Big name scientists are on the bill with headlining rock ‘n’ rollers in new ads aimed at getting kids and their parents jazzed about science. Premiering in December’s GQ magazine, the “2010 Rock Stars of Science” campaign pairs musicians such as Blondie ‘s Debbie Harry , Poison’s Bret Michaels and Timbaland , with scientists, including Nobel Prize winners. “All these people are doing great things,” says Harry, who took part in the campaign amid preparations for overseas shows. “We have to get the word out.” Rock stars are household names, but ResearchAmerica! polls suggest half the public can’t name a living scientist. A 2005 National Academies of Science report complained parents aren’t turning their kids on to science anymore. “I think being a scientist is like being a fighter pilot, it’s just as cool,” says Columbia University professor of surgery Mehmet Oz , best known as the host of the syndicated Dr. Oz S how . Oz appears with Timbaland and astronaut Bernard Harris in the campaign. “The juxtaposition of scientists with rock stars might jolt people a little, and open some minds,” Oz says. Scientists paired with rock ‘n’ rollers in the ads include Nobel Prize winner Elizabeth Blackburn of the University of California, San Francisco , and cancer researcher Craig Thompson , chief of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center . “Scientists are really invisible to people now,” Thompson says. “We actually need to get rid of Marcus Welby and show scientists are real people, and just as much a part of our lives as rock stars.” Past years’ Rock Stars of Science messages, sponsored by the Geoffrey Beene Foundation, have paired scientists such as National Institutes of Health chief Francis Collins , an amateur guitarist, with Aerosmith ‘s Joe Perry , who actually played together. “I’m willing to pick up a guitar and get on stage with Joe Perry, if that’s what it takes,” Collins told fellow scientists recently.

WILMINGTON, Del. — The U.S. Department of Education ‘s office of civil rights is investigating whether black male students are punished disproportionately in the Christina School District in Wilmington and Newark , one of five districts nationwide under scrutiny for its discipline record. Federal investigators are in the process of visiting all of Christina’s schools and have requested detailed discipline data for at least the last two academic years. Education Secretary Arne Duncan first mentioned districts were being investigated at a conference in late September hosted by the Department of Education’s civil rights office and the Department of Justice’s civil rights division. Besides Delaware, the school districts under review are in New York , North Carolina , Utah and Minnesota. CIVIL RIGHTS: Education Dept. sees spike in complaints One of the other districts, the San Juan School District in rural Utah, is being investigated for alleged gender disparities without respect to race or ethnicity, according to a school official. Christina district officials acknowledged that a disparity exists in the discipline rates for black male students that they are working to correct, according to district spokeswoman Wendy Lapham. She added that the district has been cooperating with the federal investigation. Statewide, black students made up about 32% of the public school population last year, but they accounted for about 55% of students who were suspended or expelled, according to an analysis by The News Journal published in June that compared discipline statistics provided by the state to school enrollments. The discipline rates for all students in Delaware are higher than the national average: 21,690 of the state’s 126,801 students — about one in six — were suspended or expelled in the 2009-2010 school year, which is down slightly from the year before. Those numbers include in-school suspensions. Counting only expulsions and out-of-school suspensions, the number dips to 14,368 students, or about one in nine. The Christina School District had the highest rate among the state’s 19 school districts in the 2008-2009 and the 2007-2008 school years. However, the district’s numbers went down in almost every school in 2009-2010. Lapham said the decrease is the result of an effort to better train teachers, help students learn to deal with conflicts and the elimination of a zero-tolerance policy. She said the district has been analyzing its data internally and has been “working to address any issues of disparity by working with teachers at the classroom level, increasing training for para-professionals, reviewing and discussing data at the school level and significantly reducing suspensions and expulsions.” In 2009, a 6-year-old boy brought a Boy Scout tool to a Christina school to eat his pudding at lunch. Under the district’s zero-tolerance policy, the boy faced a punishment of suspension or expulsion. The policy did not allow educators to make a punishment judgment call based on the context of the incident or age of the child. But after public outcry and widespread media attention, the school board decided to amend its policy as it pertained to kindergarten and first-grade students. Parents and officials point to that outcome when they complained about Christina’s high rate of punishment among black males. The 6-year-old was white. Wanda Stanley said she read about the boy’s case with interest because her 11-year-old daughter was expelled after a box cutter fell out of her jacket pocket at Pulaski Elementary School in Wilmington. The girl did not know how the box cutter got in her pocket and had no intention of hurting anyone, her mother said. Police were notified by the school but did not file charges. School officials told her there was no room for debate about the expulsion because of the district’s zero-tolerance policy, Stanley said. From her perspective, Stanley saw that a white boy went unpunished while her black daughter was put out of school. “I am hurt because I know my daughter is totally innocent and I don’t want this to follow my daughter through her schooling,” Stanley said. The district and state boards of education ruled that the expulsion was justified. The district’s board amended the zero-tolerance policy further last school year. A complaint against the school board is pending before the state Human Relations Commission, alleging that the district discriminated against Stanley’s daughter on the basis of age and race. Studies show that minorities are punished at higher rates than their peers, but there’s not evidence that these children misbehave more, said Dan Losen, a former teacher who now works for the Civil Rights Project at the University of California, Los Angeles . The government under President George W. Bush did not investigate many schools for these issues, which are now getting attention under the Obama administration, he said. Typically, reviews from the office of civil rights are used to help districts find solutions and to monitor progress, Losen said, because “the preference has historically been to enter into a joint problem-solving approach rather than issuing violations.” Helen Spacht, principal at Christina’s Wilson Elementary, said programs like the district’s Day of Caring help reinforce the importance of kindness and how to treat others with respect. The school is certified under the Anti-Defamation League ‘s No Place for Hate program, which means staff and students have undergone training on diversity issues. Also, teachers have been meeting to share ideas and literature on better classroom and bullying management, she said. “It’s really changing the strategies and how they work with students,” she said. But the district has not made enough progress in dealing with these issues, said New Castle Councilman Jea Street, who organized a rally in April to protest the discipline rates. “The fact is that (the office of civil rights) is once again going to have to do what local officials refuse to do,” Street said. “Nobody would listen to me when I claimed Christina was discriminating when it changed policy to accommodate one child and knew full well that the same policy had been used overzealously for others.”

