# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Coming Crisis in Teaching? Teacher Supply, Demand, and Shortages in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Widespread media reports of local teacher shortages have become a hot topic in education since the summer of 2015. After years of teacher layoffs, districts began hiring again as the economy recovered from the Great Recession. This report analyzes evidence of teacher shortages, looks at national and…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cooperation between local tribes, legislators and the Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified School District resulted in the allocation of almost $10 million dollars in state funds to help with ongoing mold issues the district's been dealing with for years.

With this money secured and a plan in the works to cover future costs of mold abatement projects and building upgrades, Superintendent Jon Ray said he had tears in his eyes when he heard about the allocation.

"Yesterday (that plan was) cemented into place and coming together," Ray said Thursday.

In February, all eight campuses in the district closed for two weeks, one of which was a scheduled week off, to give staff time to retrofit mold-free facilities into classrooms.

Dangerous levels of potentially toxic molds were measured at Hoopa Valley Elementary School, Hoopa Valley High School, Jack Norton Elementary School, Orleans Elementary School and Trinity Valley Elementary School facilities.

According to Ray, mold bloomed in these facilities because they were built in the 1950s and '60s using building plans that weren't designed for such a wet, rainy environment.

The allocation was announced in a press release from state Sen. Mike McGuire's office Wednesday evening.

"We have been working overtime to ensure the significant needs of the school district were met and the process was expedited because of the severity of the issue," McGuire said in the release. "These students and their families deserve better which is why we have been working hand-in-hand with the school district, state officials, Yurok Tribal leaders and Assemblymember (Jim) Wood to secure these dollars. All students and teachers deserve to go to school in a safe, healthy environment, and this funding will provide the district with the resources they need to modernize their schools."

With this $10 million, money already borrowed, another $6.4 million slated to come in from the state in May, more hopefully coming from the state in June and an expected $6.5 million from Measure D - which is up for voter approval on the June ballot - the school district will be able to afford all the projects it needs to complete in order to mitigate the mold and get students back into their classrooms, Ray said.

"The state will not be able to cover all of our costs for all of our projects," he said.

McGuire said these ongoing mold issues are unacceptable and embarrassing, which is why he's been working over the past few months to secure these funds.

"The issues Klamath-Trinity faces make me angry," he said. "Schools should be a place where kids can succeed in schools that are modern and safe, and Klamath-Trinity's are anything but that."

Ray said that once the district gets the money it will put out requests for contract bids to get rid of all the mold and make the facilities state of the art.

"They're telling me it will be in the bank by tomorrow at noon," he said Thursday.

Caroline Jennings recently moved to Arcata from northeast Humboldt County where she lived for 20 years. She said she toured Trinity Valley Elementary and was disgusted by the state it was in.

"I chose not to put my child in that school," she said. "I'm still homeschooling my child because that works for my family."

She'd like to see this $10 million and possibly Measure Z public safety funds go toward building a temporary school for all the displaced students while permanent schools are built.

If this money hadn't come through, the libraries and cafeterias in the affected schools would remain closed even longer than they already have and staff would have had to been cut, Ray said.

"This is just the light at the end of the tunnel," he said. "People can see it now."
Hunter Cresswell can be reached at 707-441-0506.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Klamath-Trinity school district secures $10M for mold problems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cooperation between local tribes, legislators and the Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified School District resulted in the allocation of almost $10 million dollars in state funds to help with ongoing mold issues the district's been dealing with for years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The popularity of dual-enrollment programs has soared nationally as high school students clamor to try college-level work. But the movement is dogged by questions about one of its key selling points: that students can get a jump-start on college by transferring those credits.

Take the case of Sabrina Villanueva. As an ambitious high school student in Dallas, she earned 12 credits at a local community college by taking speech, government, psychology, and sociology. Because the courses were part of a dual-enrollment partnership, they counted toward her high school graduation requirements, too.

But when Sabrina moved into her dorm at the University of Rochester last fall, she got bad news: None of her college credits were accepted for transfer. So much for her dream of minoring in psychology or sociology while majoring in engineering. Without those credits, she won't be able to assemble enough coursework in those disciplines to do it on the typical four-year college timetable.

