statements on the issue.”

My opinion is that the American people want our government including its President to concentrate its energy and efforts on economic and other problems and not chasing who did what when,  which in the long run expends huge resources and yields minimal if any benefits.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Jessie Daniels, a colleague here at the CUNY Graduate Center, passed along the following commentary about MOOCs.

“Compelling analysis from senior history professors who attended last week’s Annual Meeting of the American Council of Learned Societies:  Susan Amussen, an early modern British historian in the School of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts at the University of California, Merced, and Allyson Poska, an early modern Spanish historian in the History and American Studies Department at the University of Mary Washington.  They both attended the panel on MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), and came away wanting to talk about something thing no one in MOOC-world seems to want to talk about:  power…

Much of the discussion of MOOCs has focused on (alternately) their promise of providing “the best teachers” to students around the world, and presenting cheap quality education to the masses; or the threat they pose to education, in replacing face to face contact with potted lectures, further deskilling and de-professionalizing those of us who teach at less elite universities.  We want to argue that MOOCs raise broader questions than those usually mentioned. In the course of listening to a discussion of MOOCs at the recent meeting of the ACLS (American Council of Learned Societies), we realized that MOOCs must be analyzed in the context of the U.S. American discourse of gender, class, and empire.

One aspect of MOOCs is that the stars are (almost) all men.  At one website only 9 of 56 History MOOCS were presented by women.  Without a doubt, the model of the MOOC – of the authoritative talking head – is one that privileges cultural perceptions of men and male control over certain types of knowledge.  The gendered nature of the hierarchy of knowledge transmission that takes place is clear in the MOOC model of education. Although “students” are invited to respond at different points, to a large extent, the presenter controls the topic, the vocabulary, and the trajectory of whatever “dialogue” might take place. In recent stories on MOOCs at Princeton and Harvard, the instructors (all men) are described by their reputation as charismatic teachers.”

Read the full post here: http://www.historiann.com/2013/05/15/guest-post-on-the-lords-of-mooc-creation-whos-really-for-change-and-who-in-fact-is-standing-athwart-history-yelling-stop/“

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The Chronicle of Higher Education reported earlier this week that British scholars continue to rely largely on traditional channels of communication, including peer-reviewed journals and monographs, despite a growing emphasis on the use of social media and blogs for obtaining or disseminating scholarly information. They also still look primarily to their institutional libraries to provide them with the articles and books they use for research and teaching, even if they do not necessarily spend time in the physical buildings where the resources are housed.

Those are among the findings of a new survey of almost 3,500 British academics published on Thursday. The survey, the first of its kind in Britain, was conducted by Ithaka S+R, the consulting-and-research arm of the nonprofit Ithaka group, which works to help the academic community make better use of digital technologies. It is similar to one Ithaka has conducted in the United States every three years since 2000.

The Executive Summary of the report appears below.

Tony

Executive summary

In 2012, Ithaka S+R partnered with Jisc and Research Libraries UK (RLUK) to survey academics in the UK higher education sector in order to learn about their attitudes and practices related to research, teaching, and communicating. In addition to the findings reported here, this project will provide a national dataset that can be analyzed by discipline, institution type, and other demographic characteristics, compared with findings from a parallel US-based project, and tracked for changes over time.

Key findings

Discovery starting points differ noticeably by disciplinary grouping; for example, medical and veterinary respondents are more likely to start with electronic research resources and less likely to utilize web search compared with others. While peers are not a significant discovery source for several types of research, they are very important for maintaining current awareness of the scholarly literature.

Large majorities of scientists and medical and veterinary respondents are comfortable with the transition to electronic-only publishing and collecting for journal current issues, and majorities are comfortable with the deacces­sioning of journal backfiles. Six out of 10 respondents overall reports having used a scholarly monograph in digital form in the past six months, but while significant shares like e-books for exploratory uses a majority prefers print for in-depth reading.

Freely available materials are seen to be having a real impact on access. Aca­demic libraries collections are most likely to be seen as an important source for providing journal articles and books for research and teaching purposes, but following closely in second place are freely available materials online. When an item is not held in the library collection, the highest share of respon­dents report that they look for a freely available version online, while the second highest share gives up, both of which outrank using the library’s inter­lending or document supply service. Disciplinary groupings differ noticeably in several cases in their access practices. Overall, a third of respondents report that they can almost always get satisfactory access to needed journal articles not immediately available through their institution.

In selecting areas of research to pursue, nearly all of our respondents indicated that they are guided primarily by their own personal interests, though many also consider the availability of funding or opportunities to publish.

Virtually all respondents indicated that it is very important to them that their research reaches academics in their own subdiscipline or field of research, about 4 out of 5 identified academics in their broader discipline as an impor­tant audience, and over half ranked “professionals in my field outside aca­demia” as a very important audience. Beyond these core audiences, a relatively small share of respondents identified the general public as a key audience, with especially few scientists doing so.

Academics’ audience prioritization is clearly reflected in choices they make regarding the publication of their work, where traditional measures of influence are most important in selecting where to publish their articles.

