Get Experience at the Career Cafe

“A recent study conducted by the National Association of Colleges and Employers found that exployers extended job offers to 70% of their interns.”

Get Experience

Did you know?

Your students can’t get a job without experience and they can’t get experience without a job. At the CA Career Café students can find ways around this catch-22. In Get Experience, students will explore the different means they can use to gain workplace skills. Whether they want an internship, apprenticeship, volunteer experience or choose to connect to a professional association, students learn how to gather experiences that will give them a competitive advantage when they start handing out their resumes. This quick and easy lesson will show your students the way to CACareerCafe.

Brief them…

• Ask questions about students’ workplace experiences.
• Show the CACareerCafe home page and click on Get Experience.
• Review Get Experience lesson list and choose Land an Internship.
• View video and links on that page.
• Distribute Student Activity, review directions and complete.
• Share students’ best internship ideas and review CAP page.

Want More?

It is important to view and discuss “real” internship opportunities with your students. Go to  Indeed.Com  and type in the word ”internship” as well as the name of your city. Review the possibilities.

Read More

The Real Story Behind 'Super WiFi' And The Fight Over Spectrum; It's Not What You Read Yesterday

techdirt

from the holy-crap dept

Early yesterday morning, I saw that Cecilia Kang at the Washington Post had a story up about the years-long fight for white spaces entitled: Tech, telecom giants take sides as FCC proposes large public WiFi networks. It struck me as odd, because so much in the article seemed... wrong or misleading. The main part about efforts to finally do something with the old TV spectrum isn't anything new at all. We first wrote about the FCC "proposing" this back in 2004 and have covered it a few times since. The FCC has been trying to use some of that TV spectrum for better, more efficient and more useful endeavors. It's been an ongoing battle that feels like it's never going to end. The short version is that TV broadcasters got a ton of free spectrum many years ago (just look at how giant chunks of the spectrum chart belong to TV broadcasters). A big part of the move to digital TV was to force broadcasters to give up a chunk of wasted, valuable spectrum that can be turned into (among other things) some useful wireless services. TV broadcasters hate this and have been fighting it in a variety of ways.

The latest version of this plan is for the FCC to do a multi-part, multi-directional "auction" process for a chunk of spectrum currently held by the broadcasters. Part of that auction would be to offer incentives to broadcasters to cough up the spectrum. And then part of it would be auctioning off whatever spectrum broadcasters agree to dump. Finally, part of it would also include designating some portion of the spectrum for unlicensed uses.

All of this is ancient history. Really ancient history. So why is the Washington Post suddenly covering this? From the article, you'd be forgiven for thinking that this is all new and that the FCC has plans for some amazing free "super WiFi." Except that's not true. At all. Well, except the part that caught most people's attention: that this would be about offering "free internet service" across the country. That part is new. And that's because it's not true. You still need backhaul and service. It's just about freeing up the spectrum so that it can be used to provide service. The FCC isn't suddenly planning to get into the broadband service ISP business. Nor could they.

Think of it this way: just because WiFi exists, it does not mean that everyone suddenly has free internet access if they buy a WiFi router at their local Best Buy. Nope. They have to connect that to a service. Same thing with anything being talked about here. More spectrum may be freed up for "open" use -- meaning more things like WiFi -- but there will still be service providers offering services over it in some form or another. Could some of them offer "free" service? Possibly. Just like you might get "free" internet access from your neighbor with open WiFi, who pays for his connection. But that's not what anyone's really talking about.

However, if you could be forgiven for thinking that this was new and amazing (and true), I don't think the same forgiveness should be given to parts of the press who ate this story up. Business Insider (apparently, without any benefit from any actual "insider") wrote a breathless piece about telcos trying to stop the government from offering super WiFi. Except... no. Others, who should have known better yet still wrote about it, included Popular Science (awful) and Mashable.

Moving to the mainstream, newswire UPI picked up the story, taking some comments from FCC boss, Julius Genachowski, out of context. He was quoted in the Post piece as saying "Freeing up unlicensed spectrum is a vibrantly free-market approach that offers low barriers to entry to innovators developing the technologies of the future and benefits consumers." But the confusion is his use of "free." He's not talking "free service" but freeing the spectrum so that anyone can offer services, like WiFi, over it without having to buy a license.

