The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA) has been at the center of controversy since it became law in 2002. Two significant intentions of this legislation were to improve academic achievement for the disadvantaged and to provide language instruction for limited English proficient and immigrant students. Although meritorious goals, the controversy centers on the NCBLA not only failing in its desired results, but actually hurting high school graduation rates.

Researchers at Rice University and the University of Texas at Austin found, in a recent study, that the impact of Texas’ public school accountability system, which served as the model for the NCLBA, directly contributed to lower graduation rates in large urban school districts. The NCLBA held schools accountable for student achievement based on standardized test scores and tied federal dollars to the outcome of these scores.

Under pressure to show improved ratings in student test scores, school districts took measures to ensure higher test scores by holding students back. Although this helped raise test scores, it also contributed to affected students getting discouraged and dropping out of school. Ironically, the disadvantaged students who were supposed to be the beneficiaries of the NCLBA had become disenfranchised from public education and this in turn has made the school districts look as though test scores were improving. Consequently, the loss of disadvantaged students has allowed the school districts to be rewarded for improved test scores.

If the NCLBA has failed, it begs the question of what we can do to reform education. Maybe it’s time we turned away from government mandated programs, standardized testing for success measures, and go back to the basics of hiring the best and the brightest teachers we can find. After all, when those classroom doors close at the start of each school day, it is the teacher that is at the center of helping students succeed. If we want to fund a worthy reform in education, then let’s implement the No Teacher Left Behind Act where adequate funding is provided to attract and retain the best and brightest teachers we can find. Let’s put our resources into ensuring that we can provide the best salaries and working conditions for our teachers commensurate with the value they add to an ever-advancing civilization. We can’t begin to think about “no child left behind” if we’ve left our teachers behind.

The gigantic department store chain culture that has all but eliminated small businesses has not left education untouched.  The small, proprietary specialty shops of an older era were either put out of business or were bought and merged into the big business supermarkets and super department stores of today – where the wide array of commodities are standardized and available under one roof.  Similarly, the wide array of course offerings at colleges and universities have also become, to some degree, standardized.

A number of years ago, Colorado, like many other states, passed legislation that allowed any student from a Colorado community college graduating with an A.A. or A.S. degree to automatically transfer to the Colorado college or university of his or her choice with junior status.  The rationale was that the courses are virtually the same at every college for freshman and sophomore-level classes, and Colorado taxpayers should not have to foot the bill when a four-year institution capriciously and arbitrarily doesn’t accept a student’s transfer credits from another public institution of higher education within the state of Colorado.

But are these courses really the same?

What happens when universities value the bottom line more than the quality of the curriculum and the quality of the student experience?  Similar to the department store approach of protecting the bottom line by selling in large volume and outsourcing the manufacturing of products, some institutions are known for large volume and outsourcing.  At a large university, for example, freshman and sophomore classes of 300 to 400 students in a single class are not uncommon.  Outsourcing instruction to teaching assistants is typical.

Community colleges generally have not been caught up in the competitive bottom-line mentality because, without graduate programs, they cannot outsource to teaching assistants.  And by the nature of the community colleges (at least in Colorado), large class sizes of 300 to 400 students run contrary to the community college role and mission of providing more personal attention.  Although a course may look the same on paper, there may be a great deal of difference in the student experience if the course is taken at a community college or if it is taken at a large university.  And bigger doesn’t always mean better, nor does it mean it is less expensive.

Education is not a super department store of classes, and the measure of success should not be on profit margins and the marketability of courses and programs.  The bottom-line in education is measured by how we change lives.

Amendment 50

During the summer and fall of 2008, I joined with my colleagues from community colleges across the state, business and non-profit organizations and community leaders, in support of Amendment 50 the statewide initiative that supported an increase in the limited stakes gambling in Black Hawk, Cripple Creek and Central City.

One of the most compelling reasons to support Amendment 50 was the fact that seventy-eight percent of all new revenue would be invested in community, junior and district colleges. This was an opportunity to help tens of thousands of Coloradans who need the flexibility and affordability of a community college, as well as give a much needed boost to the state's economic engine, without raising our taxes.

The importance of these institutions of higher learning cannot be underestimated, especially in a tough economy. More than half of our state's nurses are trained at community colleges along with ninety percent of our state's first responders. Community colleges also support much needed economic development. For every dollar invested in community colleges, the community receives seven dollars in return. These arguments were compelling enough for fifty-nine percent of Colorado's voters to vote yes for Amendment 50. In fact, Amendment 50 was one of only two statewide initiatives to pass and received more than1.2 million votes, more than any other statewide campaign. In Morgan County, 61% of the voters supported Amendment 50.