NEW YORK — Do public school teachers get tenure just by breathing? It’s a claim made by a charter school leader in the education documentary Waiting for Superman , which places much of the blame for bad schools nationwide on union rules that protect incompetent teachers. Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced on national television last week that he would overhaul the way city teachers are granted tenure, linking their advancement to improving student test scores. “Just as we are raising the bar for our students through higher standards, we must also raise the bar for our teachers and principals — and we are,” Bloomberg said. But city teachers say that if bad teachers have won tenure protection it’s the fault of the administrators who gave it to them. “We don’t make that decision. Whoever the principal is makes that decision,” said LezAnne Edmond, a Manhattan high school teacher with 15 years of experience. Teacher tenure has its roots in academic tenure, which was intended to protect academic freedom; once granted, professors are rarely fired. Tenure rules for K-12 teachers vary from state to state, with some operating more like universities and others that offer no stronger protection than job security laws that prevent people from being fired without cause. States including California, Florida and Colorado have passed or proposed legislation to change tenure laws in hopes of securing education funding under President Barack Obama ‘s ” Race to the Top ” program. New York City teachers can win tenure after three years. Once they are granted tenure they cannot be fired without an administrative hearing. What the teachers union calls due process, Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein call a system that has protected incompetence. The issue gained prominence with the Sept. 24 release of “Waiting for ‘Superman,’” opening to wider release on Friday. The documentary from ” An Inconvenient Truth ” director Davis Guggenheim suggests that kids receive a superior education in charter schools without unions. NBC ‘s Sept. 27-28 education summit covered much of the same ground. Bloomberg used a 15-minute MSNBC segment to announce a tenure crackdown. “We’ll do more to support teachers and reward great teaching, and that includes ending tenure as we know it,” he said. Bloomberg said principals must start denying tenure unless their students have made two years of progress on state tests. Michael Mulgrew, the president of the United Federation of Teachers , responded that principals can already deny tenure “for any reason” and that teachers “would welcome an objective tenure-granting process based on agreed-upon standards.” But the union has opposed using state test scores — the city’s preferred benchmark — to measure teacher performance. City Department of Education spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz said the union is being disingenuous. “On one hand, they seem to be blaming principals for too many teachers getting tenure,” she said in an e-mail. “On the other hand, they don’t want principals to take into account student performance when making tenure decisions.” This year, 3.7% of teachers who reached the end of their three-year probationary period were denied tenure, up from 2.3% the year before. Another 7.2% saw their probation extended by a year. Ernest Logan, president of the union representing New York City principals, said his members take student achievement into account. “I don’t think people are just granting people tenure because they’ve been there three years,” Logan said. Veteran city teachers say they need tenure for job security and to protect the First Amendment rights it was designed to safeguard. “I need tenure to speak out,” said Arthur Goldstein, a union chapter leader at Francis Lewis High School in Queens. Goldstein said he has complained publicly about overcrowding and other issues. “I’m standing up for the kids of Francis Lewis High School and I absolutely need tenure,” he said. Katharine Dawson, who retired last summer after 12 years as a city schoolteacher, said tenure “protects you from favoritism, it protects you from all kinds of things.” Asked about tenure protecting bad teachers, she said, “Maybe there’s two bad teachers per school. Is it worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater?” One teacher whom Bloomberg would like to throw out is Melissa Petro, whose essay about using Craigslist to sell herself as a prostitute was published in the Huffington Post on Sept. 7, the same day she was awarded tenure by the principal of her Bronx elementary school. Bloomberg demanded that Petro be pulled from the classroom, but she has tenure and cannot be fired without due process. She has been assigned to an office job pending an investigation. A phone number for Petro could not be found. