Yes, I'm Going To College (Unless I Go Pro)

A new NCES report about high school sophomores shows that most of them "plan and expect" to earn a 4-year college degree or higher. The racial breakdown shows this to be true for 77 percent of black students, 87 percent of Asian students, 81 percent of white students, and 73 percent of Latino students. Almost all (93 percent) of high income kids, 79 percent of middle income kids and 66 percent of the lowest income kids say they'll receive at least a bachelor's degree.

These percentages are all big jumps from 1980 and 1990- not so surprising really since we've done a pretty good job advertising that a college education is valuable and ultimately the gateway to the middle class. And since everyone basically believes they are middle-class, it's not surprising that most would probably think they would go to college.

Sadly, we know many of them won't go and many more won't graduate.

Which brings me to my neighbor, who at age fourteen will look you straight in the eye and tell you he plans to be a professional basketball player. This despite the fact that he does not play on his school's basketball team, nor has he (in the four years I've known him) ever participated in a team sport. When I point this out to him, he waves me off and I realize that while one part of him is genuinely planning to go pro there is another part of him that knows he won't. Will he go to college? Yes, he says. But he's taking pre-algebra again and doesn't know what the PSAT is when I ask him. I also ask him what college he plans to go to. He doesn't know and doesn't want to answer. He's not looking at me straight anymore and I think he realizes–now that we're really talking about it–that his options are pretty limited.

My neighbor's no exception. A sociologist at UNC-Charlotte, Roslyn Mickelson, wrote an article back in the 90s about a phenomenon she called the attitude-achievement paradox. Focused on mostly low-income Black students, she found through her research that student attitudes operate on two different levels. These kids know that college is highly valued in society and so express positive attitudes about it. But on another level, the one rooted in their daily lives where college graduation is the exception not the norm, they realize that the path to college is not so clear for them. Ask these kids if college is important and they will convincingly agree. Ask them if they plan to go and they will nod with certainty. Then ask them how they will get from here to there. They may pause, shrug or say they'll figure it out later but they probably won't start describing their course schedules, college application materials, and financial aid options.

All this to say that these kids really don't need us to emphasize how and why college is so important (stay in school! college grads earn more!). They need some concrete knowledge and skills and support to navigate the not-so-obvious and never easy process of getting from where they are to where they "plan and expect" (and deserve) to get.

Village People

“It takes a Village” was the refrain of this morning’s policy breakfast forum held by the D.C. State Education Office on it’s new report, “Double the Numbers for College Success: A Call to Action for the District of Columbia.” In response to the report’s conclusion that 9 out of 100 D.C. students complete college on a traditional timeline, a wide range of ‘villagers’ at the forum stated their commitment to improving college access and attainment for D.C. students.

While it may have confirmed what many on the panel and in the audience already sensed, this report provided the important service of establishing common ground – that 9% college graduation is much too low – for a wide variety of education advocates whose agendas sometimes conflict. Instead of promoting individual agendas, the theme today was collaboration, as a wide range of speakers – parents, university presidents, council members, the mayor and superintendent – emphasized the need for a commitment from everyone in the city.

I don’t want to rain on the village parade with all the encouraging talk of collaboration and commitment (no sarcasm there, it really was encouraging), but I’ve got to push the question – “Double the Numbers” is just a start, right? It will certainly be an achievement, but an 18% college graduation rate can’t be the finish line.

P.S. An interesting element of the report is the wide range in DC students’ graduation rates at various universities. Among the top three universities DC students attend, graduation rates were 9% at UDC, 12% at Howard, and 51% at Trinity University. As the report states, this emphasizes the need to help students understand that not all colleges are created equal when it comes to getting students to graduate, and key to increasing graduation rates is encouraging students to attend institutions that have the most success with low-income and minority students.

Department of Odd Juxtapositions

Both from NYT's ten most e-mailed:

"Preschoolers Grow Older as Parents Seek an Edge"

"Preschool Puberty, and a Search for the Causes"


Hint: Moms and Dads, if you're kid's growing pubic hair, it's probably time to let him/her move on to kindergarten.

Getting on the Little People Bandwagon

The Century Foundation hearts preschool. And they think it should be universal, not targeted.

Stupid and Happy

So, does Brookings' Tom Loveless know how to work the press or what? It's all about the counterintuitive, kids. The latest Brown Center Report on American Education shows that kids in countries with higher average math test scores are less likely to say they enjoy math and are good at it than kids from countries with lower test scores, which is not quite the same as "Happy, Confident Students Do Worse than Math," but, hey, what's it matter. I mean, I was miserable in high school and I did very well in math, so it must be true, right?

