There was a landmark event in the history of American education yesterday. Secretary Spellings announced that she is going let North Carolina and Tennessee change the way they rate their schools under NCLB. With that seemingly unremarkable bureaucratic declaration, Spellings set in motion a fundamental shift in education policy that stands, in time, to dramatically improve the nation's public education system.
In their desire to encourage schools to improve by linking sanctions to school performance, NCLB's drafters embraced a crude system of measuring school performance because it was the only system available that could be put in place in every state at the time. It tested students once a year and held schools accountable for having a sufficient percentage of students in various subgroups pass the tests. Unfortunately (and ironically), that snapshot system didn't measure how much schools were teaching students over the course of a school year. It was (and is) a school-performance system that didn't (doesn't) measure school performance. To actually measure how much school were teaching students, schools would need to compare individual students' scores at the beginning and then again at the end of a school year.
That, in effect, is what Spellings has permitted Tennessee and North Carolina to do. The result is that parents, educators, and policymakers alike in those two states stand to get school-rating systems that they can trust and that will give educators stonger incentives to improve the education of all students.
Skeptics of the so-called growth, or value-added, rating systems that Spellings approved yesterday worry that such systems could result in schools getting credit for educating low-achieving students to lower standards. Schools, they reason, could improve test scores but students entering school performing at very low levels could still not meet state standards. Spelling required that students eventually meet state standards uner the newly approved value-added plans. That provision helped win over value-added skeptics and liberal activists like Kati Haycock of the Education Trust and William Taylor of the Citizens Commission on Civil Rights, who sat on the review panel that Spellings created to vet the states' plans. The panel, and Spellings, rejected over a dozen other applications from states that lacked the infrastructure they needed, or that sought to use very different types of growth models to weaken rather than strengthen NCLB's accountability provisions.
North Carolina and Tennessee are among the few states that currently have the sophisticated student-tracking systems needed to create value-added school-rating systems. But many other states are building the same capacity and the prospect of every state using the promising new rating systems that North Carolina and Tennessee are pioneering is increasingly real. Spellings could speed the process by giving states financial incentives to catch up to their Southern brethern.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
ABCTE Teachers Performing Well, Aside From the ABCs....
Some interesting new findings were released last week about the effectiveness of teachers certified by the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence (ABCTE).
ABCTE provides an alternate, test-based certification for mid-career professionals who want to enter teaching but don't want to endure the cost and the pain of taking countless hours of education courses. Such“fast track” alternate certification programs are hotly contested by critics who fear that unqualified teachers may be placed in our country’s classrooms. Despite the documented success of alternate programs like Teach for America, traditional ed school folks continue to defend teacher education programs as the only acceptable form of teacher training. (Disclosure: I taught for two years in Colorado with an alternate license and helped develop the social studies component of the ABCTE test).
Last week ABCTE released findings from a study* of elementary school teachers in Tennessee who passed the ABCTE tests. But while the overall findings look positive for ABCTE (despite the small sample of 55 teachers analyzed) student reading scores are a potential source of concern.
To conduct the study, researchers gave the two ABCTE tests (one for subject matter knowledge, one for knowledge of teaching skills) to a group of classroom teachers and compared the performance of students taught by teachers who passed both exams to that of students taught by teachers who failed at least one. On average, students of passing teachers had a B+ grade point average (3.36 on a 4.0 scale) compared to a C or 2.0 average earned by students of teachers who didn't pass.
This may underestimate the value of the ABCTE process, since the teachers in the study were given far less time to prepare for the exam than those who normally take the tests. It wasn’t too long ago that I was pouring over my teacher’s manuals and old AP study guides in preparation for my own licensure exam, grateful for the time I spent reviewing the British Civil Wars prior to its unveiling as the essay topic.
Yet while these preliminary results suggest ABCTE may be helpful in identifying good new math, science, and social studies teachers, the results for reading were far less encouraging. Math, science, and social studies results for students taught by passing teachers were two letter grades higher than for failing teachers. Reading results were not; students of passing and non-passing teachers alike had the same low average of 2.0.
This is disconcerting considering that the majority of teachers in the study hold a teaching license and over half hold masters degrees. All elementary teachers should know how to teach reading, but this suggests many don't. However, given that only the results for math were statistically significant, further analysis with a larger sample size is necessary to see if the low reading scores for ABCTE certified teachers are anything to raise a stink about.
Interestingly, ABCTE also offers a reading endorsement for certified elementary teachers, yet no information has been provided on the correlation between passing rates on the reading endorsement exam and student outcomes. Until such results are made available to contradict the ABCTE study, it seems ABCTE reading standards and candidate performance may require a second look.
-Posted by Margaret Price
*This post originally stated that Mathematica had conducted this study. In fact, they are doing the longitudinal evaluation; this study was done by Josh Boots at ABCTE. Sorry for anyconfusion.
