Encouraging Innovation to Serve the Needs of Binational Migrant Students

1. Encouraging Innovation to Serve the Needs of Binational Migrant Students Jeanette M. Acosta, MPP Candidate, Harvard Kennedy School Office of Migrant Education | U.S. Department of Education March 1, 2012

2. “Services designed (based on a review of scientifically based research) to expand access to innovative educational technologies intended to increase the academic achievement of migratory students whose education is interrupted.” – CIG Priority

3. Agenda • Background • Policy Question • Methodology • Interview & Survey Findings • Evaluation Frameworks • Applying the Frameworks • Challenges • The Blueprint • Discussion

4. Background

5. Binational Migrant Education Initiative (BMEI) GOAL: to provide coordination & educational strategies for binational migrant students to improve instruction & support services that result in educational continuity and positive learning outcomes.

6. Policy Question

7. Primary Policy Question What types of educational technology programming should BMEI stakeholders prioritize and how can these prioritized activities be implemented through a Consortium Incentive Grant?

8. methodology

9. Methodology • Literature Review • Binational Stakeholder Interviews (34) • Case Studies (3) • Project ESTRELLA • Plazas Comunitarias • Florida Virtual School • BMEI Survey (8)

10. Interview & Survey Findings

11. Stakeholder Interviews Importance of Stronger Federal and State-level Leadership  Need for Clear Communication 1 • Importance of BMEI Restructuring •  Recognition of BMEI Activities Diminishing Value 2 Importance of Educational Technology  Variety of Interests: Distance Learning, Student data-sharing, Online Communities, & “Cyber” Mentorship 3

12. BMEI Survey Findings Current Focus Areas of the BMEI  Strongest Component: Teacher Exchange Program  Weakest Component: Free Textbook Distribution Program 1 • Educational Technology • Top Priority: Binational Migrant Student Database • Lowest Priority: Exchange of Digital Texbooks 2 Consortium Incentive Grant  Mixed Level of Interest 3

13. Educational Technology Evaluation Frameworks

14. Evaluation Frameworks Student-Centered

15. Evaluation Frameworks Student-Centered State Consortium-Centered

16. Evaluation Frameworks Student-Centered State Consortium-Centered

17. Applying the frameworks

18. Case Studies = average = weak = strong = unknown

19. Looking Forward

20. Challenges • Undercount of binational migrant students. • Lack of data on academic outcomes for binational migrants students engaged in BMEI Activities. • Fear among State MEP Directors & binational migrant families. • Limited resources among State MEP Directors.

21. The Blueprint Referencing the Project ESTRELLA model and its use of educational technologies, develop a educational outcomes-focused strategy for the binational migrant student population in order to revitalize the BMEI in the short-term and sustain improvements in the long-term.

22. The Blueprint Short-Term State MEP Directors • STEP UP by spearheading the CIG Application Process and working closely with Mexican stakeholders to redesign the BMEI. • REVAMP the Teacher Exchange Program by expanding the teaching into the academic year and utilizing virtual classrooms and webinars. OME • RESEARCH further the expressed educational technology interests of the Lead MEP State Directors in an effort to strengthen and promote a student outcome-focused BMEI utilizing technology. • COLLABORATE with the Office of Innovation & Improvement and the Office of Educational Technology to draw upon in-house expertise and resources.

23. The Blueprint Long-Term State MEP Directors & OME • DEVELOP & IMPLEMENT clear binational follow-up and accountability mechanisms to ensure that the BMEI and its student-focused services continue to improve and expand. • The Annual Binational Forum should serve as a stimulating springboard for inclusive and meaningful action each year rather than a routine convening.