"I was kind of upset," said Sabrina, who's now a sophomore at the New York college. "The work I did didn't get accounted for in every aspect I wanted it to."

The dual-enrollment movement is having growing pains, as issues with credit transfer arise alongside its well-documented benefits. A lot is at stake for the students who invest time, hard work, hope, and in many cases, money, in the courses they're told will produce college credit.

About 1.9 million students-11.4 percent of the secondary school population-were taking some form of dual-enrollment course in 2010-11, the most recent federal data show, up from 1.2 million in 2002-03.

A new pilot program offered by the federal government might lure even more students into dual-enrollment classes: the chance to use Pell grants to cover costs at 44 institutions.

Even the staunchest advocates of dual enrollment, however, are concerned about the potential fallout of its rapid expansion, such as difficulty transferring credit.

Leaders in the field are encouraging a "guided pathway" approach, in which more colleges and universities would spell out which courses will transfer for credit, and high school counselors would use that information to help students create "sequences of courses that are planned and thoughtfully designed" so they'll be more likely to transfer, said Joel Vargas, who's researched dual enrollment as a vice president of Jobs for the Future, a group that studies college and career readiness.

The issue of dual-enrollment-credit transfer "is certainly on people's radar. It's something people are concerned about," said Melinda M. Karp, who has studied dual enrollment and is the assistant director of the Community College Research Center at Teachers College of Columbia University.

"There is a disconnect between what students are being told-that college credits are good-and the fact that college credit really needs to add up to something in order to graduate. That second half isn't often expressed," she said. "Accumulating credits that ultimately don't transfer or apply to a major can put students at risk to drop out" or use up their lifetime maximum of Pell grants, Karp said.

A Little-Documented Problem

Very little research has been done on the proportion of students' dual-enrollment credits that are accepted by the colleges they attend. The courses can be taught at high schools or colleges, by high school teachers with appropriate qualifications or by college instructors.

"Dual enrollment is like the Wild West," Davis Jenkins, a senior research associate at the Community College Research Center, said about the question of credit transfer. "No one seems to know [nationally] what credits students are earning and whether those credits are applicable toward any sort of degree."

Only a handful of small studies have explored the transfer question. The American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers asked about dual-enrollment credits in a recent survey of its 2,700 institutional members. According to preliminary findings, one-quarter of the respondents said they're aware of problems with acceptance of such credits at other institutions, according to Michael V. Reilly, the association's executive director.

A study of alumni of the University of Connecticut's Early College Experience program found that students lose 13 percent of their credits, on average, when they enroll in college.

The Greater Texas Foundation, which awards scholarships to students in early-college high schools, where they can graduate with both diplomas and associate degrees, studied the experiences of 226 of its scholars. It found that while all their credits transferred, only 73 percent were accepted toward their major courses of study. As a result, most students didn't earn bachelor's degrees in two years as they had envisioned, "mainly due to credits earned that do not apply to chosen degree programs," the foundation said in its report last October.

Some university-high school partnerships have secured rigorous national accreditation from the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships. Of those programs, three-quarters report that 80 percent or more of the students successfully transfer credits to other colleges they attend, according to Executive Director Adam I. Lowe. Those 98 programs account for only a small fraction of programs operating nationally and include only a subset of dual-enrollment courses: those taught in high schools, by approved high school teachers.

Only half the states have agreements that require public colleges and universities to accept dual-enrollment credits, according to the Education Commission of the States, and those agreements don't require the compliance of private institutions.

Sonia A. Gonzalez found that out the hard way. The 11 credits she earned in government and physics at a community college in Dallas wouldn't transfer to the University of Notre Dame in Indiana when she enrolled there last fall. Had she attended a public university in Texas, where her credits would have been guaranteed to transfer, she probably could have graduated a semester early, she said.

Even some states that guarantee transfer of dual-enrollment credits to state institutions impose restrictions. Florida, for instance, allows its flagship institutions to refuse the credits. Tennessee requires dual-enrollment students to pass an exam and allows each institution to set its own passing score.

Revising the Pitch?