Others similarly jumped on the story without understanding it at all. The Daily Caller talked about it as if it was some new plan, as did Fox. Similarly, you had ThinkProgress and Salon chiming in on the other side of the political spectrum.

Thankfully, some spoke up in response, but even then there's still some head-scratching about this whole thing.

Karl Bode, over at DSLReports, quickly questioned Kang about the whole story, and she claimed that the story was "motivated by the new comments to the FCC" from various players both in support and in opposition of the latest spectrum auction concerning "white spaces." But... again, the auction has been planned for a while -- and it's not really about "white spaces" but adding existing "white space rules" to some of the newly available spectrum (more below). There's really nothing new here, other than some comment filings about how this auction should go down, which add little to the discussion beyond what's been said already. It's the same players saying the same thing, but just in direct reference to the upcoming spectrum auction.

Jerry Brito, over at the Tech Liberation Front, digs into the details and suggests that this whole thing involves something of a comedy of errors, with massive confusion not just over what's been going on with TV white spaces, or the new comments, or the upcoming spectrum auction... but also with a completely different band of spectrum that Genachowski spoke about last month at CES.

Parsing Kang's story a little bit more since posting this, I've become even more confused. In her tweet she says she's talking about the white spaces in the incentive auction NPRM, but those couldn't possibly be used for a nationwide wireless network since they'd be low-power Part 15 type bands. Also, unlicensed in the 600 MHz guard bands are not Chairman Genachowski's design, they were allowed by Congress when they gave the FCC auction authority. So what is Kang referring to? Most likely it is the Chairman's initiative, announced at CES earlier this month, to clear 195 MHZ in the 5 GHz band to improve Wi-Fi.... Bottom line, I think Kang conflated two separate proceedings into one big non-story that made it past the Washington Post's editors all the way to the top left corner of the front page. I hope there is a correction tomorrow.

While this actually makes some sense, I don't think that's correct either. After all, the FCC's own summary of the upcoming incentive auctions makes it clear that it views "super WiFi" as a possible outcome from the television white spaces being unlicensed:

The FCC recently developed provisions for unlicensed devices to operate on TV channels that are not used at any given locations, called "white spaces." Interference is avoided by controlling access to the spectrum through a database of protected service areas. The white spaces in the TV spectrum offer an opportunity for a new generation of products such as Super Wi-Fi and wireless broadband services for communities, particularly in rural areas. In the incentive auction proceeding, the FCC proposes to make a substantial amount of additional spectrum available for unlicensed uses. First, the Commission proposes to continue allowing the operation of white space devices in the broadcast television spectrum in the newly repacked band. In addition, the FCC proposes to make the guard bands in the new band plan available for unlicensed use. Under the plan discussed above, the two proposed guard bands would be 6 MHz wide and could be larger when accounting for the addition of "remainder spectrum" resulting from the uneven division of 6 MHz wide television channels into 5 MHz blocks. Furthermore, the FCC proposes allowing unlicensed devices to operate for the first time on Channel 37 by establishing appropriate protections for existing operations in the white space database. Taken together, the FCC's proposals will enable a substantial amount of spectrum use by unlicensed devices. A significant portion of this spectrum will be available on a nationwide basis, which is important because there currently is little or no white space in the TV bands in parts of many major markets. In making these proposals, the FCC seeks to promote greater innovation in new products and services, including increased access for wireless broadband services across the country.

The confusion, I believe, is that the FCC is talking about two different types of spectrum in the above quote, though if you're not reading carefully, you might think that it's just about the spectrum they plan to be auctioning off. That's not the case. Much of the above is actually talking about the existing TV white space spectrum that has been fought over (which is generally in the 700 MHz realm -- 698 to 806 MHz). The new spectrum auction is in the 600 MHz block (572 to 698 MHz), but as part of the discussion on this new auction, the FCC is reminding people that (a) the existing TV white spaces will remain available for unlicensed use and (b) that the new auctions should, in theory, add additional open spectrum to them (under the same rules), specifically looking at freeing up channel 37 (608 to 614 MHz) (once called "the last empty channel"), as well as portions of the so-called "guard bands" between licensed spectrum chunks, that they would like to "add" to the existing white space rules, which are supposed to minimize (or eliminate) interference problems in the white space.

