PFP15F

Recently I read an article about the Teacher Loan Forgiveness program and it gave me an idea of something we should change in higher education. But first let me briefly tell you what  Teacher Loan Forgiveness program is. Earlier this year the Federal government initiated a loan forgiveness program  to encourage people to enter and continue is the teaching professions. Of course there are many stipulations they have to meet such as be a full time teacher for five complete/consecutive years at educational agencies, certain elementary and secondary schools and those who will serve low-come families. Another caveat is that the loans have to be PLUS loans (federal loans) (more information can be found at http://www.tgslc.org/borrowers/teachers/faq.cfm ). Upon meeting these requirements, their loans for up to $17,000 will be forgiven.

I believe that this is a good initiative and will benefit some teachers but not all teachers. I really believe that there are many others who would benefit from similar loan forgiveness programs who are not in the teaching profession. For example students who are going into caregiving fields where they know that if they take out loans for their education, they will not make enough money upon graduation because of the nature of their work (and it is not about the money for some but the ability to be in positions that will help others such as social work).  These individuals, similar to teachers who can benefit from the loan forgiveness program, can invest more into their passions for what they do as opposed to worrying about making ends meet and paying back their loans when their starting salary in meager as is.

College affordability continues to be a major issue for students, families and institutions of higher education.  Many students struggle to find accurate data about college cost and student debt when selecting a college. In order to help students and families to make informed decisions about the cost of college, President Obama, a few months ago, unveiled the online system called the College Scorecard.

The College Scorecard is an extensive federal database, developed in collaboration with teachers, parents and students,  that holds information about cost of attendance and student debt for over 7,000 higher education institutions in the U.S. This database also allows students and families to sort and compare institutions based on a number of factors: school size, salary after attending, on time graduation rates among other factors. The goal of the database is not to rank institution but instead provide information on institutions.  Another aim is to provide transparency and access to better data that will help students/families to be proactive about planning for college.

If you haven’t checked out the site please make sure to look up your institution and you will be surprised (some times in positive ways) about the kind of information you will find. I think this is a great initiative and the website is easy and simple. One major critique I have of this database is that although it allows students/parents to compare institutions and make decisions accordingly about the cost of college, I believe that not all institutions are the same and unless you are comparing similar institutions (by size or type) that is the only way you can easily say that you are making informed decisions about the institution you may attend.

What do you think? Is this an initiative that would have been helpful to you as you were making decisions regarding what institution to attend?

I read an interesting article about the Obama Administration’s plan to restore Pell grants for prisoners. Pell Grants is a federal financial aid program that typically provides awards (do not have to be returned- like a scholarship) to undergraduate students from low socioeconomic backgrounds (financial need). This programs helps to increase access to education for those who are unable to pay for college. Prior to 1994 inmates had some access to state and federal funds to cover education related expenses including tuition and books but in ’94 a new law prohibited the use of Pell Grants for prisoners.

Obama administration’s plan to restore Pell Grants will once again provide educational funds to some prisoners. The program will be a small piloted program that will allow a limited number for colleges and institutions to deliver courses at prisons. The money will directly be given to the institutions. The main goal of the program is to equip incarcerated individuals with skills that will allow them to succeed in the society and will make them productive members once they have completed their time in the prisons.

Although there have been many advocates of this program, this initiatives is receiving criticisms from many fronts. One of such criticisms is that the money that will be awarded to prisoners should be directed towards low income students.  I believe that this is a great initiative. Access to education should be available to all regardless of their background, criminal history and socio economic status. I am assuming that individuals who leave prisons have a tough time adjusting to the society as is ( that’s why so many end up back in prisons) and with out the necessary credentials or vocational skills (to keep up with the pace of the society) they would have a harder time finding their place.

If you are interested in learning more about the Obama Administration’s Plan here are some helpful cites:

1)Obama to extend college aid grants to some prison inmates

2) Obama Poised to Give Financial Aid to Federal, State prisoners

3)Obama’s Plan to Restore Pell Grants for Prisoners Gets Mixed Reviews

Professors in many classrooms are encouraging students to be mindful in the kind of language they use in the classrooms. Recently, there has been a push to employ gender-neutral and inclusive terms when speaking and writing, by both the professors and the students. I recently read an article in the Chronicle of Higher education titled “Should a Syllabus Ever Tell Students What Not to Say?”, where an instructor informed the students that they would be penalize for using words like “mankind” or “illegal alien” in class and on assignments. The goal was to emphasize the importance of teaching biases inherent in language. The professor set these expectations in the syllabus and informed the students of the consequences of not following up with these expectations. The professor has received pushback from not only the students but also for other constituents at the university. So what intrigues me is that if classroom is not the place to learn about such inherent biases then where do the students learn this?