As an advocate of this initiative, I was asked many times if this funding would replace the current funding that these schools receive from the state. The answer we all gave over the six months of the campaign was "no." The reason is very simple; it is written very clearly in the ballot language that this funding is meant to supplement, not supplant, current funding and that community, district and junior colleges are to receive seventy-eight percent of new gaming revenue, period. It is also made very clear in the ballot language that Amendment 50 does not reduce the amount of funding that is allocated to pre-Amendment 50 recipients; all will receive the same percentage of this revenue as they have in the past.

Colorado is facing many tough choices in what is a very tough economy. It is understandable that in these tough economic times the legislature would look hungrily at any new revenue stream and use it for what I am sure are worthwhile projects. But the voters approved Amendment 50 with the understanding that seventy-eight percent of new gaming revenues would go to community colleges and would not be diverted to pay for new government buildings or to other causes.

This extra revenue will impact our community directly by allowing us to offer a stronger curriculum and continued educational advancement for current and potential students. Currently the legislature is considering House Bill 1272 which is the enabling legislation of Amendment 50. By passing it, the legislature recognizes the will of the voters and will begin the implementation of Amendment 50.

Balancing technology with life's lessons

Computer technology in education hasn't lived up to the hype it originally had. There was once a promise and a hope that technology would exponentially improve student learning. But then, we should remember that Tomas Edison proclaimed in 1922 that the motion picture would replace textbooks. So what's the status of children using computers to enhance learning in the 21st century?

In a study done several years ago, researchers working through the University of Munich found that 174,000 students in 31 countries perform worse academically with frequent use of computers compared to students who use computers rarely or do not use computers at all.

Proponents of instructional technology argue that never before have students had unprecedented power over their external world. Is this a good thing? At what cost do we encourage children to immerse themselves in a deadened, alienated, and manipulative relationship with the world? If there is too much time spent in the virtual environment of information without a balance of allowing students to fully nurture and develop human and biological relationships with the communities in which they live and learn, our children - and subsequently society - will pay the price.

I admit I was never a big proponent of recess when I taught at the elementary level. However, I now realize that recess provided a chance for children to learn about themselves as they learned to negotiate relationships. I use the example of recess because while computer technology in the schools increased by 300 percent during the last decade, 40 percent of the elementary and middle schools in the United States eliminated recess altogether during this same time period.

The charge of balancing our children's lives belongs to parents as well as our schools. Contemplating the meaning of life as a child lays on a grassy hill and looks up at the sky on a lazy summer afternoon (instead of staring into a computer screen) provides the impetus for philosophical inquiry. Organizing games with friends (instead of playing computer games) provides lessons in cooperation. Opportunities to dig in real dirt to discover the insects and observe the plants that populate the most miniscule segments of our earth will help children learn to explore, appreciate, and protect nature as adults.

Although virtual trips to the Himalayas and cyber trips in space have intellectual merit, there must be a balance for children to have the chance to learn to understand the fragility of the petals of a flower, to use their imaginations in order to learn how to solve problems; and above all, to develop qualities of self-discipline, courage, integrity, and compassion that can only come from human interaction in the real world. An imbalance of technology can take these learning experiences away.

Technology has a place. The vast world of academic, scholarly, and wholesome information available on the internet is invaluable. But it is dangerous if this virtual environment becomes so pervasive it stunts our children's internal growth and their ability to function effectively in relationships. In fact, the conclusion of the Munich study does not advocate doing away with computers and/or technology. The conclusion indicates that technology (computers) may well have a time and a place, but not just any place and any time.

Advanced Placement: The End of an Era

According to a report titled, "Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College" produced by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU), AP has become an obstacle to education reform as best practices in pedagogy are encouraging more in-depth investigative and research-based learning. This is in contrast to many AP courses that feature broad surveys and superficial knowledge.

As AP continues to be locked into the pedagogical theories of 50 years ago, there are a growing number of private secondary schools - particularly those on the leading edge of college preparatory - that have chosen to withdraw from the College Board's Advanced Placement program and are replacing the AP program with their own curricula that aligns with best practices advocated by the AACU, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and other organizations dedicated to classroom learning.

The primary criticism of AP is that it teaches to a standardized test. Most seasoned educators believe - and their belief is supported by modern neuroscience - that covering large bodies of information that students must retain long enough to take a three-hour test is not the best way to promote meaningful learning. Former President of Harvard University, Derek Bok wrote, "It is extremely difficult to capture what students should be learning in a single set of exams, especially when colleges and their student bodies are so diverse."

