Blog

In much of the country, test scores have come down and fewer schools are meeting AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress),  This may not be caused by poorer performance but may be because the bars for passing are being constantly raised as a result of the demands of No Child Left Behind.  What is more upseting is that the gap in student performance between minority and white children seems to be widening.  In New York City, where Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and his schools chancellor, Joel I. Klein, have control over the city’s schools, the achievement gap which the mayor said that the gap was shrinking, has widened again.

The mayor and chancellor testified before Congress about the city’s impressive progress in closing the gulf in performance between minority and white children. The gains were historic, all but unheard of in recent decades.  “Over the past six years, we’ve done everything possible to narrow the achievement gap “” and we have,” Mr. Bloomberg testified. “In some cases, we’ve reduced it by half.”

When results from the 2010 tests, which state officials said presented a more accurate portrayal of students’ abilities, were released, they came as a blow to the legacy of the mayor and the chancellor, as passing rates dropped by more than 25 percentage points on most tests. But the most painful part might well have been the evaporation of one of their signature accomplishments: the closing of the racial achievement gap.

Among the students in the city’s third through eighth grades, 40 percent of black students and 46 percent of Hispanic students met state standards in math, compared with 75 percent of white students and 82 percent of Asian students. In English, 33 percent of black students and 34 percent of Hispanic students are now proficient, compared with 64 percent among whites and Asians.

But the latest state math and English tests show that the proficiency gap between minority and white students has returned to about the same level as when the mayor arrived. In 2002, 31 percent of black students were considered proficient in math, for example, while 65 percent of white students met that standard.

The bulk of Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Klein’s effort to overhaul the education system has been focused on the lowest-performing students. The city has closed 91 poorly performing schools, established about 100 charter schools and sent waves of new young teachers and principals into schools in poor neighborhoods.

The city has even tried to attack the deeper issue of how children are reared at home, by offering some families monetary incentives to go to the dentist for checkups, for example, or to maintain good school attendance. The three-year-old pilot project was ended in March after it showed only modest results.

What has caused the drop in test scores as well as a widening of the educational achievement gaps between whites and minorities? Could it have been caused by poor economic conditions for poor families or an increase in fatherless black households?  No body knows.  But the real question to my mind is does political control over schools mean school improvement?  Is it the magic answer to narrowing the achievement gap?  I will let you decide!

Anyone who reads this blog knows my fondness for the work of Diane Ravitch.  IN her latest book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Ms. Ravitch, lays out a plan to improve America’s schools.  Let me present several to you:

• leave decisions about schools to educators, not politicians or busieness people.
• devise a truly national curriculum that sets out what children in every grade should be learning
• expect charter schools to educate the children who need help the most, and not to compete with public schools
• pay teachers a fair wage for their work, not “merit pay” based on deply flawed and unreliable test scores.
• encourage family involvement in education from an early age.

I believe that the ideas listed above provide a basis for discussion.  What do you think about them?

|
Program Quality Matters for Adolescent Outcomes

A new Child Trends research brief finds positive outcomes for adolescents in high-quality out-of-school time programs, but no significant differences between adolescents in low-quality programs and those not in a program at all. The brief, How Out-of-School Time Program Quality is Related to Adolescent Outcomes, is based on data from the Every Child Every Promise survey commissioned by the America’s Promise Alliance.  For adolescents ages 12-17, it also finds:

11.5 percent are not in a program, 11.4 percent are in a low-quality program, 45.4 percent are in a medium-quality program, and 31.7 percent are in a high-quality program.
Adolescents in low-quality programs have similar outcomes to adolescents in no program.
Adolescents in medium-quality programs have better school performance than those not in a program, but do not have significantly fewer risky behaviors or significantly greater social competence.
Adolescents in high-quality programs are more likely to avoid risky behaviors, to have better performance in school, and to have greater social competence, than those in no program, even taking account of confounding factors.

High-quality out-of-school time programs are defined as those that promote a sense of physical and emotional safety, enable youth to build positive relationships, allow youth a role in decisions, and support development of social skills, like conflict resolution, leadership, and teamwork.