The "comments" that were given by various players are really just about how the auction should run, with some discussing how much space should be allocated to such unlicensed uses. In particular, many weighed in on how much should be allocated to the "guard bands" and whether they should be attached to existing TV white space rules for interference-avoiding open spectrum. Kevin Drum, over at Mother Jones, actually has one of the better explanations for the complexities of the upcoming auctions, and the issue of guard bands:
In short, because there's that first reverse auction in which broadcasters are supposed to be incentivized to cough up existing spectrum (again, which taxpayers gave them for free...), it's not entirely clear how much 600 MHz spectrum will be available to be auctioned off to anyone. Basically, they have these two chunks, starting at 608 MHz and counting down, and another at 698 MHz and counting down -- and the total amount available will depend on how much the broadcasters agree to cough up in the reverse auction. At the "bottom" of that range, the FCC has proposed a 6 MHz guard band for each of these chunks, and making much of that subject to the existing white space rules and hopefully allowing something useful to be done with that unlicensed spectrum, especially if it's combined with other available white space. The "guard bands" are called that, as they're supposed to "guard" between interference between licensed spectrum on either side, though there's a fair bit of debate over how much space is really needed to "guard" such interference. That argument leads to some suggesting that the FCC is offering up too much for the guard bands in an effort to get more unlicensed spectrum on the market.

The fight is over how much spectrum is used for unlicensed and how much for licensed. The telcos, like AT&T, want to limit the unlicensed spectrum, while internet companies, like Google, want as much of it as possible. Similarly, there are some in Congress who are against offering very much (if any) unlicensed spectrum, taking the really dumb short term view that any unlicensed spectrum (even if it leads to tax-creating innovations) is leaving money on the table, since telcos are expected to spend billions buying up any licensed spectrum available. Again, though, that's the same old story.

In short: there's an ongoing fight about how much spectrum in newly auctioned 600 MHz spectrum will be "unlicensed," which is important for some cool things. But, that's got little to do with a magic "free" nationwide internet service. This is important stuff, but the reporting by many folks has been abysmal.

Read More

How to encourage female students to consider STEM programs

For many female students in high school or college, careers in science, technology, engineering or math are just not on their radar screens.  They can't picture themselves in occupations like information technology, construction, or engineering. What can educators do to help women and girls realize that careers in STEM can be a fulfilling and rewarding choice?

The first step is to introduce female students to images of female role models on the job.  When female students repeatedly see images like those in the banners of women looking happy on the job and working with equipment, they can start to see themselves in these career pathways.

See all of the Role Model Banners 

Where is the best place for female students to see these images? The answer is: everywhere! Seeing them repeatedly helps imprint images of female role models on the minds of your female and male students.

Hang the banners all over your campus in classrooms, hallways, libraries, lunch rooms, student lounges and counseling offices. Plus, bring them to events. Every career fair, student orientation, and student recruitment event can have a women in STEM table with banners to send a strong message that women are not only encouraged, they are celebrated for pursuing STEM career pathways at your school.

We want to make it as easy as possible for you to bring these images to your whole school, district, region or even state.  That's why when you order six or more banners, in any combination, you receive a discount of 20%.  To receive the 20% discount on six or more banners, use the coupon code BANNER20 at checkout. What if your region or district has bigger needs?  Contact us at  store@iwitts.organd we can work with you to provide a discount for larger quantities.

I hope you'll get started now so that female students will start seeing these images in your schools, right away!

Warmly,

Donna Milgram

Executive Director - Institute for Women in Trades, Technology Science

PS Don't forget, when you order six or more banners, in any combination, you'll save 20%. To receive the 20% discount on six or more banners, use the coupon code BANNER20 at checkout.  If your region or district has bigger needs, contact us at store@iwitts.organd we can work with you to provide a discount for larger quantities.
 