The problems with transferring dual-enrollment credit have sparked concern that it's being oversold.

The courses have long been pitched as a way to build academic muscle and prepare for college, a benefit few dispute.

Study after study has found that participants are more likely to enroll in college right after high school, get better grades once they're there, and have the academic momentum to stay in college and finish in four years. Entering college with credits-even if they apply only to elective or general education requirements-can allow students to dive into more advanced courses or explore new subjects.

But more recently, in the wake of the Great Recession, with college costs and student debt soaring, they've also been promoted as a way to save money and finish college more quickly.

Some students find that to be the case. But others with similar dreams end up feeling misled and disappointed.

Florida's state college system says on its website that dual-enrollment courses "can save a student and their family hundreds if not thousands of tuition and fee dollars and expedite entry into the workforce." The Rhode Island education department says that with dual-enrollment, "all students have the opportunity to reduce the amount of time and expense required to obtain a college degree."

In a 2013 statement about President Barack Obama's initiatives to make college more affordable, the White House said: "Dual-enrollment opportunities let high school students earn credits before arriving at college, which can save them money by accelerating their time to degree."

"It's definitely being oversold," said Barmak Nassirian, the director of federal relations for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. "The notion of promoting more rigorous work in high school is fabulous. The problem comes when you build on that the notion that it's a cheaper way of solving the vexing problem of college costs. It's coming from policymakers who are terrified about where to go next in reducing college costs."

Qualms About High School

Most dual-enrollment courses are taught by high school teachers, on high school campuses, and are sometimes called "concurrent enrollment" courses. Even though such teachers typically have master's degrees, and work closely with their partner universities, these high-school-based programs are the ones that colleges view with the most skepticism.

Reilly, of the national registrars' and admissions' group, said his members "tend to be pretty confident when students take courses taught by [college] faculty." A course taught by a high school teacher "just doesn't quite ring the same way" when his members evaluate the coursework for transfer, he said.

Amy Roy, the director of college counseling at Westerly High School in Rhode Island, said that nearly 40 percent of her seniors are taking dual-enrollment courses-more than ever. But in the past few years, she's noticed that more colleges are reluctant to accept the course credits, which students earn through a community college or state university.

"There are so many schools my kids aren't getting credit at," Roy said. "When I call them, they kind of beat around the bush, but I get the impression that they don't feel they can guarantee the rigor of the course when it's taught at a high school," a reaction that frustrates her, because the students' teachers have master's degrees, and their curricula and pacing guides are approved by their partner colleges.

To ward off disappointment, Roy makes sure she explains to students-and their parents-that dual-enrollment credit transfer isn't a sure thing, she said.

Higher Education's Discretion

The University of Illinois Laboratory High School took steps to insulate students from potential loss of earned college credits. Its partnership allows students to take college courses, but only in college classrooms, with college students, and not for simultaneous high school credit.

Lisa R. Micele, the director of college counseling at the small, selective school in Urbana, said her school's policy is based on feedback from the 15 colleges and universities that its students most often attend.

"They were telling us, 'We don't want these kids double dipping,' " Micele said, adding that many expressed doubt that students were "truly working at a college level" in classes taught by high school teachers. "We have not had problems with credits being accepted at other colleges, but I think it's because we're not double dipping."

Jason L. Taylor, who's studied dual enrollment as an assistant professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Utah, sees the credit-transfer problem as just another arm of the broader problem that plagues students who transfer from one college to another. Higher education has long exerted its discretion to accept some credits, and reject others, costing students time and money, he noted.

But many states are working in various ways to improve transferability of dual-enrollment credits, or, at the very least, ensure that students are well informed about their chances.

Florida requires its department of education to develop and circulate a statement that tells students and parents that dual-enrollment credits might transfer only for general education or elective credit.

North Carolina requires state-funded dual-enrollment courses to be taken in one of 12 coherent programs of study. Oregon set up a committee to conduct quality reviews of dual-enrollment programs. And three other states-Hawaii, Nevada, and Oklahoma-require students to take dual-enrollment courses in college, with college faculty, or online.