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Los Angeles teachers union is promising to challenge a proposed agreement that would change how teachers are laid off in the nation’s second-largest school district, while education experts hail it as a landmark that could pave the way for changes in urban districts across the nation. The settlement, which must be approved by a judge, would shield up to 45 underperforming schools from teacher layoffs for budget reasons. It also stipulates that vacancies be filled as quickly as possible, and contains a commitment to explore incentives, such as bonuses, to recruit and retain teachers and principals at poorly performing schools, with additional incentives if the school’s academic performance improves. The agreement stems from a lawsuit by American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California over teacher layoffs at three inner-city schools. The group had filed a class-action suit against the Los Angeles Unified School District in February, saying that mandated seniority-driven layoffs led to the three schools shedding some two-thirds of their teachers, which left students largely in the hands of substitutes. The ACLU said students were being denied their state constitutional right to a fair and adequate education. It won a temporary injunction in May that prevented more layoffs of first- and second-year teachers who form the bulk of faculties at these schools in improverished areas, which more experienced teachers tend to avoid. “Any principal wants a mix of new and experienced teachers, you don’t want any schools skewed,” said John Rogers, director of the Institute for Democracy, Education and Access and the University of California, Los Angeles . “You need a set of measures to keep teachers at a school. If they had done this, seniority-based layoffs wouldn’t have been an issue.” With the recession spurring teacher reductions across the nation, the issue of how layoffs are determined has become especially contentious. Teachers’ unions have fiercely opposed most moves to change seniority policies to a system based on performance and other factors. Some education reformers lauded the proposed settlement because it seeks to correct the root problem: a lack of ways to keep more experienced teachers at schools, which leads to high turnover and thus staffs largely new to the profession. “The reform train is moving,” said Emily Cohen, district policy director of National Council of Teacher Quality. “Districts aren’t as afraid of unions anymore.” But the city’s teachers union, United Teachers Los Angeles, said it would be meeting with the school board and the ACLU to review the terms of the proposed settlement and to voice its objections. “When the district makes a long-term policy that’s detrimental to students, we are obligated to challenge it,” it said. The settlement shields teachers from layoffs at the city’s 25 lowest ranking schools according to the Academic Performance Index, a state score based on standardized tests, and another 20 chronically underperforming schools showing improvement, with the idea being that layoffs would set back advancement at these schools instead of boosting them, said LAUSD Deputy Superintendent John Deasy. Other schools would not be disproportionately affected because layoffs will be capped at the district average for each school. The union said it was concerned that the agreement would leave low-performing schools with a higher concentration of less experienced teachers. It also said “state law already gives schools districts flexibility in layoff procedures to best meet the needs of students” and “the settlement does nothing to solve ongoing staffing problems at hard-to-staff schools.” California is one of a handful of states where seniority-based teacher layoffs are mandated by law. LAUSD’s settlement takes advantage of a loophole that allows seniority to be circumvented to meet special staffing needs and to meet the state constitutional right to a fair and adequate education. Seniority-based layoffs are especially thorny in urban districts, where teachers often burn out early at tough, inner-city schools. In Connecticut, the Hartford Public School System has asked the state board of education to change the seniority-driven layoff mandate because the young teaching staffs at its schools in high-povery areas are being decimated. The teachers union has accused the district of “union-busting.” The issue “focuses the question on whether these students are less deserving of a stable set of teachers than students in a more affluent school,” said Mark Rosenbaum, chief counsel for the ACLU. “It’s about fairness and equality.” The “last hired, first fired” layoff model has long been a sacred cow for the vast majority of teachers’ unions. In a study earlier this year, the National Council on Teacher Quality found that of 100 large school districts, only 25 considered factors other than seniority in teacher layoffs. In 16 districts, performance carries more weight than seniority. Two bills to eliminate seniority-based layoffs in California died in the past year. Moves in other states have succeeded: Arizona approved a law prohibiting seniority-based layoffs, while Rhode Island said layoffs at low-performing schools must be determined by school need, not seniority. Analysts said LAUSD’s settlement is important because it will give other districts a model to follow. “It’s a good compromise,” said Cohen, of the National Council on Teacher Quality in Washington, D.C. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. (AP) — Rutgers University has planned a silent vigil to remember a student who committed suicide after his sexual encounter was secretly streamed online. The tribute to 18-year-old freshman Tyler Clementi will be held Sunday night on the steps of Brower Commons, on the school’s College Avenue campus in New Brunswick. ON DEADLINE: Vigil set for Sunday night Prosecutors say Clementi’s roommate and another student used a webcam to broadcast on the Internet live images of Clementi having an intimate encounter with another man. Clementi, a promising violinist, jumped off the George Washington Bridge over the Hudson River three days later. His body was identified Thursday. Rutgers President Richard McCormick says the vigil will be an opportunity for students and staff to come together and “reaffirm our commitment to the values of