Check out the Women in Trades, Technology and Engineering Banners 

Read More

The Myth of Population Density and the High Cost of Broadband

  

Feb 01, 2013 12:55 PM PST, CircleID

By Bill St. Arnaud

One of the enduring myths that is used by apologists for incumbent broadband operators as to the high cost of broadband in Canada and the US is our low population density.

 Since Canada and the US have low population density compared to The Netherlands or South Korea, they argue that therefore the cost of delivering broadband will be significantly higher because of the much greater distances that need to be covered.

While this may be true for rural and remote broadband services, most Canadians and Americans (over 80%) live in urban areas. The cost of deploying broadband in urban areas is almost the same anywhere in the world. The bigger factors that affect the cost of broadband deployment in urban areas is whether the fiber is buried or put on poles. Most urban communities in North America are serviced by poles and therefore cost of deploying fiber should be a lot cheaper than, for example in The Netherlands where it is mostly buried.

Canada and the US have almost the same urban density as The Netherlands (82%) and South Korea (83%). As such,in urban areas there is no reason why the cost of broadband should not be the same as The Netherlands or South Korea.

Clearly other factors (hint: lack of competition) that are play in keeping broadband speeds and prices much higher in Canada and the US than many other advanced broadband countries.

By Bill St. Arnaud , Green IT Networking Consultant

Read More

Tech, telecom giants take sides as FCC proposes large public WiFi networks

By Cecilia Kang,

Feb 03, 2013 11:41 PM EST

The Washington Post

Julie Jacobson/AP - A Lexus SL 600 Integrated Safety driverless research vehicle is seen on display at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 9. Super WiFi networks would allow for a driverless car to talk to another car a mile away.
                             

The federal government wants to create super WiFi networks across the nation, so powerful and broad in reach that consumers could use them to make calls or surf the Internet without paying a cellphone bill every month.

The proposal from the Federal Communications Commission has rattled the $178 billion wireless industry, which has launched a fierce lobbying effort to persuade policymakers to reconsider the idea, analysts say. That has been countered by an equally intense campaign from Google, Microsoft and other tech giants who say a free-for-all WiFi service would spark an explosion of innovations and devices that would benefit most Americans, especially the poor.

 

The airwaves that FCC officials want to hand over to the public would be much more powerful than existing WiFi networks that have become common in households. They could penetrate thick concrete walls and travel over hills and around trees. If all goes as planned, free access to the Web would be available in just about every metropolitan area and in many rural areas.

The new WiFi networks would also have much farther reach, allowing for a driverless car to communicate with another vehicle a mile away or a patient’s heart monitor to connect to a hospital on the other side of town.

If approved by the FCC, the free networks would still take several years to set up. And, with no one actively managing them, con­nections could easily become jammed in major cities. But public WiFi could allow many consumers to make free calls from their mobile phones via the Internet. The frugal-minded could even use the service in their homes, allowing them to cut off expensive Internet bills.

“For a casual user of the Web, perhaps this could replace carrier service,” said Jeffrey Silva, an analyst at the Medley Global Advisors research firm. “Because it is more plentiful and there is no price tag, it could have a real appeal to some people.”

The major wireless carriers own much more spectrum than what is being proposed for public WiFi, making their networks more robust, experts say.

Designed by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, the plan would be a global first. When the U.S. government made a limited amount of unlicensed airwaves available in 1985, an unexpected explosion in innovation followed. Baby monitors, garage door openers and wireless stage microphones were created. Millions of homes now run their own wireless networks, connecting tablets, game consoles, kitchen appli­ances and security systems to the Internet.

“Freeing up unlicensed spectrum is a vibrantly free-market approach that offers low barriers to entry to innovators developing the technologies of the future and benefits consumers,” Genachow­ski said in a an e-mailed statement.

Some companies and cities are already moving in this direction. Google is providing free WiFi to the public in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan and parts of Silicon Valley.

Cities support the idea because the networks would lower costs for schools and businesses or help vacationers easily find tourist spots. Consumer advocates note the benefits to the poor, who often cannot afford high cellphone and Internet bills.
 

The proposal would require local television stations and other broadcasters to sell a chunk of airwaves to the government that would be used for the public WiFi networks. It is not clear whether these companies would be willing to do so.