There is already a best practice taking place in eastern Colorado that doesn't utilize AP, but gives high school students one of the most successful starts possible in their college education. This practice is a strong partnership among many schools who are working with Morgan Community College (MCC) in allowing qualified high school students to take regular college classes through MCC while still in high school for dual (both high school and college) credit. These college courses have supplanted the AP courses with a distinguished record for student success at virtually every university and four-year college in Colorado - and many universities outside of Colorado as well.

If we don't allow a declining AP program to define the transition between high school and college, we will find new opportunities for collaboration between secondary and post-secondary educators. Indeed, if we want the students of tomorrow to be the beneficiaries of the best education we can provide in high school and college, then now is the time to bring secondary and college educators together to make stronger connections for a richer, engaging, and relevant curriculum.

There's the one about the mother who called to ask the college president to make sure her son was wearing his sweater. Then there's the mother who called the college administration to have a light bulb changed in her daughter's dorm room. I've had my share as well. One example of a helicopter parent that I thought was a bit extreme was a couple who submitted a hand-written letter as a job application for their son for a faculty position - albeit their son was not part of the millennial generation. He was 54 years old.

Administrators will tell you it didn't use to be this way. When a student graduated from high school, he or she was considered an adult and responsible for his or her own welfare at college. In fact, being responsible and assertive were attributes that were part of the learning experience in transitioning from adolescence to adulthood. But there's an irony here.

Statistically, most helicopter parents are those who have a college degree and understand the channels in the college hierarchy. This is knowledge parents can share to help their college-age children learn how to take responsibility in an appropriate way. There is less parental involvement from parents of first generation college students; yet first generation college students are at the greatest risk of non-completion of their college degree and could probably use both guidance and support from their parents.

Colleges and universities can address the problem of parents on both sides of the involvement issue by doing a better job of communication. Positive and useful pro-active communication to parents that explains and encourages a positive parental role will potentially alleviate the need for concern from the helicopter parents. And at the same time, those parents who are unfamiliar with college systems would be empowered to be supportive for their children in this uncharted and unfamiliar territory of higher education.

Math performance scores between boys and girls is a matter of equality

A few years ago, Former Harvard University President, Lawrence H. Summers made a remark at an academic conference stating that "The innate differences between men and women might be one reason fewer women succeed in science and math careers." This comment caused an uproar that eventually contributed to Summers' demise as the president of Harvard.

Since that remark, there has been a debate in academic circles whether the difference in math performance between boys and girls is "nature" or "nurture." The debate may be over. In a recent study that was published in Science, four researchers found that out of 276,000 15-year olds in 40 countries who took a math test, girls scored 2 percent lower than boys.

But on its face, the facts are misleading. The researchers found that it was national culture, not innate ability that caused the lower test scores with girls.

In countries that promoted a culture where women were considered subordinate to men, the math scores were lower for girls. These countries included Turkey and Korea. In countries where women have an equal status with men such as Norway, Sweden, and Iceland, there was no difference in test scores between boys and girls. The United States ranked in the middle for both gender inequality/equality and the gap on the math test scores.

The researchers could not determine whether a culture that promoted inequality between men and women caused the gap in test scores between boys and girls was due to a lack of female role models in math (and science); or whether a culture that promoted inequality of men and women created low self-esteem and consequently undermined the girls' self-confidence in taking the math test. However, Paola Sapienza, one of the authors of the study and a professor of finance at Northwestern University, indicated there is no gender gap in mathematics when the societal culture promotes gender equality.

The findings in this study have profound implications that connect our behavior to learning that takes place in the formal educational setting. If we want our girls to excel in math (and science) in the classroom, it is the responsibility of each one of us to model the principle of the equality of men and women so that we create a cultural attitude that will positively affect self-esteem and confidence - and consequently higher academic performance in math - for both girls and boys.

Reading, Writing, and Multitasking

Educators continually sing the praise of this new millennial generation for their technological and multitasking skills. Go to an education conference of any type at any level and there will certainly be sessions on how to understand and keep up with this new generation. Veteran teachers learn new pedagogical and technological methods to capture the attention, teach in short bursts, and move quickly to new and varied activities because students think faster and grasp information much more readily than the generation of their parents.

The traditional lecture is out; group activities are in; and information-gathering skills have supplanted memorization. In fact, a number of teachers eliminate exams and replace the traditional demonstration of knowledge acquisition with a demonstration of information-gathering skills on the internet. This break from traditional education is not necessarily bad. It's just different and a valuable skill for some things. But we need to be cautious that we don't supplant important time-tested learning theories with what may be perceived as an enhanced brain function in the younger generation.

Students can text-message a friend while participating in a conversation as they're watching television and performing other tasks at the same time. But it's a different story if you ask these same students to write an essay while doing another task. Teachers have told me that when it comes to the basics of reading and writing, students cannot excel unless they can focus on the single task at hand - a skill that is increasingly being lost in this high-tech era.