civility, dignity, compassion, and respect.” The vigil is the latest in a series of remembrances for Clementi at the university that included the establishment of a Facebook group, In Honor of Tyler Clementi. On Friday, students wore black and were encouraged to leave flowers or mementoes at a makeshift memorial for Clementi. The Rutgers Glee Club also marched down to the memorial and performed a rendition of Rutgers Prayer , which is traditionally sung when an important member of the Rutgers community dies or a tragedy happens at the university. On Saturday, the school had a moment of silence for Clementi before the start of Rutgers’ homecoming game against Tulane. Clementi’s death was one of a string of suicides last month involving teens believed to have been victims of anti-gay bullying. On Friday, more than 500 people attended a memorial service for Seth Walsh, a 13-year-old central California boy who hanged himself after enduring taunts from classmates about being gay. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

SEATTLE (AP) — For many years, diversity in higher education has been measured by how many low-income students and students of color enroll in college. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation wants to make a dramatic change in that definition, by focusing instead on college graduation rates. The foundation, along with the National League of Cities, announced Monday that New York City ; San Francisco ; Mesa, Arizona ; and Riverside , California , will each receive $3 million over the next three years for work designed to boost college graduation. The foundation says its long-term goal is to double the number of low-income adults who earn a college degree or credential that meets job-market demands by age 26. The grants announced Monday are for aligning academic standards between high school and college, strengthening data systems, implementing early assessment and college prep strategies and creating support systems to help students get through school. In announcing the grants, the foundation pointed out the following statistics about the cities where the money will be spent: — Low-income students who graduate from Mesa Public Schools and enroll at Mesa Community College have a 5.4% graduation rate. — Ten percent of the students enrolled as first-year students at the City University of New York in 2006 had earned an associate’s degree three years later. — Riverside City College has a graduation rate of 14%. — About 27% of 9th-graders in San Francisco will go on to earn a post-secondary credential or degree. “We know that in today’s economic climate and labor market, a high school diploma is no longer enough,” said Allan Golston, president of the U.S. Program at the Gates Foundation. “We must not only ensure that young people have access to college; we must ensure that they go on to complete college and earn a degree or certificate with value in the workplace.” Since 2000, the foundation has spent $5 billion on its efforts to improve American public schools, send kids to college and, over the past few years, improve college graduation rates. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Disgruntled students, employees and shareholders have filed a flurry of lawsuits against for-profit colleges since a federal investigation last month found deceptive practices at 15 campuses. The Government Accountability Office report was released Aug. 4, and class-action lawsuits have now been filed in California, Colorado, Arkansas and Utah by former students and employees, who argue in most cases that a school lied to them or misled them. Some companies, including the University of Phoenix and Westwood College, closed campuses or launched internal investigations after the release of the report, which found that admissions officials in four cases encouraged applicants to commit fraud by lying on financial aid forms. Shareholders have filed class-action lawsuits against at least five schools, noting the effect of the report on stock prices and citing securities fraud. Lawsuits alleging deception at for-profit colleges are not new. Last year, the parent companies of the University of Phoenix and Westwood agreed to pay the federal government millions of dollars each to settle separate false-claims lawsuits. In both cases, the schools admitted no wrongdoing. John McKernan, chairman of Education Management Corp., which operates about 95 schools in 31 states, including Argosy University, says lawsuits are part of the territory. “Statistically, the bigger you get, the more (complaints) you’re going to have.” Tampa lawyer Jillian Estes, whose firm has represented students in several class-action suits against for-profits, including Westwood College, says she hopes the federal scrutiny will bolster students’ cases. “We’ve been trying to raise this flag for so long,” she says. “It helps for judges to realize this isn’t just some kids who are a little unhappy, but a nationwide systemic problem.” Westwood in March sued Estes and her law firm for defamation. A Texas agency has threatened to revoke or deny one company’s licenses to operate three for-profit campuses there. One college received a similar warning in Wisconsin. Still, tens of thousands of students say for-profit colleges are their best option. An unprecedented 91,000 public comments were submitted in response to a proposal that would deny federal student aid to for-profit colleges whose graduates don’t earn enough to pay back student loans. The Education Department estimates one-third or more came from students worried that their college would close if the proposal is adopted.