More states are pursuing the concurrent-enrollment alliance's accreditation, which can increase the chances of credit transfer. Iowa in 2015 became the first state to have all its community colleges-where dual-enrollment partnerships reside in that state-accredited.

Lowe, the organization's leader, argued that states' keen attention to quality will affect dual-enrollment credit-transfer rates. "Quality and transfer," he said, "go hand in hand."

Published in Print: September 7, 2016, as Are Dual-Enrollment Programs Being Oversold?

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The popularity of dual-enrollment programs has soared nationally as high school students clamor to try college-level work. But the movement is dogged by questions about one of its key selling points: that students can get a jump-start on college by transferring those credits. Take the case of Sabrina Villanueva.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
UPDATED
After months of criticism from Republican lawmakers, state chiefs, and teachers' unions on its approach to spending rules for the Every Student Succeeds Act, the U.S. Department of Education Wednesday released a new proposal that appears to give districts and states some additional flexibility when it comes to ensuring federal funds for low-income students don't replace state and local dollars.

But, judging from early reaction, it seems that the changes to proposed rules for the part of the law known as "supplement-not-supplant" are not enough to placate the sharpest critics of the department's original approach, crafted as part of a "negotiated rulemaking" process this spring. Those critics include Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., an ESSA architect.

The department's original proposal would have required districts to demonstrate that state and local per-pupil spending in Title I schools, which have large shares of students from low-income backgrounds, be at least equal to the average of that spending in non-Title I schools. The new approach would provide some additional options to meet similar goals. More on that below.

Civil rights advocates have said both the initial proposal and the revamped version represent a long-overdue fix to a loophole in Title I rules when it comes to teachers' salaries, one of the biggest expenses on districts' plates.

But Alexander, the chairman of the Senate education committee, said the department had overstepped its authority. He renewed a pledge, made earlier this spring, to block the rule from going into effect if it becomes final.

Alexander said in a statement that U.S. Secretary of Education John B. King, Jr. apparently thinks he's a member of Congress and chairman of a "national school board" in addition to being education secretary.

"His proposed regulation would give Washington, D.C., control over state and local education dollars that it has never had before," Alexander said. "Federal law gives him zero authority to do this. In fact, our new law specifically prohibits his doing this."

But King said that intradistrict state and local funding gaps are inconsistent with the "civil rights history" that's the source of the supplemental-money requirement.

"No single measure will erase generations of resource inequities, and there is much more work to do across states and districts to address additional resource inequities, but this is a concrete step forward to help level the playing field and ensure compliance with the law," King said in a statement.

Overall, the proposal, which has been highly anticipated for months, doesn't seem to have shifted the political landscape on the debate over supplement-not-supplant. Superintendents, state chiefs, and others still say the department has put forth something unworkable.

And civil rights groups and ESSA's Democratic sponsors-Sen. Patty Murray of Washington and Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia- argue the new rule strikes the right balance in ensuring the poorest students get access to their fair share of resources, while giving local leaders the flexibility they need. More reaction below.

But first, what exactly has the department changed?

The proposed rule, which we previewed for you exclusively earlier Wednesday, still needs to go through a 60-day comment period before it can be finalized. It would give districts the following options to show compliance with the supplemental-money rule:

1. They could use a weighted student-funding formula. A formula in compliance with the proposal would put a priority on certain demographics associated with educational disadvantage, such as students from low-income backgrounds, English-language learners, and students with disabilities. It would also have to ensure that Title I schools receive all the actual funds they're entitled to under the formula.

2. Districts could choose to distribute money using a formula based on a districtwide average of personnel and non-personnel expenditures. For personnel expenditures, districts would calculate the number of personnel at a school and multiply that figure by the district's average salary for each respective staff category. For non-personnel expenditures, the district would multiply the number of students in a school by the district's average per-pupil expenditures for nonpersonnel resources. Then those personnel and nonpersonnel figures would be added together to determine the distribution of state and local money to schools. (Again, districts would have to ensure that Title I schools get all the funding they're entitled to under such a formula.)

3. There's an option for a state-developed compliance test. These tests would have to lead to a distribution state and local aid to schools that would be as rigorous as the first two options listed above. Such state compliance tests would be peer-reviewed at the federal level.

