Free Report Sample on Education SWIRL & Professional Development

Introduction

Education “SWIRL” is defined as the standards within the integrated real-world learning in the higher education system. Further, education “SWIRL” is critical in using a professional development model to engage teachers in the learning process and determine how to develop a high impact lesson plans for the students within their school. The main focus in the implementation of the education SWIRL system is to allow students to be aware and able to use language and math skills to solve the existing meaningful problems that are framed through the science content. Moreover, education “SWIRL” has also created a model implemented to integrate lessons and foster it in critical thinking in readiness of workforce skills in the real world (Clark & Clark, 2016). Many goals are needed to ensure a long term benefit for students when the SWIRL education system is implemented in schools. These goals include an increase in the quality and quantity of establishing an instruction being facilitated in the classrooms for participating teachers. Similarly, SWIRL education facilitates the development and implementation of sustainability plans based on inquiry instruction tailored to each cohort school's unique needs. Besides, the other goal is to increase the content knowledge of the existing participating teachers in different schools.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Racial Breakdown

The SWIRL education system for students cuts across all races since it is currently used by many students and institutions for an individual to achieve a degree. However, when it comes to racial breakdown, most Whites, Black Americans, and Hispanic communities are the leading individuals involved in the program (Sturtz, 2014). There are few whites and Asians involved in the programs since most of them can afford direct entry to the universities in the country. However, there was an increase in the number of students involved in the SWIRL education system, with an overall 68 percent of millennial students enrolling for the program after graduating from high school (Clark & Clark, 2016). Besides, while more people are attending the program, it is noted that there is also a smaller number who are graduating from the program as well. On the other hand, it is noted that about 40% of students who enrolled in a four-year institution graduated within these study periods (Clark & Clark, 2016).

The education system among many people in the country has an impact on household incomes in various measures. There is an increase in spending rates experienced when an individual joins education a college or education. However, there are some advantages that households can gain when their children study through SWIRL education. The students can mix their classes from different institutions to take advantage of the unique courses where they are flexible (Bontrager & Clemetsen, 2015). This mixture costs less amount of money for the students and their households in general. As a result, student loans' debts are minimized among the students using the SWIRL education system to pursue their programs. It is reported that students having a wide variety to go to college are mainly beginning their studies at a community college where 25% of them are individuals from households that earn $100000 annually (Clark & Clark, 2016). Besides, the prices for a four-year college continue to rise, and most family incomes stagnate. Substantially this makes parents and students take other options of joining community colleges to begin their studies. For instance, a two-year college would offer many advantages, which include lower tuition rates that can be met by different households.

Common Trend

The SWIRL education system has been a common trend in the United States' contemporary higher education system. It is noted that the concept of SWIRL education was introduced in the 1980s, where it described the undergraduates who were moving among institutions before they could earn a bachelor’s degree. Further, students who often transferred were due to the poor initial match with an institution or even encountered a challenge in academic or financial problems in a given way (Sturtz, 2014). The system has revolutionized how students join and study in different institutions to achieve their undergraduate programs without necessarily attending or joining one institution for a four-year program. There are various impacts that the SWIRL education system has caused by the trends and revolution it has established among the students, institutions, and teachers within the United States higher education system. The cost of tuition fees has been significantly reduced for the individuals undertaking the SWIRL education system (Sturtz, 2014). Studies suggest growing evidence where students might be making deliberate choices to transfer institutions as part of their pathway to obtain a bachelor’s degree.

Substantially this increase in deliberate choices for transfer of institution is because of an increase in the cost of school fees, which makes it difficult for students to complete their studies (Sturtz, 2014). The amount of state funding for public colleges and universities has also continued to decrease making it difficult for most institutions to put up with balancing their budgets. As a result, it makes the tuition rates to increase for the students to meet the obligation operating activities for quality education. Students would begin in community college for two years because it offers lower tuition rates, smaller classes, and a possibility to explore different majors before committing to a specific specialty (Bontrager & Clemetsen, 2015). Besides, the education department has also provided a pathway that legitimizes students' need to set out for their career in college by attending different institutions to earn their bachelor’s degree.

