Education Gadfly Weekly
Volume 2, Number 27
July 18, 2002
Opinion + Analysis
Opinion
The shame of the AFT
By
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
News Analysis
Helping failing schools is easier said than done
News Analysis
New wrinkles in the game of college admissions
News Analysis
An open letter to the president of Harvard
News Analysis
Edison test score results are in the eye of the beholder
News Analysis
Vouchers promote integration, not segregation
News Analysis
Why Jews should embrace school choice
Reviews
Research
Developments in School Finance 1999-2000
By
Rob Lucas
Research
Higher Pay for Hard-to-Staff Schools: The Case for Financial Incentives
By
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Research
School Evaluation Services Statewide Insights: State of Michigan
By
Terry Ryan
Research
Shooting for the Sun: The Message of Middle School Reform (Selected Remarks of M. Hayes Mizell)
By
Kelly Scott
Research
Summer School: Unfulfilled Promise
By
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Research
The Nation's Report Card: Geography 2001
By
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Gadfly Studios
The shame of the AFT
Chester E. Finn, Jr. / July 18, 2002
Yesterday brought the official release of a much-hyped and professionally leaked "study" of U.S. charter schools by the American Federation of Teachers, timed to coincide with the union's convention in Las Vegas.
In a word, it reeks.
It reeks of error, distortion and untruth about charter schools, how they're working, what effects they're having, what we know about them. It also reeks of politics and self-interest. But why expect otherwise? As Lawrence Patrick of the Black Alliance for Educational Options remarked, "An AFT study on charter schools has about as much credibility as a Philip Morris study on smoking." Everybody knows that the teacher unions find both their monopoly and their memberships threatened by an education reform that focuses on independently operated (and staffed) schools that compete for students, money and teachers. The bigger the charter movement has grown, the more threatened they feel. This "study" illustrates one way of containing that threat.
What's dismaying is that some people take the AFT seriously when it declaims on education policy issues. There were grounds for that response when Al Shanker was in charge. Today, there are far fewer, and none at all in the increasing number of policy domains-charters being a prime example-where the AFT is driven by politics rather than by education.
Every place across the land where the AFT has a presence, its state and local affiliates are doing their utmost to maim and kill the charter school movement. This has been
The shame of the AFT
Helping failing schools is easier said than done
July 18, 2002
State accountability systems are shining a harsh spotlight on failing schools, and education officials in several states are striving to help those schools turn around. In Florida, principals from all 68 schools recently earning "F" grades in the state's accountability system were called to a meeting where they were connected with experts and specialists and encouraged to shop for the help they need. In Virginia, Governor Mark Warner last week announced a program to rescue the state's 34 worst public schools by deploying special teams of principals, teachers, and mentors to try to help them boost achievement over the next year.
But an article in Sunday's Los Angeles Times reveals the daunting task faced by those charged with repairing failed schools. Veteran journalist Richard Colvin describes what the SWAT team of state auditors saw when it arrived a year ago at Fremont High School in South-Central Los Angeles to develop a road map for improving that troubled school. The auditors encountered a dropout factory, Colvin writes, with dismal test scores, widespread illiteracy, overwhelming truancy, poor teacher training and morale, staff infighting and rudderless administration. Because nearly a third of Fremont freshmen read no better than third graders, and test scores show that about 70 percent of Fremont students don't understand what they read, teachers rely on oral reports, movies, picture books, and art projects rather than high-school level academic work involving books.
The school's new principal told auditors "I don't
Helping failing schools is easier said than done
New wrinkles in the game of college admissions
July 18, 2002
Getting the incentives right in the high-stakes game of college admissions is always a challenge, but two recent changes-one in the SAT's disability policy, the other in the admissions system of the University of California-are raising eyebrows.
As part of a legal settlement, the College Board has agreed to stop "flagging" the scores of disabled students who take the SAT under special conditions or with special accommodations, Tamar Lewin reports in The New York Times. Most of those who receive such accommodations have attention deficit problems or learning disabilities like dyslexia. Their special arrangements can include extra time, a separate, quiet room to work in, and the use of a computer. One high school guidance counselor predicts that, once these scores stopped being flagged as "Scores Obtained Under Special Conditions," it will "open the floodgates to families that think they can beat the system by buying a [disability] diagnosis and getting their kid extra time." A college admissions dean observes that "the kids who are going to get most hurt are the kids who do have real disabilities." There is already evidence that accommodations are more often given to affluent youngsters; a study also found that private school students are four times as likely as public school students to receive such favored test-taking treatment. As the Times article notes, great uncertainty surrounds how much extra time on a test fairly compensates for the labored reading of someone with dyslexia or
New wrinkles in the game of college admissions
An open letter to the president of Harvard
July 18, 2002
Readers with a stomach for more commentary from the Gadfly's Checker Finn may want to peruse "An Open Letter to Lawrence H. Summers," which reflects upon Summers' first year as president of Harvard. In this piece from the summer 2002 issue of Policy Review, alumnus Finn urges Summers to welcome ROTC back to campus, curb grade inflation, and resist pressures to balkanize the campus along racial and ethnic lines. See http://www.policyreview.org/JUN02/finn.html.