Overall, about 45% of respondents indicated that they would describe themselves as very dependent on their college or university library for the research they conduct. Almost all respondents rate the library’s role as a purchaser of needed resources as very important, while other roles are less universally indicated as important.

Learned societies are valued primarily for organizing conferences, publishing peer-reviewed academic journals, and defining and advocating for the field’s values and policy priorities. Conferences are valued for their formal function of helping academics keep up with new scholarship, and the informal role of connecting academics with peers.

Dear Commons Community,

Colin Chellman,  Associate Dean, of CUNY’s Office of  Institutional and Policy Research, has passed along information  on a policy brief his office completed on Hurricane Sandy and its impact on CUNY and its students.  Entitled, In the Eye of the Storm: CUNY Students and Hurricane Sandy, the brief comments:

“Nearly one in ten CUNY students resided within reach of Sandy’s flood waters in New York City. Every CUNY campus was affected by the storm’s surge, albeit some more than others. Identifying which students were impacted by the hurricane constituted an important part of CUNY’s response to Sandy. Final counts indicate that over 17,000 CUNY students were affected. Future research will focus on the storm’s effect on enrollment and academic performance.”

Well worth a read!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Following a report from the Congressional Budget Office, Democrats in Washington scolded the Obama administration and the U.S. Department of Education for establishing policies that will result in a $51 billion profit from students and their families.  As reported in The Huffington Post:

“Congressional Democrats have pounced on a nonpartisan government report showing the Department of Education this year is forecast to earn a record $51 billion profit off student borrowers, denouncing the Obama administration and urging for structural reforms.

Members of the House of Representatives including George Miller (D-Calif.), John Tierney (D-Mass.) and John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) cited news reports that highlighted the Tuesday estimate by the Congressional Budget Office, which showed that the Education Department was forecast to report higher earnings this year than Exxon Mobil and nearly as high as those of the four biggest U.S. banks by assets combined.

“We don’t see students or their parents as profit centers, and we don’t think it’s an appropriate concept to be acting like a market-driven bank here,” Tierney said.

Miller criticized a policy that is leading to “immense profit being extracted from students and families that are struggling.”

The critical comments have alarmed policymakers in the Obama administration, who along with lawmakers are racing to avert a scheduled doubling of interest rates on some new federal student loans that is set to occur on July 1.”

This is a shame and a serious breach of trust with President Obama and especially the leaders of the U.S. Department of Education who have talked the talk of helping students enroll and succeed in college while implementing policies that have added significantly to their debt.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Following on the heels of Paul Tough’ s book, How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character, the U.S.  Department of Education has issued a draft report examining these qualities in terms of student success.  The report is ambitious in trying to deal with this very difficult and murky topic.  Here is an excerpt from the Executive Summary:

“How can we best prepare children and adolescents to thrive in the  21st century – an era of  achievement gaps that must be closed for the benefit of everyone in society, rapidly evolving  technology, demanding and collaborative STEM knowledge work, changing workforce needs, and economic volatility? The test score accountability movement and conventional educational approaches tend to focus on intellectual aspects of success, such as content knowledge.

However, this is not sufficient. If students are to achieve their full potential, they must have opportunities to engage and develop a much richer set of skills. There is a growing movement to explore the potential of the “noncognitive” factors—attributes,  dispositions, social skills, attitudes, and intrapersonal resources, independent of intellectual ability—that high-achieving individuals draw upon to accomplish success.

In this brief, we take a close look at a core set of noncognitive factors—grit, tenacity, and perseverance. These factors are essential to an individual’s capacity to strive for and succeed at long-term and higher-order goals, and to persist in the face of the array of challenges and obstacles encountered throughout schooling and life.  Importantly, we are deliberate not to treat these factors as residing only within the student—it is the responsibility of the educational community to design learning environments that promote these factors so that students are prepared to meet 21st-century challenges.

What will it take to shift educational priorities to promote not only content knowledge, but also grit, tenacity, and perseverance? This is an important and exciting time to stop, take stock, and prepare to move forward…

While this domain of noncognitive factors is rich and vibrant, it is also quite nascent. Research and practice traditions in education, psychology, economics, engineering, and other fields  provide a wealth of knowledge about these factors. At the same time, there are many unanswered questions, and it can be challenging to navigate this landscape of ideas.

The purpose of this brief is to distill the critical themes, questions, conclusions, and recommendations around theory, measurement, and the design of learning environments, with an eye toward identifying  potential  new roles for technology.  This brief explores the possibility that grit, tenacity, and perseverance can be malleable and teachable, and discusses the potential of these factors to significantly increase success for all students.”

Without a doubt, this is an important area of investigation for educators and worth one’s time to review.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The U.S Department of Education through its policies has managed to turn the student financial loan program into a magnificent profit center for the federal government, more lucrative than the most successful American businesses.  As reported in the Huffington Post:

“The Obama administration is forecast to turn a record $51 billion profit this year from student loan borrowers, a sum greater than the earnings of the nation’s most profitable companies and roughly equal to the combined net income of the four largest U.S. banks by assets.