4. Finally, as a safe harbor, districts could choose a methodology that results in their state and local per-pupil spending in Title I schools being at least equal to the average of such spending in non-Title I schools. There's a little flexibility built in here, because districts would still be considered in compliance if per-pupil spending for each Title I school were up to 5 percent less than the average spending figure in non-Title I schools.

The key takeaway: The department apparently is no longer going to explicitly require that, no matter what compliance approach they use, districts' per-pupil spending of state and local money in Title I schools is at least equal to the average of that in non-Title I schools, in order to comply with the supplemental-money rule. It's now an option for districts, albeit one that the department would obviously look favorably on.

This multiple-option approach might be considered similar to how the department approached the politically thorny issue of test-participation in ESSA accountability. In that case, the department laid out several consequences states could impose on schools with high opt-out rates, or the state could develop some plan of its own for the department to review.

The department also says the proposed regulations would mean up to $2 billion in additional state and local funding for high-poverty schools.

More Details

During negotiations about this ESSA spending rule in the spring, state and district representatives argued that the department did not have the power to require that sort of increased per-pupil spending equalization between schools.

They also argued it would seriously disrupt school operations and potentially undermine collectively bargained employee rights. Supporters of that plan, however, said it would truly ensure that the supplemental-money rule was being followed, and that schools with many poor students weren't being shortchanged of their rightful state and local aid.

The proposed rule seeks to address some of these criticisms, by doing the following:

Give districts additional time to meet the requirement. ESSA calls for districts to demonstrate how they'll comply with the spending rule by December 2017. (The compliance test would then impact spending in the 2018-19 school year). However, the department would allow districts to submit a plan to their states, by December 2017, showing how they would demonstrate compliance with the supplemental-money rule beginning in the 2019-2020 school year instead.

The rule states that nothing in it shall be construed to require forced teacher transfers.

An exception would be made for intradistrict spending disparities due to spending on students like English-language learners and those with disabilities, as well as on special schools.

There would be some flexibility for small fluctuations from year to year in a district's budget.

Small schools with enrollments of 100 or fewer would have at least some degree of flexibility from the draft rule.

Districts would have the opportunity to comply on either a districtwide or grade-span basis.

Districts could exclude from their compliance test state and local money spent on districtwide activities, like districtwide summer school. However, Title I and non-Title I schools would have to be at least equal beneficiaries of such activities-Title I schools could also receive a larger share of those benefits.

Districts could also exclude state and local money for program activities that meet the intent of Title I, such as a preschool program that provides additional services for at-risk students.

A district without any Title I schools would be exempt from the requirement.

More Reaction

Republican lawmakers and advocates for state chiefs, superintendents, and school board members are unhappy with the proposal.

Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., called the proposal "unprecedented and unlawful." He said, "The Department of Education is threatening to unilaterally impose a multibillion-dollar regulatory tax on our nation's schools. This punitive policy will unleash havoc on schools and their students at a time when education leaders should be focused on helping children succeed in the classroom."

The Council of Chief State School Officers' Executive Director Chris Minnich, said that while the Education Department clearly responded to feedback from the education field in its proposal, the draft rule is still not consistent with ESSA.

He added, "Unfortunately, in the department's effort to ensure resources go to the students who need it the most, they have created a situation where the reverse is likely to occur in many places. We look forward to helping get this right before the rule becomes final."

Randi Weingarten: The American Federation of Teachers president said the draft rules represent an "unfunded mandate from Washington" that pushes districts to increase spending without showing them how to do so, or compelling any additional resources to help districts. And in her view, the draft rules specifically prohibit forced teacher transfers.

While she supports the intent of the regulations, Weingarten said in a statement, she added, "To be clear, the AFT will fight to ensure that these proposed regulations are used for their intended purpose--equity--and not as a means for states and districts to make budget cuts or staffing decisions that are not in the best interest of our most vulnerable students."

Lily Eskelsen García: The president of the National Education Association said the proposal has rightly moved away the previous idea to needlessly track every dollar spent in schools. That would actually result in misguided layoffs that would hurt students, in her view.