An open letter to the president of Harvard
Edison test score results are in the eye of the beholder
July 18, 2002
Supporters and opponents of Edison Schools frequently butt heads over whether Edison-run schools are performing better than similar schools in the same districts. An article in The New York Times explores how the two sides can examine the same student achievement data and come to opposite conclusions, making several points along the way that are relevant to any effort to evaluate school effectiveness. "Complex calculations on academics," by Jacques Steinberg and Diana Henriques, The New York Times, July 16, 2002.
Edison test score results are in the eye of the beholder
Vouchers promote integration, not segregation
July 18, 2002
In an op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal, Jay Greene warns voucher supporters that the teachers unions, the Harvard Civil Rights Project and others, are already sharpening their knives to attack vouchers on a different constitutional front-the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause-by arguing that vouchers increase segregation. But Greene's own research shows that private schools are actually less segregated than public schools because their attendance isn't constrained by politically drawn boundaries that reinforce segregated housing patterns. Private school parents are also more willing to try "racial mixing" because those schools usually maintain discipline and safety-two common concerns of wary parents-much better than public schools. "Choosing Integration," by Jay P. Greene, The Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2002 (subscribers only)
Vouchers promote integration, not segregation
Why Jews should embrace school choice
July 18, 2002
American Jews were strong supporters of equal educational opportunity for all children in the civil rights era, but the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee oppose school vouchers (and therefore the Supreme Court's recent Zelman verdict), equating support for this reform with rejection of public education. Rather than fight school choice, argue Seth Leibsohn and Checker Finn, Jewish leaders should embrace it as a civil right that would not only offer poor children a shot at a better education (and promote competition that would improve U.S. public schools) but also combat the problem of declining Jewish identity, as more Jewish parents could take advantage of the option to send their children to Jewish day schools. "Key to Continuity," by Seth Leibsohn and Chester E. Finn Jr., National Review Online, July 17, 2002.
Why Jews should embrace school choice
Developments in School Finance 1999-2000
Rob Lucas / July 18, 2002
William J. Fowler Jr., ed., National Center for Education Statistics
July 2002
The National Center for Education Statistics holds an annual conference on school finance and has now gotten around to publishing a 142-page collection of papers from the 1999 and 2000 conferences. Better late than never, however, as these six papers merit a good skim. Only the most intrepid readers are likely to venture beyond the first few paragraphs of some of them, however, or to delve deeply into their many pages of formulas and methodological discussions.
In "Reform and Resource Allocation: National Trends and State Policies," Jane Hannaway, Shannon McKay, and Yasser Nakib look at whether the standards-and-accountability movement has increased the proportion of resources devoted to instruction. Surprisingly, they don't find much overall change, though the evidence from a few states, such as Kentucky and Texas, is more promising.
"Where Does New Money Go? Evidence from Litigation and a Lottery" by Thomas S. Dee. Tennessee and Massachusetts were ordered by courts to boost their education funding. Georgia did so by choice, and paid for it with a new lottery. Dee says that both litigation and lottery led to spending increases, but that the states had only mixed success in productively targeting their additional dollars.
"School Finance Litigation and Property Tax Revolts: How Undermining Local Control Turns Voters Away from Public Education" by William A. Fischel. To equalize funding between schools, many states have assumed effective control of school funding, taking
Developments in School Finance 1999-2000
Higher Pay for Hard-to-Staff Schools: The Case for Financial Incentives
Chester E. Finn, Jr. / July 18, 2002
This fifty-page paper by Cynthia Prince, issues director at the American Association of School Administrators, contends that "offering financial incentives to teachers willing to take on more challenging assignments is essential if we are to staff every school with highly qualified teachers....Changing the way that teachers are paid is critical if we are to attract and hold teachers in the schools that serve students with the greatest needs....In short, incentives matter." She reviews a number of incentive-payment programs underway in various states and communities and draws nine lessons from them as to how such programs should be structured to maximize their chances of success. At the end of the paper is a useful bibliography (including websites) of literature-and specific programs-that bear on this issue. It's good to see the staid A.A.S.A. climbing on something so "radical" as incentive pay for teachers-perhaps that means it's no longer a radical idea-and this is a lucid discussion of how to do it. Especially tantalizing is her suggestion that incentive pay is more or less compelled by the No Child Left Behind requirement that every child have a "highly qualified" teacher, suggesting that NCLB is already having unintended (and in this case positive) effects. You can find the paper (in PDF format) on the web at http://www.aasa.org/issues_and_insights/issues_dept/higher_pay.pdf or send for a copy from American Association of School Administrators, 1801 North Moore Street, Arlington, VA 22209. The phone is (703) 875-0767 and the author's
Higher Pay for Hard-to-Staff Schools: The Case for Financial Incentives
School Evaluation Services Statewide Insights: State of Michigan
Terry Ryan / July 18, 2002
