A field guide to low academic standards

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / May 16, 2002

The miserable failure of most states to implement the requirements of the 1994 federal education amendments in timely fashion had already cast a veil of doubt over the prospects for No Child Left Behind: the stark fact that states don't necessarily make the changes that Washington expects of them-and then get away with it.

But what happens when states do comply with the formal requirements of federal legislation, yet do so in such a way that they defeat its main purpose?

No Child Left Behind allows for that possibility, via one of its central "federalism" features: the expectation that every state will set its own standards and (with Washington's approval) select and score and report the results of its own tests. The only uniform requirement is that every state has the same twelve years to get all its pupils up to the level that it designates as "proficient."

Many have noted that this arrangement could easily encourage low standards, i.e. that a state with lower standards has a better chance of making "adequate yearly progress" toward, and getting everybody up to, those standards within the prescribed dozen years than a state with loftier standards. It's obvious: if you set the bar lower, more people will successfully jump over it without having to struggle very hard.

But what, exactly, does "low standards" mean and by what mechanisms could a state, intentionally or inadvertently, end up with them? Who would know that this was occurring?

» Continued

A field guide to low academic standards

School districts worry about letting kids leave failing schools

May 16, 2002

The No Child Left Behind Act requires school districts to allow children in persistently failing schools to transfer to better (public) schools and to pay the transportation costs for those students to reach their new schools. For thousands of schools, that provision takes effect in September. Well-run districts are already developing plans for complying with this provision but in the process they're encountering two issues they've thus far managed to avoid: integration and competition. Both issues are being played out in Montgomery County, Maryland, an enormous school district in the suburbs of Washington, DC which includes some of the nation's most exclusive zip codes as well as more diverse urban areas, a district that has lately been struggling with its own widening achievement gap.

The Montgomery County school system has developed a plan that gives parents in 10 faltering schools the ability to transfer their children to affluent, high-achieving schools that are nearby and have room for more students. The reactions to this plan have been telling. Some parents whose children attend the high-achieving schools are bristling at the news that students from other neighborhoods might be bused in, according to Washington Post reporter Brigid Schulte. The vice president of the school board commented that "I hate to think people are socioeconomically biased, but I think there is some prejudice in this county." School staff seem more optimistic. One principal whose school has been designated to take about 45 transfers

» Continued

School districts worry about letting kids leave failing schools

Why social studies teachers don't teach history and what to do about it

May 16, 2002

Last week, the Department of Education released the most recent batch of scores on the NAEP history exam, and the results for 12th graders were abysmal. Once you learn a little about the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS), the 26,000 member organization of teachers of history, geography, political science, economics, sociology, and psychology, you may not be surprised that history scores are so bad. In the May 6 issue of The Weekly Standard, Kay Hymowitz of the Manhattan Institute takes a look at what the NCSS and its members-the professionals who are in charge of turning the nation's young into effective citizens-have had to say about citizenship since September 11 and over the past decade. After the attacks, the NCSS magazine warned that they would provide the excuse Americans wanted to indulge their reflexive racism and revenge-oriented ideology. But the deep cynicism of the NCSS about America is nothing new. For the most part, the NCSS aims to "de-exceptionalize" both America and the Western world as a whole ("We're just another country and another group of people") and to help students think of themselves not as Americans but as members of the global community. The curriculum standards that NCSS promulgated for social studies in 1994 include a list of performance expectations that cover culture, economics, technology, "continuity and change," and personal identity, but no American history, no major documents, and only a smattering of references to government at all,

» Continued

Why social studies teachers don't teach history and what to do about it

Education Management Organizations: Growing a For-profit Education Industry with Choice, Competition, and Innovation

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / May 16, 2002

Guilbert C. Hentschke, Scot Oschman and Lisa Snell, Reason Public Policy Institute
May 2002

Former U.S.C education dean Guilbert C. Hentschke and two colleagues penned this "policy brief," reviewing key aspects of the growth of "EMO's," notably the political barriers they face, their comparative advantage, their "complementarities" with school systems, conditions affecting their future growth, and how to contract with them. The appendix offers a list of selected EMO's. You can download the PDF version at http://www.rppi.org/pb21.pdf.