The FCC’s plan is part of a broader strategy to repurpose entire swaths of the nation’s airwaves to accomplish a number of goals, including bolstering cellular networks and creating a dedicated channel for emergency responders.
 Some Republican lawmakers have criticized Genachowski for his idea of creating free WiFi networks, noting that an auction of the airwaves would raise billions for the U.S. Treasury.

That sentiment echoes arguments made by companies such as AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon Wireless, Intel and Qualcomm, in a letter to the FCC staff late last month, that the government should focus its attention on selling the airwaves to businesses.

Some of these companies also cautioned that a free WiFi service could interfere with existing cellular networks and television broadcasts.

Intel, whose chips are used in many of the devices that operate on cellular networks, fears that the new WiFi service would crowd the airwaves. The company said it would rather the FCC use the airwaves from television stations to bolster high-speed cellular networks, known as 4G.

“We think that that spectrum would be most useful to the larger society and to broadband deployment if it were licensed,” said Peter Pitsch, the executive director of communications for Intel. “As unlicensed, there would be a disincentive to invest in expensive networking equipment and provide users with optimal quality of service.”

Cisco and other telecommunications equipment firms told the FCC that it needs to test the airwaves more for potential interference.

“Cisco strongly urges the commission to firmly retreat from the notion that it can predict, or should predict . . . how the unlicensed guard bands might be used,” the networking giant wrote.

Supporters of the free-WiFi plan say telecom equipment firms have long enjoyed lucrative relationships with cellular carriers and may not want to disrupt that model.

An FCC official added that there is little proof so far that the spectrum that could be used for public WiFi systems would knock out broadcast and 4G wireless signals.

“We want our policy to be more end-user-centric and not carrier-centric. That’s where there is a difference in opinion” with carriers and their partners, said a senior FCC official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the proposal is still being considered by the five-member panel.
The lobbying from the cellular industry motivated longtime rivals Google and Microsoft to join forces to support the FCC’s proposal. Both companies would benefit from a boom in new devices that could access the free WiFi networks.

These companies want corporations to multiply the number of computers, robots, devices and other machines that are able to connect to the Internet, analysts said. They want cars that drive themselves to have more robust Internet access.

More public WiFi, they say, will spur the use of “millions of de­vices that will compose the coming Internet of things,” the firms wrote in their comment to the FCC last week.

“What this does for the first time is bring the prospect of cheap broadband, but like any proposal it has to get through a political process first,” said Harold Feld, a vice president at the public interest group Public Knowledge.

Read More

Recruiting IT Workers? Here’s What You Need to Know…

January 22nd, 2013, CareerBuilder

By Mary Lorenz in Forecasts, Insights & Trends, Technology  

              

CareerBuilder’s annual job forecast reveals how employers plan to recruit and retain more IT workers in 2013.

In things-you-probably-already-knew news, a new survey reveals that IT professionals are in high demand this year. I know, right? I’ll give you a second to pick your jaws up from off the floor…

Anyway, according to CareerBuilder’s annual hiring forecast, 42 percent of hiring managers plan to add full-time, permanent IT employees in 2013, up four percentage points over 2012.
The nationwide survey of more than 180 IT hiring managers and human resource professionals and more than 240 IT workers across company sizes, also revealed that employers are also willing to pay higher salaries and spring for more training this year.
Below are a few other gems about 2013 IT hiring and recruiting trends the survey uncovered:

1. Full-time hiring is up. Yay! (Unfortunately, so is downsizing. Boo!): While 42 percent of employers plan to hire full-time, permanent employees in 2013 (as opposed to 38 percent last year), 10 percent plan to decrease headcount (up from 7 percent last year).
2. Temporary and contract hiring is the new black: Fifty-two percent of employers plan to hire temporary and contract workers in 2013, up from 49 percent last year.  Among these employers, 47 percent plan to transition some temporary workers into full-time, permanent employees over the next 12 months.
3. If there’s one thing IT employees love, it’s their jobs: Seventy-two percent of workers currently in IT report being satisfied with their job, higher than any other industry, and only 15 percent said they plan on switching jobs in the coming year.