It's not surprising the report got most attention for its most counterintutive finding, but I actually think it's a lot less interesting than the report's other sections, which looked at trends on the main and long-term NAEP (scores are up in math, stagnant in reading and science, and high school students are faring worst of all the age groups), and whether or not differences in state performance on NAEP and their own state tests means states are "gaming the system" by lowering their standards, an interesting question relevant to the renewed interest in national standards. Most interesting, IMHO: Loveless suggests that the poor NAEP performance of high schoolers may reflect their tendency to screw around on the test. Teenagers screwing around?!?! Who knew?

Learning on the Brain

Writing in the fall American Educator cognitive psychologist Daniel T. Willingham explains why much of the hype about brain-based learning is just that, and he proceeds to eviscerate several popular "brain science"-based education myths, including the myth that schools are designed for left-brained students, the myth that schools are designed to suit girls' brains, and the myth that classical musical is critical to stimulating young children's brains. Well worth reading.

Gratuitous Edu Catblogging

Joe Williams reports that the NYC Department of Education is cracking down on rats and mice in the city's schools, following a NY Post report that 360 school cafeterias were rife with the vermin. Ewww! Hope none of them are participating in Erin's cook-off. Jelly, pictured here, offers her services to the students of New York.

Spending Limit Silliness

AFTie Ed has been posting extensively on the issue of state Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) initiatives. He thinks they're bad for education, and he's absolutely right.

TABOR provisions--often implemented via ballot iniative or constitutional amendment--limit annual state spending growth to a fixed percentage, typically tied to the inflation rate and sometimes a measure of population growth. State spending typically increases at higher rate, usually in line with the overall growth in the economy. If the economy grows by 5%, for example, 1% might be due to population growth, 2% to inflation, and 2% to increases in economic productivity. TABOR provisions essentially deny the public the right to invest the fruits of productivity growth in public services, including schools. Thus, public employees--like teachers--whose work contributes to economic growth don't share in those rewards.

In addition to being simplistic and mechanistic, TABOR provisions are also intensely undemocratic. They amount to the citizens of today denying the citizens of the future the chance to have different opinions about how much public spending is desirable (unless that amount happens to be less than spending today).

Ed's advocacy on this issue also emphasizes a point that sometimes gets lost in the various internecine education policy disputes around unions and collective bargaining: while unions may be wrong on some of the issues within education policy, they're on the right side of many of the most important issues outside of education policy, this being just one example. There are plenty of people out there who couldn't care less about the intracies of seniority-based transfer rules or merit pay, they just want to cut school spending and use the money to fund tax cuts for big corporations and rich people. That those policies should be opposed we can all agree.

Like Oil and Water?

Teachers Unions and Charter Schools--like oil and water, right? A new report from the National Charter School Research Project and the Progressive Policy Institute looks at what happened when the two organizations convened a group of charter and teachers union leaders at PPI. No, the building did not explode. But some common themes did emerge: Different metaphors and frames for viewing education issues mean both sides often find themselves talking past each other, and while leaders of both the charter and labor movements tend to view the other in light of its most extreme members, moderates within both movements actually share a lot of the same goals and views for what good schools should be like. And both movements could gain something of value from one another. It's a preliminary foray, but expect more action around this topic down the road.

The Lemons' Last Dance?

This summer, the Department of Education required states to include Equity Plans with their Highly Qualified Teachers Plans as part of NCLB compliance. Between the NCLB attention and groups like The Education Trust pushing the issue, teacher equity is increasingly becoming a top concern for states.

That’s why this California law, signed by Schwarzenegger on September 28^th, could be a harbinger of things to come. As states move to comply with the teacher equity provision of NCLB, they may look more closely at the impact of teacher transfer and hiring rules, especially if typical strategies like incentives, targeted recruitment, and mentoring are insufficient in addressing the teacher equity problem.

This law underscores the need for high quality and independent research on the "Dancing Lemons" issue - research that examines the real impact of collective bargaining on teacher quality relative to the impact of other important factors, such as working conditions and pay.

School cafeteria bake off!

No, don't run screaming! These ladies are SERIOUS, and it all sounds pretty tasty to me.

Honestly, though, it’s a nice reminder of the dedication of school employees, including the ones you don’t hear about in policy debates.

Why I Love Leo Casey

Read this post, in which Leo both weighs in on the homework debate and critiques Alfie Kohn's broader world view. I don't agree with everything Leo says, but he cuts to the heart of what's wrong with the debate that's often constructed between "rigor" and "authentic learning."