If students approach literature, for example, the same way they approach the internet, they will skim through the words of Hemingway, Faulkner, Yeats, and Tennyson for the factual information. They would lose the meaning of a story or a poem. Reading can't be reduced to data and figures. Literature, like the performing and visual arts, is a process - a sensual process in which the experience of reading, contemplating the symbolism, and getting beyond the literal interpretation of the story is really the whole point. It is an experience in developing insights into the human condition - something that can't be acquired from the internet while watching television and text-messaging at the same time.

Research supports findings that the brain needs a relatively long period of time to perceive and understand. Multitasking and the ability to gather information in record time are great skills in certain circumstances. But enabling students to focus on a single task in order to develop perceptions and understanding is a long-standing and time-tested methodology that can't be supplanted by technology. In the final analysis, there is no substitute for the value of developing contemplative thought with a single focus when it comes to reading and writing.

Underneath the Pomp and Circumstance

As I watched the colors of hoods and the various stripes on the gowns filter into the auditorium for the recent Morgan Community College (MCC) graduation ceremony, I was reminded of the ritual and tradition that began with the advent of the university ten centuries earlier. Even with a progressive community college such as Morgan Community College (MCC), the antiquated system associated with the acquisition of titles and the pontification of knowledge lingers as a reminder of the colorful history of higher education.

The degrees represented on the graduation robes and hoods of Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorates equate the acquisition of knowledge to the respective skill levels of "Apprentice," Journeyman," and "Master" - titles that also began, like higher education, in the Medieval period in Western Civilization.

To greater and lesser degrees, colleges and universities have had difficulty in shaking off the stereotype (ivy tower elitism) of the ancient university. For example, titles that began with the western university in the tenth century are still used today. Titles such as "Chancellor," "Rector," "Provost," "Bursar," "Dean," and even "Professor," differentiate a college or university from any other type of institution - albeit some colleges and universities have merged a modern business model with the older traditions. For example, a college or university may have a president instead of a chancellor and a vice president instead of a provost.

But the acquisition of titles and the pontification of knowledge in higher education are no longer enough to meet the demands of the 21st century. And elitism certainly has no place in institutions designed to be responsive to changing needs of the local and global communities. Innovative colleges such as Morgan Community College are flattening out their structures, de-emphasizing the importance of the traditional titles, and are adapting philosophies oriented toward collaboration in the learning experience. Student, faculty, and staff all have a responsibility and a stake in the learning experiences and outcomes. The idea of an optimum learning experience is to make connections among the curriculum and out-of-class activities so that students can apply learning, become responsible members of the community, strive for excellence in the workplace, cope with change, and build effective relationships.

Beneath the surface of the academic tradition that was on parade at the 38th MCC graduation ceremony, Morgan Community College is bringing positive changes to collaboratively affect and enhance student learning for practical application toward job, career, family, and life in the twenty-first century.

There are currently about 80 million baby boomers born between 1946 and 1965, who will reach retirement age during the next 20 years. Many of them intend to forgo full retirement and remain in the workforce well into their 60s and possibly their 70s. According to recent estimates by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 41 percent of adults 55 and older will still be in the workforce by 2014. This has significant implications for a changing role of higher education.

Many blue collar workers, after a lifetime of working in heavy labor, are seeking skills that will open up new opportunities to get away from heavy lifting, to get away from working in the cold weather, and to find a meaningful second career that will keep the paychecks coming in. In some parts of the country, the trend is starting to shift away from personal interest classes to retraining for new jobs that are less physically taxing.

Although the typical comprehensive community college will continue to offer academic transfer classes, career-tech classes, personal interest classes for life-long learning, and customized training for business and industry, many of the baby boomers returning to college are seeking courses and programs that will help them retool - particularly in technology.

In addition, community colleges are going to need to break away from their traditional scheduling patterns and find ways to accommodate this new population by offering classes on weekends, evenings, and on other sites in the community that provide easy access - and by finding creative ways to tailor the curriculum to maximize learning.

The new demands placed on the community college go beyond making changes in the curriculum and providing enhanced support services. Community colleges are going to need to increase partnerships with industry, local economic development groups and other institutions in order for the curriculum to provide a fair reflection of job opportunities.

With this new trend comes a hidden benefit to traditional-aged students. The boomers are bringing a high work ethic into the classroom that provides healthy competition for academic achievement and also serves as a role model for the traditional 18-year-old student. Many in the very group who once disassociated themselves with mature adults now find themselves amicably comparing class notes with the current generation of younger students.

The times, they are indeed a changin'.