Linda Randall says her daughter, Randi-Lyn, a student at Radford University in southwestern Virginia, is not a “die-hard” follower of the Highlanders sports teams. Even so, by the time Randi-Lyn graduates in 2012, her parents probably will have paid an average of nearly $1,000 a year in fees to the school’s athletics department. They just didn’t know it from the school’s billing statements or website. “We’re looking at five years because she changed majors. That’s $5,000,” Randall says. “That’s one of her loans. That would have paid rent off-campus for a year. It’s kind of disheartening. I don’t think I’d have as much of a problem with it if I knew I was paying it. With what we’re paying, it doesn’t seem right.” Like most other schools in NCAA Division I, Radford relies on student fees to help support ever-expanding athletics budgets. Many schools, including Radford, do not itemize where those fees go for those who pay the tuition bills, USA TODAY found in an ongoing examination of college athletics finances. The amounts going to athletics are soaring, and account for as much as 23% of the required annual bill for in-state students. Students were charged more than $795 million to support sports programs at 222 Division I public schools during the 2008-09 school year, according to an analysis of thousands of pages of financial documents. Adjusting for inflation, that’s an 18% jump since 2005, making athletics funding at public schools a key force in the rapidly escalating cost of higher education. CHAT TRANSCRIPT: Discussion of college athletics and student fees STUDENTS: Unaware of usage of fees and less interested in athletics DISCLOSURE: Laws in place in Virginia and Tennessee ANALYSIS: percentage of tuition that goes to athletics DATABASE: What NCAA schools spend on athletics At nearly all schools, various mandatory fees are tacked on to tuition, and can cover everything from student health care to computers. But the largest portion often goes toward running the school’s athletics department. In exchange, students typically get free or reduced admission to sporting events. But when demand exceeds available student seating, some students can get shut out. Many aren’t interested in the games anyway. “She does go to some of the games,” Linda Randall says of her daughter, “and it’s nice that they let them in free. … But she’s going there for the (academics); she’s not going to fund athletics.” There were 42 Division I athletics departments that reported receiving no student-fee money in 2009, but some of those schools say student-fee money is included in institutional funding provided to athletics programs. Many schools help cover the gap between their athletics departments’ expenses and revenue because they regard sports teams — especially football and men’s basketball teams — as important parts of campus life and excellent vehicles for generating publicity and alumni support. A University of California-Berkeley faculty group seeking ways to reduce the campus’ financial support of athletics acknowledged in a recent report that besides having a “significant” impact on the school’s $250 million in annual academic fundraising, Cal’s wide-ranging and successful sports program “adds to campus spirit and unity, provides free advertising for the campus, helps in branding, and provides a link and outreach to alumni.” But at NCAA Division I schools, athletics spending has been rising at a faster rate than increases in academic spending, prompting various higher-education groups to call for a change in priorities. At least six schools — all in Virginia — charged each of their students more than $1,000 as an athletics fee for the 2008-09 school year. That ranged from 10% to more than 23% of the total tuition and mandatory-fee charges for in-state students, the primary customers at most public universities. Sandy Baum, a policy analyst for the College Board and co-author of the organization’s annual Trends in College Pricing report, asks: Is athletics “10% of what you’re getting out of college?” At least five states, including Virginia, ban or limit the use of public and/or tuition money for athletics. For some schools in those states, relatively large fee charges become an alternative. In other states, on top of dedicated fees that might or might not have been approved by students, athletics departments often get other financial support from their schools. The Randalls are not the only parents who were unaware of the scope of the athletics fees. Among the 20 schools nationally that had the highest estimated per-student athletics fee charges in 2009, based on a USA TODAY analysis, 15 schools confirmed that they do not disclose their per-student athletics fee charges on their billing statements, websites or in other official school publications. Officials at four of those 15 schools — Radford, James Madison , Longwood and Norfolk State, all of which are in Virginia — said the information could be found in an appendix of a state report. At Virginia Military Institute, the athletics fee figure is “buried in our budget,” says Col. Stewart MacInnis, a spokesman. “I had to go dig it out myself. It’s not where anybody would go look for it. You’ve identified a weak spot.” Some schools don’t reveal how much students pay toward athletics, to try to avoid controversy. “Why would you?” asks Jack Boyle, vice president for business affairs and finance at Cleveland State, which was just outside the top 20 in estimated per-student athletics-fee charges. ” …Whenever we spell something out, somebody decides they don’t want that service. We don’t spell out in tuition that 1.8% of it goes to run the religion department. ‘I’m an atheist. Why should I pay for them? I’d never go to any of their courses.’ ” ‘A matter of transparency’ Schools’ reluctance to make public how much athletics departments get from student fees runs counter to federal, and some state-level, efforts to require greater transparency of college costs. The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 this year began requiring schools to annually report to the Education Department separate figures for tuition and required fees. (They had been allowed to report a combined figure.) Starting in July 2011, schools with the largest percentage increases in price over the previous three years will be listed by the department and required to report the reasons for the increases and what will be done to cut costs. In May, the University of California system voted to force greater disclosure of how its schools use money from a fee that can fund certain programs, including athletics. Each campus will have to maintain a website that says how the spending of that money compares with the spending recommended by the campus’ student-fee advisory committee. In June, the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics advocated making student fees apparent as a means to reform athletics spending. “At a time when the cost of attendance at college is going up at a very high rate, it’s a matter of transparency and fairness and equity that people ought to know what they’re spending their money on,” commission co-chairman William E. Kirwan , chancellor of the University System of Maryland, said at that time. “I think that is a way of bringing pressure to bear — this transparency and this exposure of revenues and expenditures — and beginning to put a hold on, to tamp down, the rate of increase (of spending) in intercollegiate athletics.” After Kirwan’s comments, USA TODAY found that two schools in the Maryland system were among the top 20 in estimated per-student athletics fee charges in 2009. Maryland-Baltimore County specifically disclosed its athletics fees on its website and the university system’s; Towson provided only the amount of what the bursar’s office’s website called a “University Fee.” “We do not itemize each cost or fee,” bursar Thomas Ruby says. “We do not get into that detail. That’s how this university operates.” Kirwan said in early August that Towson’s athletics fee is “in the public domain” because it was discussed at a system board of regents public meeting, but “it isn’t as transparent as I think it should be. It ought to be more transparent on the website, and it will be addressed.” Within two days, Towson’s athletics fee — $767 per student for the 2010-11 school year — had been posted on the university system’s site; it remains unspecified on Towson’s site. (Following this story’s original publication on Sept. 22, Towson began showing its specific athletics fee information on the university’s web site.) The Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a Washington, D.C.