How IT Employers are Navigating the Skills Gap in 2013
CareerBuilder’s survey also provided insight into what companies are doing to both get qualified talent in the door – and retain the talent they have currently. Below are three ways employers plan to avoid or overcome a skills gap this year:

1. No more waiting by the phone:Survey results indicate that when it comes to recruiting, some employers are taking recruitment into their own hands: One-in-four IT workers (26 percent) reported they have been approached to work for another company in the last year when they didn’t apply for a position with that organization.
2. Upping the ante: Clearly, employers are hoping money talks when it comes to recruitment. According to the survey, 75 percent of employers plan to increase compensation for existing employees–up from 71 percent last year –while 54 percent plan to offer higher starting salaries for new IT employees – up significantly from 42 percent last year.  Most increases will be 4 percent or less.
3. Taking matters into their own hands:Employers who can’t find candidates with the right skills are taking measures to “re-skill” workers themselves. Thirty-six percent of IT employers plan to train people who don’t have experience in IT and hire them for positions within their organizations, up from 34 percent last year.

Tell us: Do these results surprise you? What about your experience? Do you find it harder or easier to find qualified IT talent this year than in previous years?
 

About Mary Lorenz

Mary is a copywriter for CareerBuilder, specializing in B2B marketing and corporate recruiting best practices and social media. In addition to creating copy for corporate advertising and marketing campaigns, she researches and writes about employee attraction, engagement and retention. Whenever possible, she makes references to pop culture. Sometimes, those references are even relevant. A New Orleans native, Mary now lives in Chicago, right down the street from the best sushi place in the city. It's awesome.

Read More

University of California A-G Process Information

For those involved in helping high schools get University of California A-G approval for ICT courses, which helps build pathways to ICT careers for high school students with little room in their schedules:

2013-14 A-G Course List Update Cycle – OPENING MARCH 1, 2013

Due to technical difficulties, the Online Update website will open on March 1, 2013 for the 2013-14 course list update cycle. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause. The Online Update website will close on Sunday, September 15, 2013 at midnight PST for all new course submissions, resubmissions and other course list updates for the 2013-14 academic year. Verification of your institution's demographic information, including school accreditation information, must be submitted each year to publish your “a-g” course list on the “a-g” Course List website at https://doorways.ucop.edu/list. Your course list should reflect those courses that will be offered at your school during the upcoming school year. Please use the Online Update site at https://doorways.ucop.edu/update to submit updates to your course list. More information on submitting new courses for “a-g” review, including tips and resources for writing “a-g” courses, can be found on the “a-g” Guide at http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/updating-your-course-list/submitting-courses/index.html.

NEW Three-Phase A-G Course Submission Cycle

Beginning with the 2013-14 update cycle, a new phased timeline will be implemented to improve the overall “a-g” course review process. All new course submissions, resubmissions and course list revisions must be received by UC via the Online Update website by Sunday, September 15, 2013 at midnight PST. The course update cycle will be divided into three distinct phases:

• Phase 1 (March 1 - June 1): New courses initially submitted during Phase 1 may have up to two opportunities for resubmission if the course is not initially approved.

• Phase 2 (June 2 - August 1): New courses initially submitted during Phase 2 may have one opportunity for resubmission if the course is not initially approved.

• Phase 3 (August 2 - September 15): New courses initially submitted during Phase 3 will have no opportunities for resubmission if the course is not initially approved. Any courses not approved after the September 15 final deadline must be submitted as new courses using the “New Course” section during the next update cycle that will open in February 2014.

A comprehensive timeline of the “a-g” course submission cycle can be found on the “a-g” Guide at http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/updating-your-course-list/dates-deadlines/index.html.

2012-13 A-G Course List Update Cycle

Our articulation analysts are working as quickly as possible to complete the reviews of your submitted course descriptions from last year. More than 8,000 course submissions – about a third of the total submissions received last cycle – came in during the final weeks of the update cycle. Courses that were not approved during the previous cycle can be submitted as new courses using the “New Course” section when the Online Update website opens for the 2013-14 update cycle on March 1. Please do not submit another new course description until you receive an e-mail notification with the results from your original submission – this will not expedite the review and approval process. Access to course submissions from the 2012-13 and previous update cycles, including feedback on any non-approved courses from last year, will be available beginning March 1. The 2012-13 course review results can be found on the Online Update website (https://doorways.ucop.edu/update) in the “Find Submission” section at that time.