Figures made public Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office show that the nonpartisan agency increased its 2013 fiscal year profit forecast for the Department of Education by 43 percent to $50.6 billion from its February estimate of $35.5 billion.

Exxon Mobil Corp., the nation’s most profitable company, reported $44.9 billion in net income last year. Apple Inc. recorded a $41.7 billion profit in its 2012 fiscal year, which ended in September, while Chevron Corp. reported $26.2 billion in earnings last year. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo reported a combined $51.9 billion in profit last year.

The estimated increase in the Education Department’s earnings from student borrowers and their families may cause a political firestorm in Washington, where members of Congress and Obama administration officials thus far have appeared content to allow students to line government coffers.

The Education Department has generated nearly $120 billion in profit off student borrowers over the last five fiscal years, budget documents show, thanks to record relative interest rates on loans as well as the agency’s aggressive efforts to collect defaulted debt.”

This is an incredible turn of events for an administration that has supposedly sought to help students go to college and to ease their financial burdens.  There is a contradiction here if not hypocrisy.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Bill Thompson, Democratic mayoral candidate, in a talk last night at NYU, came out swinging against the current state of public education in New York City.   While giving Mayor Michael Bloomberg credited for some accomplishments such as the development and expansion of 21^st century vocational high schools, he characterized the state of public education under Mayor Bloomberg as a system where:  “Parents feel shut out, teachers feel demonized,” and, “too many classrooms have been turned into test-prep centers”.

Much of what Thompson said is true and echo comments from other candidates.  In the coming weeks and months as the mayoral nomination season moves into high gear and the candidates become more adamant about closing any gap in their polls, Mayor Bloomberg’s policies and especially education will come under severe scrutiny and attack.  This will especially be the case until the United Federation of Teachers endorses one of the candidates.   As reported in the New York Times:

Michael Mulgrew, the leader of the city’s teachers’ union, said Thompson’s speech was full of “very smart ideas” that he was sure would elicit a “positive reaction” from his members.

“He clearly has an understanding of the diversity of our city schools,” Mr. Mulgrew said.

However, Mr. Mulgrew declined to say if Mr. Thompson’s performance had succeeded in inching the candidate closer to the union’s coveted endorsement.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

In an op-ed piece in the New York Times on Monday, Angelina Jolie shocked her fans and many more with the disclosure that  she decided to have a preventive double mastectomy once she learned that she has a gene that greatly increases the risk for breast and ovarian cancers.  In a most candid revelation:

“MY MOTHER fought cancer for almost a decade and died at 56. She held out long enough to meet the first of her grandchildren and to hold them in her arms. But my other children will never have the chance to know her and experience how loving and gracious she was.

We often speak of “Mommy’s mommy,” and I find myself trying to explain the illness that took her away from us. They have asked if the same could happen to me. I have always told them not to worry, but the truth is I carry a “faulty” gene, BRCA1, which sharply increases my risk of developing breast cancer and ovarian cancer.

My doctors estimated that I had an 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer, although the risk is different in the case of each woman.

Only a fraction of breast cancers result from an inherited gene mutation. Those with a defect in BRCA1 have a 65 percent risk of getting it, on average.

Once I knew that this was my reality, I decided to be proactive and to minimize the risk as much I could. I made a decision to have a preventive double mastectomy. I started with the breasts, as my risk of breast cancer is higher than my risk of ovarian cancer, and the surgery is more complex.”

Ms. Jolie has done women an incredible service by her decision and her public disclosure.   Her incredible high profile and beauty gives so much credibility to her candid revelations that women around the world will think most seriously about their risks for developing these deadly cancers.

Brava!!!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Educational technology after a bit of a hiatus in the early part of this decade and then struggling during the Great Recession, is making a major comeback.  Samantha Faire referred me to an article she wrote that provides lots of advice on  How to Make it in the Ed Tech Startup Sector .  Essentially she explores opportunities that are available in what many are predicting is a major growth industry.  She catches the reader’s attention with:

“If you’re in business school, wondering which industry is ripe for innovation and rife with investment and consumer dollars, just take a look around and you’ll have your answer. Education, that bastion of methods, materials, and mediums from yesteryear, is being rebooted. The educational technology, or edtech, market could be looking down on the trillion-dollar mark by 2015, and now is the time to jump in with a new business idea.”

She goes on to refer to the MOOC startups such as Udacity and Coursera.  She also provides info on  new entries into the LMS and lecture capture market.

For those of us who have been involved with ed tech for a while, we have seen  boom and bust cycles in the 1980s and again in the late 1990s/early 2000s.  However, we have surely now entered another boom period.  Whether it lasts or not is another question.  I do think that regardless of how the private sector develops, there will definitely be a large demand for ed tech professionals who will be readily employed by the private sector or by colleges and K-12 schools who decide to develop technology services on their own.

Tony