-based research group, plans to survey students to see how many are aware of athletics fees. But even the center acknowledges that increasing accountability is tough — mostly because even if students are aware of the fee, they rarely are clear on the true cost, administrative director Matthew Denhart says. Many students pay their college bills with loans, so they don’t think about what the true cost will be. And third-party payers — parents, scholarships, Pell Grants — pass on the cost to someone else. “There’s a lot of, ‘I’m not paying for it anyway, so why fight it?’ ” Denhart says. ‘Absolutely getting nothing’ from fee There are those who are trying to fight athletics fee increases or the fees themselves. Kentucky state Rep. Joni Jenkins filed a bill this year to prohibit public universities from charging commuter students mandatory athletics and meal-plan fees. Her bill was never taken up by a state legislative committee, but she says she plans to refile the bill soon so it will be heard in the next legislative session starting in January. “I represent a middle-class district where parents are struggling and students are struggling,” Jenkins says. “So many of the students from my district are part time because they can’t afford to go full time, and they have to work, and they are absolutely getting nothing out of that athletic fee.” She believes commuter students and others should be able to opt out of paying athletics fees, although she acknowledges that for “some of the smaller schools that don’t have the same revenues, (an athletics fee) does keep their non-revenue sports going.” At Montana, however, the student body rejected a proposed athletics-fee increase, overriding action by elected student leaders. Representatives from the Associated Students of the University of Montana (ASUM) approved a plan to boost the athletics fee to $144 annually from $92, but other students were so outraged that they forced the issue to be put to an all-campus vote in May. The plan was defeated by a 2-to-1 ratio. ASUM President Ashleen Williams, who supported the fee increase, predicts the issue will come up again in the fall. “Sometimes you have to make hard decisions,” she says. Relying heavily on ticket revenue to fund athletics is a “really risky game” because sales — which have been Montana’s largest or second-largest revenue source each of the past five years — can wane if teams don’t win. Hawaii’s athletics department had been trying to rely on the $23 million a year it generated from ticket sales, donations, television and marketing, plus an additional $10 million in direct and indirect support from the university. But by this summer, the department had accumulated about $10 million in debt and was adding to that at a rate of $1.5 million to $2 million a year. Over the objections of undergraduate and graduate student organizations, the state board of regents voted in July to impose an athletics fee for the first time. Beginning in January, students will be charged $50 a semester, an amount that is projected to increase the athletics department’s net revenue by about $1.8 million a year; the fee money will be available for any purpose except staff compensation or benefits. “It showed a pretty messed-up sense of priorities,” says Amy Donahue, chairwoman of the University of Hawaii Graduate Student Organization’s advocacy committee. “If we’re going to pay, it should reflect the priorities of the university and benefit the entire university community.” Associate athletics director Carl Clapp says the department hopes the fee will have such a benefit. Athletics “is by no means the most important part” of the university, Clapp says, but “a strong, successful athletic program is very important to the connection with alumni, donors and leaders in the state, and it magnifies the university not only in Hawaii but beyond the state. That’s the visibility that the athletics program can have.” ‘We don’t ask where it’s going’ At some schools, students have been willing to approve fee increases for a variety of purposes. In March 2009, Bowling Green students voted to approve a $60-per-semester fee to help finance the construction of a new campus arena/convocation center — and the measure carried by a ratio of more than 2 to 1. (The school won’t collect the fee until the arena’s completion, scheduled for 2011.) Also that month, Utah State students voted 53% to 47% to more than double their athletics fee to nearly $120 a semester as part of a funding plan to help the school have a more viable program in the NCAA’s elite-level Football Bowl Subdivision. There are students who say they don’t mind paying sizable athletics fees, regardless of whether the fees are specifically disclosed. James Madison University was another school among the top 20 in estimated per-student fee charges that did not disclose its specific athletics fee ($1,080 in 2008-09, according to the state report the school cited). Student body President Andrew Reese says that “it’s not cause for much concern for (students)” because the school provides free admission to events, puts student sections in prime seating areas, and “athletics is a very big part of the student culture.” Cleveland State junior Andrew Sobczak says, “I personally would like it if I knew what I was paying for — and where the money was going.” But he has no problem with most of his overall fee money going toward intercollegiate athletics: “How much? That can be questionable. But I think it should. If you want to go to school, part of the whole school atmosphere is sports as well.” If students know little or nothing about general fees, Sobczak says, it’s partly their own fault for not being more educated consumers. “We don’t question it, we don’t ask where it’s going, we don’t do any of that. So it’s definitely partly our fault that the system works that way.” Boyle, Cleveland State’s vice president of business affairs and finance, says that if students don’t want their money going toward sports, there are options such as online schools and schools such as the University of Phoenix that do not have sports. At Cleveland State, general fees are considered part of tuition, Boyle says. The money from collected fees generally is sliced up three ways, he says. About 40% goes to paying off debt from new student buildings. About 45% goes to athletics. The rest funds activities such as student government. Linda Randall says being told about Radford’s athletics fee “up front would have been better. We still would have sent her there. She loves it. She’s happy. But it would have been nice to know.”