New Online Course Policy – Changes for Online AND Non-online Institutions

As of May 2012, UC faculty approved a revised version of the University’s policy for “a-g” online courses. A summary of the policy is available on the “a-g” Guide at http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/online-learning/policy-changes/index.html. Online courses already approved by UC and offered by online providers and online schools will remain valid for “a-g” purposes through the end of the 2013-14 academic year. Effective for the 2013-14 school year, all online courses offered by any online course publisher or online school will be required to undergo the review process outlined in the new online policy. Beginning with the 2014-15 academic year and update cycle, all non-online institutions will also be required to comply with the new online course review process.Please remember that the principal certification option for non-UC-approved online courses will no longer be acceptable beginning with the 2013-14 academic year. A UC-hosted webinar that will provide additional information on the new “a-g” online course policy and processes will be offered this spring – please see below.

Upcoming Webinars!– REGISTER NOW

The High School Articulation unit at the University of California Office of the President is pleased to offer two free webinars:

1)       New User Training – Updating the A-G Course List Webinar (March 13 10:00 -11:30 AM) – This webinar geared toward new users (returning users are welcome too!) will focus primarily on the “a-g” course list update process, providing step-by-step instructions, helpful hints, resources and tools to assist those writing, preparing and submitting courses for UC “a-g” approval. To register, please go to: https://ucadmissions.webex.com/ucadmissions/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=661732070.

2)      New Online Policy Webinar (April 21 10:00-11:30 AM)– This webinar will focus on the new policy for “a-g” online courses and requirements for both online and non-online institutions offering online courses. Important deadlines, processes and criteria required by institutions offering an online course will also be covered. To register, please go to: https://ucadmissions.webex.com/ucadmissions/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=666071395.  

Registration is required to attend. Please feel free share this registration link with other administrators at your school or district who might benefit from these presentations. For those unable to attend, the recorded webinars will be posted on the “a-g” Guide at http://www.ucop.edu/agguide/get-help/trainings/index.html.

UCCI Institutes – Applications open through February 25
There’s still time to apply to the Spring 2013 UCCI Institutes, which will be held April 11-14, 2013 at the Westin SFO in Millbrae. The Institutes bring together CTE and academic teachers to create high school courses that integrate college-preparatory academics with career technical education. Applicants selected to participate will receive a $550 stipend and will earn 2.5 Continuing Education Units from the Education Department at UCLA Extension. Meals and lodging, though not travel expenses, are covered for participants. UCCI also can provide up to $250 to participants’ schools and districts to help cover sub costs.

Each session of the UCCI Institutes features two college-prep/CTE pairings. The Spring 2013 Institutes pairings are:

·        Health Science and Medical Technology CTE industry sector with Language other than English (“e”)

·         Arts, Media and Entertainment CTE industry sector with History/Social Science (“a”)

The application deadline is February 25, 2013. More details including links to the applications and the deadline for applying are available at the following links: Arts, Media, and Entertainment/History Institute [PDF] and Health Science and Medical Technology/LOTE [PDF].

New UCCI Courses

The courses produced at the UC Curriculum Integration Institutes (UCCI) blend core academic subjects such as English, history and mathematics with Career Technical Education (CTE). Recent UCCI Institutes have produced such unique courses as:  Spanish for the Entrepreneurial Mind, which grounds third-year Spanish language instruction in the context of entrepreneurship; Constructing Algebra 2, which takes a project-based learning approach to traditional Algebra 2 curriculum, with students completing hands-on projects resulting in the construction of a scale model or actual home; andBiological Connections to Energy and Environment, which answers such questions as, “What role does cellular biology play in our need for energy?” and “How do the various forms of energy (natural and manmade) affect the biology of our environment?”

UCCI courses have “program status,” which means they can be added to the course lists of any high school in California in the same manner as AP or ROP courses.  The complete course frameworks will be accessible on the new UCCI website, http://ucci.ucop.edu, which will launch on February 15.

Sincerely,

High School Articulation

University of California Office of the President

Read More