ABCTE provides an alternate, test-based certification for mid-career professionals who want to enter teaching but don't want to endure the cost and the pain of taking countless hours of education courses. Such“fast track” alternate certification programs are hotly contested by critics who fear that unqualified teachers may be placed in our country’s classrooms. Despite the documented success of alternate programs like Teach for America, traditional ed school folks continue to defend teacher education programs as the only acceptable form of teacher training. (Disclosure: I taught for two years in Colorado with an alternate license and helped develop the social studies component of the ABCTE test).
Last week ABCTE released findings from a study* of elementary school teachers in Tennessee who passed the ABCTE tests. But while the overall findings look positive for ABCTE (despite the small sample of 55 teachers analyzed) student reading scores are a potential source of concern.
To conduct the study, researchers gave the two ABCTE tests (one for subject matter knowledge, one for knowledge of teaching skills) to a group of classroom teachers and compared the performance of students taught by teachers who passed both exams to that of students taught by teachers who failed at least one. On average, students of passing teachers had a B+ grade point average (3.36 on a 4.0 scale) compared to a C or 2.0 average earned by students of teachers who didn't pass.
This may underestimate the value of the ABCTE process, since the teachers in the study were given far less time to prepare for the exam than those who normally take the tests. It wasn’t too long ago that I was pouring over my teacher’s manuals and old AP study guides in preparation for my own licensure exam, grateful for the time I spent reviewing the British Civil Wars prior to its unveiling as the essay topic.
Yet while these preliminary results suggest ABCTE may be helpful in identifying good new math, science, and social studies teachers, the results for reading were far less encouraging. Math, science, and social studies results for students taught by passing teachers were two letter grades higher than for failing teachers. Reading results were not; students of passing and non-passing teachers alike had the same low average of 2.0.
This is disconcerting considering that the majority of teachers in the study hold a teaching license and over half hold masters degrees. All elementary teachers should know how to teach reading, but this suggests many don't. However, given that only the results for math were statistically significant, further analysis with a larger sample size is necessary to see if the low reading scores for ABCTE certified teachers are anything to raise a stink about.
Interestingly, ABCTE also offers a reading endorsement for certified elementary teachers, yet no information has been provided on the correlation between passing rates on the reading endorsement exam and student outcomes. Until such results are made available to contradict the ABCTE study, it seems ABCTE reading standards and candidate performance may require a second look.
-Posted by Margaret Price
*This post originally stated that Mathematica had conducted this study. In fact, they are doing the longitudinal evaluation; this study was done by Josh Boots at ABCTE. Sorry for anyconfusion.
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Quick and the Ed Roster Expands
The post below marks the first entry from a new member of Education Sector's policy team, Elena Silva. Elena has a Ph.D in education from UC-Berkeley and previously worked as the director of research for the American Association of University Women, where she directed a number of national research projects on gender equity in education and the workplace. Much more from Elena to come.
Dreaming About College
Kevin Carey's Crying Wolf About Immigration clarifies some key points about immigrant youth, including the fact that most children of immigrants are not undocumented. Yet as the debate on immigration reform rages on, there are gnawing questions about how we will educate the nearly 5 million children of undocumented immigrants who are currently living in the United States.
According to a recent Pew Hispanic Center report, an estimated two-thirds of children of undocumented immigrants are U.S. citizens by birth (leading to a large number of "mixed status" families). That leaves more than 1.5 million children who are themselves undocumented, although many of these youth have been in the U.S. for as long as they can remember and have attended U.S. public schools since kindergarten. This is possible, of course, because the United States provides free public elementary and secondary education to all children, regardless of immigrant status.
College, however, is another matter.
Under federal law, undocumented students are not eligible for in-state tuition rates (unless all other U.S. citizens are also made eligible for the same rate). The added fact that undocumented students cannot qualify for financial aid is the dealbreaker for many of these students. States are now grappling with the issue, and many have introduced legislation to change residency requirements (California already offers resident tuition). Meanwhile, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act would provide qualified undocumented students conditional legal status to attend college and would also give states the power to determine residency policies for tuition purposes. Read the full text of the Dream Act as introduced in 2005 (type "S.2075" into search).
The legislation is now sitting in committee as the nation debates the broader issue of immigration reform. Meanwhile, barely half of undocumented students are attending or have attended college, compared to nearly three-quarters of documented immigrant and native-born students. As it is likely that these students will remain in the United States, we must consider if the cost of making college more accessible and affordable to them is more or less than doing nothing.
According to a recent Pew Hispanic Center report, an estimated two-thirds of children of undocumented immigrants are U.S. citizens by birth (leading to a large number of "mixed status" families). That leaves more than 1.5 million children who are themselves undocumented, although many of these youth have been in the U.S. for as long as they can remember and have attended U.S. public schools since kindergarten. This is possible, of course, because the United States provides free public elementary and secondary education to all children, regardless of immigrant status.
College, however, is another matter.
