Keep Thinking’s Early Childhood Education Professional Training (ECEPT) Program: A Technological Approach to Service Learning and Experiential Education

Keep Thinking seeks a social entrepreneurship with local community resources to implement an early childhood education professional training (ECEPT) program for high schoolers and young adults.

Basic features of the American high school can be modified to target the ¼ of high school students who fail to graduate within four years of beginning. Two major reasons for high school are to prepare teenagers for civic participation and economic self-sufficiency. This can be achieved in a variety of ways. Based on empirical evidence, four strategies can be implemented to improve education for teenagers. First, education should implement a curriculum that prepares students for both postsecondary education and careers. Keep Thinking’s ECEPT program uses mastery goals in line with college admission expectations and early childhood education professional objectives to prepare students for both postsecondary education and careers. Second, program funding should not be limited to the number of students attending but also to things like content of coursework, success in participation and graduation and procurement of jobs and postsecondary education options. Keep Thinking’s ECEPT program plans to fund future projects through a variety of means, including utilizing community resources and procuring public grants, so that resources will not be limited based on the number of students. Third, more adults than traditional educators should be responsible for the education of youth. Keep Thinking’s ECEPT program will utilize service learning and experiential education, both of which will require students to go out into our community. Academic advisors, coaches, internship supervisors, and mentors will be available to help with the holistic education of program participants. Finally, programs should expand the option of geographically fixed areas. Keep Thinking’s ECEPT program will include technological approaches (like distance learning and social networking) that will allow the program to attract students from an area larger than a fixed school district (Stern, 2009).

Keep Thinking’s ECEPT will:

·  Use Mastery goals as the framework of the course

·  Prepare students for postsecondary education, as well as a career upon graduation from high school

·  Prepare students for civic participation and economic sufficiency

· Provide a holistic approach to learning

· Utilize technology, service learning and experiential education

· Base funding on a variety of factors, not just number of students enrolled in program

· Provide many places of learning: Learning will take place throughout the community, allowing for many people to educate our youth

· Take advantage of distance learning aspects, and create an online presence, allowing for more students to attend from a larger geographic region.

· Create a network of support for students and ease the transition into higher education and careers

Social entrepreneurship is defined as mission driven work where the prime outcome is social benefit. Social entrepreneurship is a three step process (Intrator and Siegel, 2010). 

Step 1: Identify an area of need and a population who lacks financial or political means to achieve transformation.

• Area of need: More, better quality, diverse and differientiated education programs
• Population: Children and youth in rural south Georgia

Step 2: Identify an area of improvement and develop a social value proposition.

• Area of improvement: Introduce a technological approach to provide a service learning and experiential early childhood education professional training (ECEPT) program 
• Social value proposition: Education improves quality of life for everyone

Step 3: Implement program to improve quality of life for population.

• YOU can help

Keep Thinking’s ECEPT: A Technological Approach to Service Learning and Experiential Education

A Technological Approach

-Technology skills are best learned through experience (Knight and Rochon, 2010).

 -Online communities can replace physical proximity to provide social, academic and practical support to students in the program, as well as those transitioning into higher education or careers(Haythornthwaite, Kazmer and Robins, 2000).

-Technology use in the classroom has shown to improve student achievements (Colcord Stuht and Colcord, 2011).

-Asynchronous Learning Networks (ALNs), like online classrooms, enables learning to become student centered, allowing for higher cognitive functions (Heckman and Annabi, 2005; Lobel, Neubauer and Swedburg, 2005).

-Online service learning is just as effective as face to face service learning (McCorry, 2012).

Service Learning and Experiential Education

Service learning involves community activities or projects that link real world or hands on experience to course content to facilitate social responsibility while reinforcing academic learning. Experiential education provides students with a connected view of learning that integrates real world experiences with classroom lectures to create a holistic learning environment. Although similar, service learning’s main focus is to develop a sense of civic responsibility. Experiential education enhances students’ understanding and interest in a particular subject area and improves classroom engagement and comprehension. Both involve real world projects, student reflection and coursework correlation (McCorry, 2012). More information about the experiential education model can be viewed here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS0k7RT3dKI

  

Why should you join Keep Thinking in a Social Entreprenuership?

                            Just look at some of the benefits!

 

Community	Programs involved in social entrepreneurship	Students
·         Better education ·         More involved in education process ·         Increases involvement in youth programs ·         Improve economic conditions	·         Additional funding opportunities ·         Advertisement through involvement ·         Possible expansion ·         Stronger community involvement	·         More holistic education ·         Improved academic achievements ·         Economic sufficiency sooner ·         Civic Involvement ·         More engaged learning

For more information, please call Michael Nancy RIcketts, owner of Keep Thinking Training and Educational Services, 220 Victoria Circle, Vidalia, Georgia, 30474 at (912) 386-4511.

Resources:

1. Colcord Stuht, A., & Colcord, C. (2011). Tech, teachers and teens: Bridging the divide. Leadership, Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.dml.regis.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=20&sid=b5a5cf4c-fdbb-408b-bef3-3df1d9b894e4@sessionmgr104&hid=122 (Colcord Stuht & Colcord, 2011)
2. Eyharabide, V., et al. (2009). Personalized e-learning environments: considering students’ contexts. Brazil: Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.dml.regis.edu/book/10.1007/978-3-642-03115-1/page/1
3. Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M. M., & Robins, J. (2000). Community development among distance learners: Temporal and technological dimensions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1), Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/haythornthwaite.html
4. Heckman, R., and Annabi, H. (2005). A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face-to-face case study discussions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 7. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/heckman.html
5. Intrator, S. M., & Siegel, D. (2010). Project coach: A case study of a college-community partnership as a. Perspectives on Urban Education, 66-71. Intrator, S. M., & Siegel, D. (2010). Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.dml.regis.edu/
6. Knight, J., & Rochon, R. (2012). Starting online: Exploring the use of a social networking site to facilitate transition into higher education . The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(3), Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/kanuka.html
7. Lobel, M., Neubauer, M., and Swedburg, R. (2005). Comparing how students collaborate to learn about the self and relationships in a real-time non-turn-taking online and turn-taking face-to-face environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4), article 18. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/lobel.html 
8. McGorry, S. Y. (2012). No significant difference in service learning online. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(4), 45-54.
9. Stern, D. (2009). Expanding policy options for educating teenagers. 19(1), 211-239. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.dml.regis.edu
10. http://www.merriam-webster.com/
11. All photos provided by google image. www.google.com

Michael