I believe that college is a place where students learn not only about their majors but also acquire life long skills. Expectations that faculty set in the classroom regarding the use of language, may not always be well received, but creates an avenue to challenge and explore different ways of knowing and communicating. Often, people use language that is learned from an early age, not always the most politically correct, but it is never too late to practice new skills and become mindful. In my opinion, I would not penalize the students (unless it is a requirement) but I would create opportunities to have dialogues with students when non inclusive language is used. Also it allows for those in the room who the language excludes to get a voice. I am not sure about others but dialogues like these allow me to be self aware and conscious of the language I use when communicating with diverse populations?

Do you think faculty can police certain types of language in the classroom and penalize those who do not adhere to such expectations?

The unfortunate truth is that every few weeks we hear about threats of gun violence in university communities. If you do a quick search on any of the higher education news papers or journals you will find a ton of articles and news reports of violence or fear of safety because of guns. So the questions that baffles me is why do we continue to allow these weapons in academic settings?

I understand that the second amendment of the U.S constitution gives individuals the rights to protect and bear arms but is a college campus the right place it.  In my opinion, NO! Allowing students to carry arms on campus creates an environment of fear and distracts students from the main purpose of why they are there. I am certain that most campuses have safety and security offices (university police departments) or have partnerships with local police departments to help with providing a safe learning community. Secondly, I agree that we are all adults and should be treated as such and thus should be allowed to practice the freedoms that the U.S. Constitution provides but I also understand that not all students behave like adults. Allowing such adults to carry weapons puts a larger community at risk.

As I was reading about this topic, I was surprised to uncover that there are various states that have allowed the carrying of firearms on university premises (i.e. campus grounds, classrooms, dormitories, or parking lots). Virginia is among the states (along with 22 others) that allows each college and university to decide their decision to ban or allow concealed weapons.

The interactive image below was taken from Armed Campuses website to provides more information on how various states enforce the carrying of concealed weapons on college campuses.

COLOR CODING KEY

RED = Concealed guns allowed by law
GREY = Concealed guns allowed by law, but schools limit locations/who carries
GREEN = Concealed guns on campus prohibited by law
YELLOW = Schools decide weapons policy
ORANGE = Concealed guns allowed only in locked cars in parking lots

We all have seen that in the last decade or so social media has become a huge part of most peoples lives. It has transformed the way we communicate and share information (whether we like it or not). Various avenues (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter…) have blurred international lines as people have the ease of connecting globally within seconds.

Although there are many critiques who believe that  social media does not belong in the classrooms, many faculty members are starting to embrace it and are incorporating Facebook, twitter and blogs in creative ways as part of the curriculum to keep the information and methods of delivery approachable.  I recently read the article “Using Social Media in the Classroom: Why There’s A Lot to Like”, and got some great ideas on incorporating social media in higher education. Some of the tips that were new to me are:

1. Teachers offering  support to students via twitter. That is in addition to office hours, making your self available via twitter can allow flexible ways to provide support to students. Additionally, students can discuss assignments and requirements through twitter as well.
2. Teachers can encourage students to great Facebook groups for team assignments and use that as information sharing platform.
3. Instagram can be used to capture real-time visual concepts and used to submit them in place of written papers or assignments.

I believe some of these ideas are cool and more easily implemented then others but what I liked about this article was that it encourages teachers to think outside the box.

As I was browsing the ORI (Office of Research Integrity) website and the various resources it provides, I was excited to come across the website for “Office for Human Research Protections” (OHRP).  In particular, I found a tab on International research. Prior to consuming this information I was unaware that there are agencies within the U.S. that works to make sure that human subjects in a research study, who do not reside in the U.S., are offered the same level of protections as research participants locally. They offer various resources for consultation and trainings prior to taking on any research.

Additionally, they offer a six page document highlighting research standards and additional information. What I found most helpful was that they list out necessary information regarding standards and requirements by country. Most of the information is organized around four categories: Key Organizations (include those groups that issue regulations or guidelines, or serve in a national oversight role for human subjects research), Legislation (encompasses statutes, statutory instruments, and legislative decrees, as well as any pertinent constitutional provisions), Regulations (refer to instruments that are created and issued in the name of governmental administrative bodies) and Guidelines (pertain to non-binding instruments). Lastly, I believe that this website is a great resource for all researchers regardless if one is conducting research on human subjects abroad or locally.