The other impact of the SWIRL education system in America's the United States is that it provides students with a wide choice for the preferred institutions on different courses. The days when nearly all of the community college students were undergoing a four-year degree program under a single transfer to a university changed completely. Currently, students are taking an active role in planning their education by looking for two year and four-year colleges and universities of their choice since it can benefit their desired needs as separate entities (Johnson & Muse, 2012). The flexibility experienced in joining different institutions and mixing classes has an advantage in taking unique courses, popular professors, and even the ability to have more courses to choose from. Further, students' main concern using the SWIRL education system is to keep track of transferable credits that can be used cumulatively to be awarded an undergraduate certificate. Notably, choosing different institutions for various courses is critical for students and teachers in multiple ways. SWIRL education system assists in providing both quality and quantity of inquiry-based instruction, which is being facilitated by the participating individuals (Johnson & Muse, 2012). The program is also critical in highlighting problem-based learning, where different teachers in various institutions can incorporate an active style of learning subjected to enabling students to solve problems when it comes to real-world applications.

Negative Impacts

There are also negative impacts posed by the use of the SWIRL education system for students, teachers, and institutions, which needs to be considered. Different faculties departments may experience differences in the coherent education quality for students. The challenge is mainly caused by the enrollment patterns taking place, especially for courses that students preferred to be taught by some professors (Bontrager & Clemetsen, 2015). Therefore, this issue can be solved by collaborating with all necessary institutions to streamline the minimum requirements for a student to qualify for each course. The students may also face the problem of juggling into traveling between colleges to negotiate challenging financial aid issues and determine how to select transferable courses. Besides, such involvement in finishing a given course also might raise issues on the students' psychology. Substantially, this is because it can complicate the assessment of student learning process, transfer rates, and graduation (Bontrager & Clemetsen, 2015). For instance, when students in the SWIRL education system do not follow one prescribed curriculum, they may tend to have less or more experience than peers attending one college. As a result, there might be an experienced skewed department-wide assessment of the learning process. Another impact SWIRL education system is when these students are leaving institutions after completion of courses they were doing (Johnson & Muse, 2012).

Substantially, this is because if either the institutions or students do not have a proper tracking system of their process, it may pose an issue in the future when students want to graduate. Students need to track their transferable credits to avoid complications of certification by different institutions. Similarly, institutions' responsibility is to assist their students under the programs of the SWIRL education system in connecting against institutions transfers for credits (Clark & Clark, 2016). The success of transferring these grades is considered to be a challenge for many students and institutions since the lack of communication to track the progress may be nullified and make it difficult for graduation.

Conclusion

In general, the SWIRL education system is determined to be one of the popular multi-college paths for students to choose their undergraduate programs. The system has revolutionized the way students join and study in different institutions to achieve their undergraduate programs without necessarily attending or joining one institution for a four-year program. There are various positive and negative impacts that the SWIRL education system needs to consider by students, institutions, and teachers within the United States higher education system. The positive impact is that the system is less costly and provides flexibility for students to study at their preferred institutions of choice and obtain the relevant transferable credits for their undergraduate programs. However, one of the challenges that may be experienced from the SWIRL education system is the need to track the transferable credits from a different institution to successfully graduate.

References

Bontrager, B., & Clemetsen, B. (2015). Enabling Student Swirl: A Community College/University. College and University, 80(4).
https://partnerships.oregonstate.edu/sites/partnerships.oregonstate.edu/files/cuj8004-bontrager-etal.pdf

Clark, C., & Clark, E. A. (2016). The swirl of globalization through the US political economy. Economic, Political, and Social Issues, 33. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Kanyamurwa/publication/311562824_Globalization_national_Politics_and_youth_unemployment_in_Uganda/links/5858a2c408ae3852d254471f/Globalization-national-Politics-and-youth-unemployment-in-Uganda.pdf#page=47

Johnson, I. Y., & Muse, W. B. (2012). Student swirl at a single institution: The role of timing and student characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 53(2), 152-181.
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11162-011-9253-0.pdf

Sturtz, A. J. (2014). Changing Lanes on The Educational Superhighway: A View of Student Swirl. In 31st Annual Conference Proceedings (p. 134).
https://www.neair.org/docs/2004_neair_conference_procee.pdf#page=140.