A new report from Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce states that the United States’ colleges and universities will need to inccrease by 10% the number of degrees they confer in order to meet the workforce’s education requirements by 2018.  According to the report, 63% of jobs in the U.S. economy will require some education beyond high school.  This is an increase from 59% in 2008.  The report also state that just 19 states will be at that level.  Jobs for high school graduates will be concentrated in Southern states.  For state-by-state comparisons visit: cew.georgetown.edu

It would appear to me that in order to meet those requirements, states need to increase the number of students graduating from K-12 schools.  Therefore we should have some sort of cooperation between K-12 schools and univrsities to align what we are doing.

What is the purpose of giving grades?

The Mount Olive school district, in New Jersey has eliminated the grade od “D’ from its report cards.

“D’s are simply not useful in society,” said Larrie Reynolds, the Mount Olive superintendent, who led the campaign against D’s as a way to raise the bar and motivate students to work harder. “It’s a throwaway grade. No one wants to hire a D-anything, so why would we have D-students and give them credit for it?”

The no-D policy was adopted by the school board. Even some teachers have expressed concerns that it may result in more students failing and possibly dropping out of school.

How many of us knowingly would go to a “D” doctor or fly on a n airplane piloted by a “D” pilot?  Should we allow students to pass a subject with a “D”?

Under the old system, students could pass with a 65 “” 389 of the 1,500 students at Mount Olive High had a “D” on their final report cards in June “” but now anything lower than a 70 will be considered failure.

While few high schools have banned D’s outright as Mount Olive has, some have sought to tamp down grade inflation by quietly tightening their standards over the years. Several New Jersey high schools, for instance, have raised the minimum for D’s to 70, which is traditionally the C-minus range, with anything below deemed an F.

Mount Olive, an above-average school in a middle-class community, is developing a support system to help students meet the tougher grading standard. When students receive a failing grade on a test, a paper or a homework assignment in the future, they will have three days to repeat the work for a C, and their parents will be notified by phone or e-mail.

Students who continue to fail will be placed on a “watch list” to receive extra-help classes, as well as tutoring from other students. If they need to make up a failed course, they will be given the option of attending an evening school, known as “Sunset Academy,” that will charge a fee of $150 per class.

While I commend the superintendent and school board of Mount Olive, I believe that we should limit grades to three, pass, exceptional and “no credit”.  It is increasingly difficult to explain to students and parents the difference between a 89 and a 90. In New York City, where I taught, some teachers gave a student a zero (0) what effect did that have on a student? Grades need to reflect achievement, not effort. A student who says, “I deserve to pass because I tried hard” doesn’t deserve to pass unless the student achieves a certain teacher-established competency in a subject.

The business and political community believe that if you give merit pay to educators to produce higher test scores there will be an improvement in academic achievement.

According to a new study conducted by Vanderbilt University in Nashville Tennessee giving bonuses of up to $15,000 did not produce higher test scores.  The study was conducted from 2006 to 2009 and involved 296 middle school math teachers.  The teachers were placed in two pools what were randomly selected.  One-third of the eligible teachers -51 out of 152 – got bonuses at least once.  Except for some temporary gains, their students progressed no faster than those in classes taught by the 146 other teachers.

Critic

In the state in which I live, New Mexico, we have 6 four-year colleges .  Next store in  Arizona, which has 4 times our population, there are 3 universities.  Colleges and universities across the United States continue to proliferate and expand and build additional buildings and seats seemingly without regard to the impact on students and their parents.

In the negative sense, this means that there is duplication of majors and a spreading of the best talents to many institutions as opposed to consolidating them in fewer schools.  It also means that students (and their parents) bear the additional costs of maintaining the universities.

On the other side, we live in a society which insists that everyone should attend colleges and graduate from them.  [Read more…] about Do We Have Too Many Colleges?

One of my favorite educators is Diane Ravitch.  Her new book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System is superb.  Here is an article she wrote for her regular column in the Washington Post.