But she said she wants the final rules make sure in some way to "include empowered voices of the practitioners that will implement this. .. I believe we have taken a significant step down a better road," she said in an interview. "But we're not there yet."

García said she also thinks the regulations have significantly lessened the chance of forced teacher transfers, but that more protections against the "shell games" of moving employees around to come into compliance should be added.

Daniel Domenech, the executive director of AASA, The School Superintedents Association: "We are deeply disappointed in today's proposed regulation as it relates to the 'Supplement Not Supplant (SNS)' provisions in ESSA, given its federal overreach and extensive prescription. While we can agree with USED on its focus on ensuring students have the resources they need, this proposal--as drafted--glosses over the realities of school finance, the reality of how and when funds are allocated, the extent to which districts do or do not have complete flexibility, the patterns of teacher sorting and hiring, and the likelihood that many students would experience the rule, as drafted, in a way that undermines true efforts aimed at increasing education equity," he said in a statement.

But civil rights groups and Democrats who supported the original proposal complimented the department on the changes.

Wade Henderson, the president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights: "Our states and districts routinely spend less money to educate children facing greater challenges. This rule doesn't solve this massive problem-no single rule could-but it's a step in the right direction and brings us closer to a more just education system."

Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.: "Achieving true equity in education is not easy, but it is incumbent on all of us, at all levels of government, to work collectively to ensure that all schools in every community are equipped with the public resources necessary to graduate all students ready for college and career."

Further Questions

Here are some other lingering questions or potential issues, based on what we've learned:

As with concerns expressed about the department's proposal for handling high opt-out rates on tests, critics might contend that the department is being overly prescriptive by laying out the options that would show compliance, and not allowing for greater flexibility. And implementing the specified options, however many there are, may be far from an easy task for many districts. (ESSA says the department can't mandate any methodology for showing compliance with the supplemental-money rule.) The department's defenders would likely counter that, by extending options to districts, federal officials are by definition not prescribing any specific methodology.

It's not clear exactly how narrow weighted student-funding formulas would have to be in order to comply with the supplemental-money rule. What if a district wanted to include additional funding weights for other demographics, or for certain academic subjects, or for prekindergarten, that aren't necessarily associated with educational disadvantage?

How much would state-developed compliance tests vary across state lines?

Although forced teacher transfers would not be legally required through the proposal, that doesn't mean they'd be prohibited. Teachers' unions in particular are concerned about the possibility of forced transfers.

Click here to read the full draft rule.

Assistant Editor Alyson Klein contributed to this blog post.

Don't miss another Politics K-12 post. Sign up here to get news alerts in your email inbox.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UPDATED After months of criticism from Republican lawmakers, state chiefs, and teachers' unions on its approach to spending rules for the Every Student Succeeds Act, the U.S. Department of Education Wednesday released a new proposal that appears to give districts and states some additional flexibility when it comes to ensuring federal funds for low-income students don't replace state and local dollars.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2016 Statewide Student Test Results Released - Year 2016 (CA Dept of Education)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Schools Chief Torlakson Reports Across-the-Board Progress Toward Career and College Readiness in CAASPP Results.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
State Policies to Support Competency-Based Education for Overage, Under-Credited Students | College and Career Readiness and Success Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn how competency-based education can support overage, under-credited students' graduate college and career ready.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
State Approaches to Competency-Based Education to Support College and Career Readiness for All Students | College and Career Readiness and Success Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn how to develop competency-based education to support college and career readiness for all students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Improving Workforce Education and Training Data in California

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2016-17, eight state agencies are receiving more than $6 billion in state and federal funding to administer almost 30 workforce education and training programs. Historically, state and federal laws have required service providers to report different types of outcome information even for similar workforce programs, making comparing programs and assessing the overall system's performance difficult.

# data[].attributes.headline
Bringing Career Exploration into the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Bringing Career Exploration into the Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ideas for Bringing Career Exploration to the Classroom | Kuder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's time to head back to school! Here are a few ideas on how to incorporate career exploration into any classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
Career Education Ideas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For over 75 years, Kuder has helped nearly 165 million students and adults see what they can be.