One of the Open access journals in education is the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL), founded in 2001 and housed at Indiana University. The journal is published six times a year and its main focus is to provide a forum of education sharing for a community of teacher-scholars. It is peer reviewed and its objective is to publish data- driven articles that are both quantitative and qualitative (literature reviews, case studies, essays…). Its goal is to promote scholarship of teaching and learning of investigations that are supported by theory and evidence based.

The journal promotes an open access policy and states their policy on their website:

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

The journal aims to provide quality information as well as promotes credible information sharing practices. It positions itself in the open access movement by promoting effective practices as well as knowledge base in teaching and learning. Additionally, the aim is to provide free access to knowledge for everyone.

I read this interesting article in the Chronicle of Higher Education titled “Academic Social Network Hopes to Change the Culture of Peer Review” . The article focuses on creating a peer review network for journals, to be released soon to the public. Its aim is to replicate what already happens at conferences (reviewing scholarly journals), but this will allow more timely feedback, less time spend on traveling and a larger audience that can provide feedback to the authors.

Although there are many critics of this system, I believe that it’s a new and innovative way of connecting young scholars to others. Additionally, not everyone can afford to go to conferences (monetarily and time restrictions), so this allows for cheaper, quicker feedback.

Do you buy into Academia.edu’s peer review culture shift ?

The first mission statement is from Duke University, located in Durham, North Carolina. Duke is a private, liberal, research institution founded in 1838, with approximately 15,000 students (undergraduate and graduate). Duke University’s mission statement is clear and focuses on providing high quality education for both undergraduate and graduate student populations. The statement emphasizes a focus on students’ (undergraduate and graduate) intellectual development, ethical development and providing opportunities that will allow the students to develop as leaders within their communities. The mission includes promotion of health, open inquiry, developing active professionals, instilling a sense of commitment and citizenship and creating life long learners.

I was surprised to learn that Duke has more graduate students (8,379) than undergraduates (6471) and has  eleven schools that offer both undergraduate and graduate degrees in Law, engineering, medicine, public policy, nursing, business, divinity, and environmental sciences, to name a few. This explains the reason why both populations and their development is explained in the mission statement. Additionally, it was refreshing to read that the institution also believes in (as per the statement) in choosing outstanding individuals to work for the institution: officers, trustees and faculty. As these groups are important constituents in supporting, practicing and furthering the institutions mission. Something that stood out to me further was that the statement indicates the institutions desire to cure disease, and promote health, through sophisticated medical research (I did not expect the mission statement to be so specific).

The second mission statement is from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech), located in Blacksburg, Virginia. Virginia Tech is a large, research, public, land-grant university, founded in 1872, with approximately 30,000 students (undergraduate-23,000 and graduate-7,000). Virginia Tech’s mission statement states the purpose of the institution (to serve the state of Virginia, the nation and world community). It emphasizes that discovery and research of new knowledge, teaching and learning, and outreach and engagement are important to the institution.  Lastly, the statement indicates that VT “creates, conveys, and applies knowledge to expand personal growth and opportunity, advance social and community development, foster economic competitiveness, and improve the quality of life“. Virginia Tech’s statement is really broad. It states a desire to be leaders locally, nationally and globally through discovery, research, teaching and learning, outreach… The statement uses a lot of loaded words that can mean different things to different people. These words/ statements are vague and ambiguous.

I understand that both the institutions (Duke and VT) are unique (one private, one public) in their own ways, suited for their environments and the populations they serve, but both have mission statements that place a value on serving multiple communities through learning (which should not be a surprise as the purpose of the institutions is higher education). Additionally, both institutions have a research focus and believe in creating new knowledge. A major difference in the mission statements is that Duke’s mission statement is detailed, it addresses the various constituents of the university and their needs/ development. On the other hand, Virginia Tech’s mission statement is broad and one can assume that it addresses the same needs yet it does not explicitly mention undergraduates and graduates in the statement. I believe that it is difficult to have highly specific statements in the mission statements,partly as the statement should highlight big goals, aspirations and directions that institution wants to pursue. Although, I am more attracted to Duke’s statement, I believe the VT statement hits on all the major areas that makes VT unique from other institutions.