Under federal law, undocumented students are not eligible for in-state tuition rates (unless all other U.S. citizens are also made eligible for the same rate). The added fact that undocumented students cannot qualify for financial aid is the dealbreaker for many of these students. States are now grappling with the issue, and many have introduced legislation to change residency requirements (California already offers resident tuition). Meanwhile, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act would provide qualified undocumented students conditional legal status to attend college and would also give states the power to determine residency policies for tuition purposes. Read the full text of the Dream Act as introduced in 2005 (type "S.2075" into search).
The legislation is now sitting in committee as the nation debates the broader issue of immigration reform. Meanwhile, barely half of undocumented students are attending or have attended college, compared to nearly three-quarters of documented immigrant and native-born students. As it is likely that these students will remain in the United States, we must consider if the cost of making college more accessible and affordable to them is more or less than doing nothing.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Why Club-Hoppers Should be Interested in DC Schools "Rightsizing"
Several folks have e-mailed me links to or questions about Washington, D.C., Superintendent Clifford Janey's announcement yesterday of six D.C. schools that will be closed as part of DCPS's plan to eliminate 3 million square feet of vacant space by August 2006. Parts of nine other D.C. campuses will be opened for co-location with city agencies or charter schools.
Analysis from DC Education Blog tells me that three of the 6 schools slated for closure are in Ward 7, and one is in each of Wards 2, 6, and 8. The predictable carping that 75 percent of the closures are east of the Anacostia River has already begun. I don't know as much as I probably ought to about the schools in Ward 7, so I'll refrain from saying anything much about the specific choices.
I will offer two random bits of trivia, however. One of the schools, Van Ness elementary in Ward 6, is only a few blocks down M street from my home. With only 90 students, it's been severely under-enrolled, although I continue to hope the new Hope V I development in near southeast will mean more kids in that neighborhood's public schools soon. In addition, one of the schools slated for merger--Adams Elementary in Ward 1, slated to merge with Oyster Bilingual--is the source of half of the name of D.C.'s Adams-Morgan neighborhood, known to D.C.-area 20-somethings for its bar and club scene.
More substantively, I will say that I respect Janey for having the guts to move with this.
Excess space has been a tremendous financial drain on the district and a foolish and unecessary one when the district's growing population of charter schools are scrambling for space. Closing schools is something that has to happen, but it's an incredibly difficult thing to do politically--no one will thank you for it, and a lot of people will be pissed off. Janey deserves credit for facing these tough facts and moving forward.
Analysis from DC Education Blog tells me that three of the 6 schools slated for closure are in Ward 7, and one is in each of Wards 2, 6, and 8. The predictable carping that 75 percent of the closures are east of the Anacostia River has already begun. I don't know as much as I probably ought to about the schools in Ward 7, so I'll refrain from saying anything much about the specific choices.
I will offer two random bits of trivia, however. One of the schools, Van Ness elementary in Ward 6, is only a few blocks down M street from my home. With only 90 students, it's been severely under-enrolled, although I continue to hope the new Hope V I development in near southeast will mean more kids in that neighborhood's public schools soon. In addition, one of the schools slated for merger--Adams Elementary in Ward 1, slated to merge with Oyster Bilingual--is the source of half of the name of D.C.'s Adams-Morgan neighborhood, known to D.C.-area 20-somethings for its bar and club scene.
More substantively, I will say that I respect Janey for having the guts to move with this.
Excess space has been a tremendous financial drain on the district and a foolish and unecessary one when the district's growing population of charter schools are scrambling for space. Closing schools is something that has to happen, but it's an incredibly difficult thing to do politically--no one will thank you for it, and a lot of people will be pissed off. Janey deserves credit for facing these tough facts and moving forward.
Monday, May 15, 2006
That Doesn't Sound Like Curricular Narrowing to Me
So, this weekend was the last one for the production of A Midsummer Night's Dream in which I appeared (I'm the one in pink). Lots of terrific things about the experience, not related to education, that I won't go into here. One very interesting and educationally-relevant thing I learned about, though, was some of the great work the Washington, D.C., area theaters are doing with local public and private schools to expose youngsters to theater--including kids who otherwise wouldn't get this kind of experience.
Our phenomenal Puck, Niki Jacobsen (below, in red), works professionally with several local theater companies teaching acting and other classes to children in a variety of schools throughout the area. Another member of the cast, Joe Angel Babb, manages community outreach programs with the Shakespeare Theatre, which operates some of the most extensive educational and community outreach programs in the country. Most of the area's other theaters provide educational and outreach programs in a variety of ways too numerous to mention here.
These partnerships between local theaters and schools are broadening kids' cultural and educational opportunities. At their best, they also give lie to the myth that standards means narrowing the curriculum and eliminating "fun" activities, like theater, that get students engaged in school. For example, Young Playwrights' Theater--a unique program that brings playwrighting into the schools--designed its curriculum in alignment with D.C.'s English Language Arts Standards, so that students are building literacy skills and learning towards the standards even while they're learning to express themselves creatively.
If you're interested in learning more about how to bring these programs into your school, or your child's school, click on the links above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)