Standard & Poor's
November 30, 2001
In an innovative partnership aimed at improving the transparency of Michigan's charter schools, the financial consulting firm Standard and Poor's (S&P) has produced comprehensive analytical reports for each of the 57 charter schools authorized by Central Michigan University (CMU). As of 2000-2001, those schools enrolled over 22,000 students in 36 cities and towns, making CMU the state's largest charter authorizer and the nation's largest university authorizer. The reports, drawing on data for 3 recent school years, analyze each school's academic and financial performance and compare it with key benchmarks, including the CMU average, district and state averages, and the school's own record. They also measure each school's progress towards the goals stated in its charter, a benchmark that CMU will consider when the time comes to renew the schools' charters. Such report can yield several benefits. They help schools spotlight problems and provide outside justification for tough curricular and personnel decisions. They give schools access to comparable data against which to benchmark their financial and academic performance. They also help parents and others to understand what's actually going on in an individual school, enabling them to make sound decisions about which school may fit a child's needs. Such data can obviously assist policymakers and educators to understand what may or may not work in schools. Finally, these reports can help philanthropists make wiser decisions about where to spend their limited grant dollars. To view the S&P
School Evaluation Services Statewide Insights: State of Michigan
Shooting for the Sun: The Message of Middle School Reform (Selected Remarks of M. Hayes Mizell)
Kelly Scott / July 18, 2002
The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
2002
This report pulls together speeches and essays on improving student achievement in the so-called "middle grades"-six, seven and eight-which are, on the whole, marked by weak academic performance. Written by Hayes Mizell, director of the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation's urban middle grades reform initiative (which will sunset in 2003), the pieces address challenges of middle school reform, the importance of tying systemic reform to standards and accountability, and hard-nosed lessons learned over Mizell's decade leading this Clark initiative. An unabashed advocate of high standards, Mizell does not fall prey to "middleschoolism"-the notion that adolescents' raging hormones impede their ability to master challenging academics. Anyone seeking an honest diagnosis of our nation's failing middle schools or suggestions on how to fix them will want to peruse this report, which can be downloaded or ordered for free at http://www.emcf.org/programs/student/shootingforthesun.htm.
Shooting for the Sun: The Message of Middle School Reform (Selected Remarks of M. Hayes Mizell)
Summer School: Unfulfilled Promise
Chester E. Finn, Jr. / July 18, 2002
Southern Regional Education Board
2002
This short (20 page) report from the Southern Regional Education Board contends that states need to get more serious about providing high-quality summer-school programs if they want to end social promotion and lower their grade retention rates. Included here are a bit of data, some examples of strong programs, and 7 sensible (if fairly obvious) recommendations for state policy makers. The essential point is that this is a domain of education where states should assert themselves rather than leaving it almost entirely to local decision-making. You can obtain a PDF version by surfing to http://www.sreb.org/programs/srr/pubs/Summer_School.pdf.
Summer School: Unfulfilled Promise
The Nation's Report Card: Geography 2001
Chester E. Finn, Jr. / July 18, 2002
National Center for Education Statistics
June 21, 2002
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) recently released the results of its 2001 geography assessment in grades 4, 8 and 12. These are national data only-geography isn't tested at the state level-and the only previous results they can be compared with come from 1994. The good news is that 4th and 8th grade scores are up during that seven-year period. (12th grade is essentially unchanged.) The bad news is that all the gains occurred at the lower levels of performance; there was no change in the proportion of youngsters scoring at/above the "proficient" level-and those scores remain very weak: 21 percent in grade 4, 30 percent in grade 8, 25 percent in grade 12. This means, for example, that, while three-quarters of 8th graders know that Florida is a peninsula, just 22 percent were able to give two reasons why tropical deforestation has been occurring. (60 percent gave at least one reason-in response to a question asking for two.) In other words, in a pattern consistent with NAEP results for many years across many subjects, U.S. kids aren't doing badly at the rudimentary levels but their performance tails off as the content (or mode of response) grows more sophisticated. This 180-page report contains many breakouts by gender, race, region, etc. and a lot more sample questions. You can find it on the web at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/geography/results/. Or order a hard copy by phoning
The Nation's Report Card: Geography 2001
Announcements
March 25: AEI Common Core Event
March 21, 2013While most discussion about the Common Core State Standards Initiative has focused on its technical merits, its ability to facilitate innovation, or the challenges facing its practical implementation, there has been little talk of how the standards fit in the larger reform ecosystem. At this AEI conference, a set of distinguished panelists will present the results of their research and thoughts on this topic and provide actionable responses to the questions that will mark the next phase of Common Core implementation efforts. The event will take place at the American Enterprise Institute in D.C. on March 25, 2013, from 9:00AM to 5:00PM. It will also be live-streamed online. For more information and to register, click here.





