It’s not a surprise that it’s taken so long to develop the Standards for Gap Years in the US, but after much effort, several drafts, and a lot of collaboration, I’m proud to say that they’re here! Visitwww.americangap.org/standards.php to download a copy!
What’s in the Standards: AGA’s Gap Year Standards hold five main certifications at this point: “Philosophy & Integrity”, “Partnerships”, “Backcountry / Developing Country”, “Service-Learning”, and “Independent Student Placements”. Each of these certifications represent what any single organization will be doing when on program, and organizations will submit corroborative materials for each certification. In most cases the Standards represent common-sense best practices, but their true value is in safety – primarily those issues that are potentially major but due to their infrequency are often overlooked. The idea is to prevent the major issues through planning!
Why should I care?:
Simply put, Gap Year enrollment has shown consistent growth since the numbers have been tracked. At this point we’ve been able to take a sample accross the industry and I’m pleased to see the growth of the industry. However, as this form of pedagogy has grown, so too has the onus to ensure the highest caliber of instruction, and so, the Standards are beyond important!
o 2006-‐2007 = + 35.3% enrollment
o 2007-‐2008 = + 39.0%
o 2008-‐2009 = + 4.2%
o 2009-‐2010 = + 27.8%
o 2010–2011 no data
o 2011–2012 = + 34.9%
o 2012–2013 (March to March) = + 58.2%
Simply put, Gap Year enrollment has shown consistent growth since the numbers have been tracked. At this point we’ve been able to take a sample accross the industry and I’m pleased to see the growth of the industry. However, as this form of pedagogy has grown, so too has the onus to ensure the highest caliber of instruction, and so, the Standards are beyond important!
o 2006-‐2007 = + 35.3% enrollment
o 2007-‐2008 = + 39.0%
o 2008-‐2009 = + 4.2%
o 2009-‐2010 = + 27.8%
o 2010–2011 no data
o 2011–2012 = + 34.9%
o 2012–2013 (March to March) = + 58.2%
How they’ve changed: The Standards have gone through many evolutions, but the big ones include:
* removal of the “Environmental Sustainability” section. While this is a very important standard, it represents only one of many possible (such as women’s issues, etc.), and thus a larger plan is required to integrate these sub-certifications into the overall fold
* revised Gap Year pedagogy section that focuses more on outcomes
* revised Service-Learning section
* increased transparency about financial aid availability
* greater clarification about Philosophy & Integrity Indicators: policies about relationships, forms, incident reporting, student orientation, student re-entry process, hiring standards, and staff training.
* increased compatibility for online submission (coming in April!)
* removal of the “Environmental Sustainability” section. While this is a very important standard, it represents only one of many possible (such as women’s issues, etc.), and thus a larger plan is required to integrate these sub-certifications into the overall fold
* revised Gap Year pedagogy section that focuses more on outcomes
* revised Service-Learning section
* increased transparency about financial aid availability
* greater clarification about Philosophy & Integrity Indicators: policies about relationships, forms, incident reporting, student orientation, student re-entry process, hiring standards, and staff training.
* increased compatibility for online submission (coming in April!)
Who’s reviewed them: Thankfully, as these Standards have evolved, I’ve been lucky enough to incorporate some great feedback from peers in the industry. The following people deserve a very special thanks for their comments in this documents evolution. Holly Bull (Interim Programs), Robin Pendoley (Thinking Beyond Borders), Drew Edwards (Carpe Diem Education), Erin Barnhart (Effective Altruism and IPSL), Carlton Rounds (Volunteer Positive and formerly Cross Cultural Solutions), and Karl Haigler (Author of The Gap Year Advantage). Without these tremendous people the Standards would not represent such a high caliber.
No comments:
Post a Comment