WASHINGTON — Bouncing from home to home exacts a significant toll on a child’s ability to learn. Preliminary data from a 10-year study released Thursday, looking at how California foster kids stack up against their at-risk peers, suggests that academic challenges posed by poverty, disability and language barriers are compounded when those children also have to shuffle from school to school because they have no permanent family. The study, conducted by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley , shows that foster children consistently scored lower in state English and math tests, even when factors such as income, race and learning disabilities were taken into account. The findings confirm earlier studies analyzing foster children in the Midwest and Washington state but the final California report, due out later this year, will be the first to examine how different circumstances within the foster care network affect student learning, researchers said. The data was released at a Capitol Hill news conference by the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute and Fostering Media Connections, which are hoping to spotlight the issue in Congress. Legislation, sponsored by Sen. Al Franken , D-Minn., would direct child-welfare agencies to collaborate with local school districts to ensure that foster children remain in their current schools after they move to new school districts if it’s in their best interest. There are some 400,000 children in foster care at any one time in the United States. The average time a child spends in the foster care system is about 27 months, advocates say. No one needs to promote the importance of stability to Christina Miranda, a foster child from the Reading, Pa., area who shuttled among 10 different schools between the ages of 5 and 18. At 13, Christina thought she had finally found a permanent school — until she was told one afternoon that she had three hours to leave because she was being sent to another family in another community. “I remember moving to that new foster home,” she said during the news conference. “I had this new room. I’m in a new town. I’m with a new foster care agency. New school. New teachers. New friends. That can be very traumatizing for a child, but to have to go through that all the times that I did, it’s unbelievable.” Rep. Michele Bachmann , R-Minn., who has been a foster parent to 23 children — all teenage girls — said she’s not surprised how important a permanent home is for a student who may be struggling with the complexities of algebra or the intricacies of grammar. “The one thing we learned in foster care is that stability is very important in a child’s life,” she said. “Children need a sense of place.” Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Some professors believe Wikipedia has no place in the footnotes of a college paper. But could it have a place on the syllabus? The Wikimedia Foundation , the nonprofit organization that does fundraising and back-end support for the popular open-source encyclopedia, says yes. So do the nine professors at prominent colleges who have agreed to make creating, augmenting, and editing Wikipedia entries part of their students’ coursework. “We’ve known for a long time that students are the fuel of Wikipedia,” said LiAnna Davis, a Wikimedia spokeswoman. “{hellip}We feel there is a place for Wikipedia in the classroom.” ON THE WEB: A stand against Wikipedia MORE FROM INSIDE HIGHER ED: Research methods ‘beyond Google’ “Students have access to so many journals and library materials and other scholarly materials that other people just don’t have access to,” she said. Wikimedia’s new alliances with professors stem from its Public Policy Initiative, an effort to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of topics relating to U.S. public policy. On a grant from the Stanton Foundation, Wikimedia started recruiting public policy professors who were willing to have their students create content for Wikipedia. This fall, the foundation will help nine instructors — four at George Washington University , two at Georgetown University , and one each at Indiana University at Bloomington, Syracuse University , and Harvard University — integrate Wikipedia-related assignments into their syllabuses. (Wikimedia does not pay the professors to do this; the Stanton grant pays for foundation staff and training associated with the project.) “The social media trend is something that students have definitely latched on to, and regardless of what everyone else thinks, they’re going to continue to be involved with it,” says Carol Ann Dwyer, a public affairs instructor at Syracuse , who is among Wikimedia’s academic recruits. “I would prefer, particularly if they’re going to become ‘Wikipedians,’ that they do it properly.” The foundation also recruited student “ambassadors” at those colleges to serve as on-campus resources for professors and students who might be less familiar with the technical aspects of contributing to Wikipedia. It gathered the ambassadors in Washington this summer for three days of training. The foundation also recruited “online ambassadors” — experienced Wikipedia users from around the world — to serve as a second line of support, especially for students who might need help while burning the midnight oil the night before a due date. The particular ways the professors are planning to work Wikipedia into their courses vary. The graduate students in Peter Linquiti’s policy analysis course at George Washington will be asked to pen a detailed critique of an existing entry, assessing its “credibility, intended audience, currency of content, degree of support for the information and analysis, use of policy analysis tools or concepts, extent of balance and/or bias, and any recommended changes to content, style, and tone,” according to a summary provided to Wikimedia. They will then submit appropriate edits to the entry, and then monitor those edits for a week to see what happens to those changes in the fray of editing and counter-editing that is a common byproduct of the site’s wild-west revisions policy. Rochelle Davis, an assistant professor in the school of foreign service at Georgetown, says contributing to Wikipedia dovetails