My guest is Diane Ravitch, New York University education historian and author of the best-selling “The Death and Life of the Great American School System.” Ravitch, once a supporter of No Child Left Behind and now a fierce critic of its impact, is traveling the country and meeting thousands of teachers as she blasts the Obama administration’s education policies.

By Diane Ravitch
For the past five years, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel Klein have claimed that, due to their programs, New York City was a national model. They proclaimed that the city had made “historic gains” on state tests, all because of the mayor’s complete control of the policymaking apparatus. The mayor testified in congressional hearings that New York City had cut the achievement gap in half. Klein traveled to Australia to boast of the city’s gains, and the Australian minister of education intends to align that nation’s education system with the New York City model.

It was an exciting and wonderful ride while it lasted. But last week, with the release of the state test results for 2010, New York City’s claims came crashing to the ground. The national model went up in smoke. The miracle was no more. The belief that mayoral control was a panacea for urban ills was no longer sustainable.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has gone around the nation for the past 18 months singing the praises of mayoral control. But in light of the New York City fiasco, he will have to find a new example when he lectures urban audiences, because the New York model just lost its wheels.

What is that model? All decision-making power vested in the office of the mayor, who chooses the school leadership; testing and accountability; report cards for schools with a single letter grade; bonuses for principals whose schools have rising scores; closing schools whose scores do not rise; opening charter schools and small schools; devolving authority to principals to make decisions about spending and instructional programs.

When Mayor Bloomberg first ran for office, he said that the legislature should give him control of the school system with minimal checks or balances. He promised accountability. If anything went wrong, the public would know whom to hold accountable; not some faceless board, but he, the mayor, would be accountable.

The New York City version of mayoral control means that parents and the public have no voice. The shell of the central board is dominated by a majority of mayoral appointees, who approve whatever the mayor wants. On the one occasion when two of his appointees threatened to vote independently, they were fired on the spot.

Every year, the State Education Department reported that scores were going up across the state and in New York City. In 2007, based entirely on steadily rising state scores, the Broad Foundation awarded New York City its annual prize as the nation’s most improved urban school district. Mayor Bloomberg used the state scores to win re-election in 2005 and to bypass term limits and get re-elected for a third term in 2009.

When the mayoral control law expired a year ago, the mayor referred to the state scores as evidence that his reforms were working and the progress should not be interrupted.

The narrative ended on a sour note last week. The State Education Department accepted that the state tests had gotten so easy in recent years that the standards had become meaningless.

Students could advance from level 1 (where remediation was required in New York City) to level 2 by random guessing. Reaching level 3 (“proficiency”) did not mean that students were likely to graduate high school. Under new leadership, the state raised standards, and the proportion of New York City students who reached proficiency dramatically declined.

The pass rate on the reading test fell from 69 percent to only 42 percent, and on the math test, it dropped from 82% to 54%. In addition, the achievement gap among students of different racial and ethnic groups grew larger, as large as it was when the mayor took office.

The mayor and the chancellor responded to the new situation not by accepting responsibility and accountability, but by denying the facts. In news conferences, press briefings, and opinion articles, they and their surrogates insisted that the “historic gains” of the past five years were still intact.

They pointed to scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress to defend their claims, but this was a weak reed. New York City’s gains on NAEP were garden-variety. Atlanta, Boston and the District of Columbia made larger gains in fourth grade reading and math; Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and San Diego made larger gains in eighth grade math; and New York City made zero gains in eighth grade reading from 2003-2009, while Atlanta, Houston, and Los Angeles did see significant improvement in that grade and subject.

So the larger story is this: Mayoral control did not turn New York City into a national model. Before promoting mayoral control as the answer to urban education, Secretary Duncan would do well to consider Cleveland, which has had mayoral control since 1995.

Like New York City, Cleveand has participated in national testing from the inception of urban district assessment. Cleveland has made no gains in fourth grade reading or eighth grade reading or fourth grade mathematics or eighth grade mathematics.

Mayoral control is not a panacea. Not in Cleveland or in New York City. Nor in Chicago, which has seen some gains, but is still one of the nation’s lowest performing urban districts after many years of mayoral control.