nicely with the sort of literature review and summarizing that she already has students do as part of preparing to write an argumentative paper. Davis says she plans to simply have the students in two of her classes format those summaries for Wikipedia, submit them to the site, then use that as a jumping-off point for writing a proper research paper. In this way, the process mirrors a strategy already employed by many college students, only in reverse: Instead of starting with a Wikipedia page as a nexus to find more authoritative material, the students would do research first, then consolidate their findings into a concise entry on the site. “I’m tired of my grad students saying, ‘All we ever do is critique and discuss and deconstruct,’ ” Davis says. “So I’m going to make them create something that’s not just a thing for me to read; it’s going to go out into the community.” The fact that summarizing for Wikipedia comes with the pressure of knowing others might read and rely on their work might even prompt students to be more meticulous than they might have if the summaries were for Davis’s eyes only, she says. Several other people involved with the project made the same point. The tower and the crowd Academe historically has viewed Wikipedia, which allows any visitor to edit its entries and relies on the vigilance of volunteer fact-checkers, with a great deal of ambivalence. In 2007, the history department at Middlebury College took a stand against citing Wikipedia entries directly in papers, and many others have worried that Wikipedia sows the same moral hazard in students as Google by enabling, by virtue of its breadth and convenience, lazy research habits. A study published earlier this year in the online journal First Monday reported that more than half of college students use Wikipedia at some point in the research process either all or most of the time (though their professors might be relieved to hear that 70% of those students use it at or near the beginning of their research). In recent years, academics seem to have gotten used to Wikipedia being around (and have perhaps recognized its efforts to keep out bad information), and much of the discussion has shifted to how it can be applied constructively. The professors who have partnered with Wikimedia’s Public Policy Initiative are not the first to incorporate Wikipedia into their courses — the foundation counts 59 such instances between 2007 and 2009 — and academics have certainly played a role in helping build and edit the site since it opened in 2001. The initiative does, however, represent the first time the foundation has pushed to seed a community of contributors within higher education. “This is exciting to be sure!” wrote Curtis J. Bonk, a professor of instructional systems technology at Indiana and author of The World Is Open: How Web Technology is Revolutionizing Education , in an e-mail to Inside Higher Ed. “That is a key part the mission of all of us in a higher education setting — to generate as well as disseminate knowledge in different disciplines,” Bonk wrote. “Given that Wikipedia is now central to the knowledge dissemination process as well as the linkages between content and fields, such partnerships are make sense.” But for as much that the academic cloisters and the ?ber-democratic site might have to offer each other, there remains intractable philosophical tension between the two that could foil the collaboration. Linquiti’s exercise of having students track the changes made to their entries by the equally empowered masses hints at the vulnerability of their contributions. The mutability of Wikipedia entries is why Neil Waters, a history professor at Middlebury, still forbids his students from citing them. In its guidelines, Waters points out, Wikipedia instructs visitors to “Be bold in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes” — hardly a scholarly protocol, he argues. “I want my students to worry about making mistakes, and to learn how to avoid them, and how to take responsibility for what they write,” wrote Waters in an e-mail. Alan Liu, chair of the English department at the University of California at Santa Barbara and author of the popular academic blog Voice of the Shuttle, noted the importance of resolving these process issues if academe wants to make its authoritative voice louder in Wikipedia. “The academic community provides a constrained and relatively standard set of protocols for constructive collaboration and refereeing that could be built on (whereas the larger global community behind Wikipedia was more problematic because there is actually no such thing as a global community with sufficiently shared motives and standards of collaboration),” wrote Liu in an e-mail. Much remains to be hashed out between academics and the general public as far as working out such “standards of collaboration,” he said, to resolve the tension between the academic value of peer review and the social media value of crowd-sourcing. “New policies, institutional arrangements, practices, protocols, and technologies will need to be created on both sides of the divide” — between higher education and the “foundations of networked public knowledge” such as Wikipedia and Google — “to create productive and socially-good ways for experts and the crowd to teach, and learn from, each other,” said Liu.” As a handful of loose alliances between Wikimedia and professors, the project “does not seem complete enough.” Wikimedia says it plans to recruit 15 more professors by the spring, and hopes to expand the collaborations beyond public policy eventually. “We are trying to develop a model, a body of documentation, and some technical tools and Wikipedia community processes that will be useful around the globe and in a variety of topic areas; and we hope to set into motion something that will be self-sustaining by volunteer and academic groups,” Frank Schulenberg, head of public outreach at Wikimedia, wrote in a statement. “While we are working only with U.S.-based public policy programs during the pilot program, we will also be continually seeking opportunities to engage our Wikimedia chapters, professors, students, and Wikipedians in other parts of the world and in other topic areas.”