» Continued

Education Management Organizations: Growing a For-profit Education Industry with Choice, Competition, and Innovation

Final Report of the Evaluation of New York Networks for School Renewal: An Annenberg Foundation Challenge for New York City

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / May 16, 2002

Institute for Education and Social Policy, Steinhardt School of Education, New York University
December 2001

New York University's Institute for Education and Social Policy prepared this five-year report on the Annenberg Challenge in New York, to which it gives high marks. The study finds somewhat stronger attendance in the Annenberg-aided schools than in regular New York City public schools serving similar youngsters; slightly more stable enrollments; a smaller fraction of ESL and special ed students in the Annenberg schools; significantly smaller schools and less experienced teachers (bear in mind, though, that the Annenberg Challenge in New York focused on starting and supporting networks of small new schools); a mixed picture with respect to test scores (better than comparison schools but still below the citywide average, which itself is notably weak); and another mixed picture with regard to school completion and graduation rates. The authors work hard to declare the Annenberg-assisted schools a success. They only succeed moderately well in making this case. Their bullish findings are somewhat more persuasive concerning qualitative and process indicators such as school climate, curricular focus and individualized attention. You can see for yourself by downloading the PDF version from http://www.nyu.edu/iesp/publications/reports/NYNSRFinalReport.PDF. Interested readers may also want to reacquaint themselves with Ray Domanico's examination of the Annenberg Challenge program in New York City, prepared for this foundation and available at http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=41.

» Continued

Final Report of the Evaluation of New York Networks for School Renewal: An Annenberg Foundation Challenge for New York City

Special Education Services in Colorado Charter Schools

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / May 16, 2002

Debora Scheffel, Colorado Department of Education
March 2002

The Colorado Department of Education recently released this 50-page study by Debora Scheffel of the University of Northern Colorado, based on a survey of district special-ed directors and charter-school administrators regarding services for disabled youngsters attending Colorado charters. It indicates that the number and proportion of such youngsters is rising, that this is "causing an increasing strain on both the charter schools and the support provided by the districts." This argues for finding ways of addressing "issues which impede a collaborative and enabling relationship between charter schools and school districts so that the needs of students with disabilities can be adequately met." As you may know, Colorado charters are all sponsored by their local districts, so they find themselves working together-or at loggerheads-more than in most states. For delivering and paying for special ed services, it's common in Colorado to use an "insurance model wherein [charters] pay a flat rate to the district for provision of specific services to their students with disabilities." This seems to work well from the district perspective but far less so from the charter-school viewpoint. Only ten percent of charter heads report a "positive relationship" with their district-though 70% of district special ed directors are satisfied. The author finds a major lack of awareness of each other's perspective. She goes on to make recommendations, mostly predictable. It's not a riveting report but is pertinent to those seeking better information

» Continued

Special Education Services in Colorado Charter Schools

Statement of the Wingspread Coalition: Where Will We Find the Leaders and What Will We Ask Them to Do?

Terry Ryan / May 16, 2002

Forum for the American School Superintendent
January 2002

There is a deepening shortage of strong principals and superintendents in American public education, especially those willing to work in urban and rural schools. It is well established that good schools have good principals, and effective school districts have first-rate superintendents. Hence a growing coalition is forming around the effort to improve school leadership. The "Statement of the Wingspread Coalition" is an effort by the Danforth and Johnson foundations, partnered with the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the Wallace-Reader's Digest Funds, to spotlight the need to improve the quality of school leaders in the United States. Leaders from these philanthropic organizations gathered in October 2001 with superintendents and principals at the Wingspread Conference Center in Racine, Wisconsin, to define a new grantmaking agenda in this area, one based on the premises that school leaders are learners; that effective leaders are made, not born; and that therefore they can be developed and improved. To these ends, the coalition coalesced around five ideas. They are:

• Urban Schools Leadership Roundtable-to improve big-city schools. The Coalition wants to develop a roundtable that will work to improve education in the nation's 100 largest school districts. (Presumably they know to seek out the Council of the Great City Schools-a coalition of nearly 60 of the nation's largest urban public school systems founded in 1956 to improve urban education.)
  
• Presidential Commission or Conference on School Leadership-to develop future leaders. The

  » Continued

  ---

  Statement of the Wingspread Coalition: Where Will We Find the Leaders and What Will We Ask Them to Do?

The Emerging Education Industry

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / May 16, 2002

Michael R. Sandler, Education Industry Leadership Board
April 2002

Michael R. Sandler, who heads EduVentures, wrote this "white paper" reviewing the first decade of the "education industry" (the burgeoning for-profit sector of K-12 education) for a group called the Education Industry Leadership Board, which he also chairs. In a dozen pages, it offers a nice, quick tour of this fast-changing sector of the education cosmos. For copies of the paper, e-mail cyelich@aepp.org and request a PDF copy. The paper will be online at www.aepp.org next week. - Chester E. Finn, Jr.

» Continued

The Emerging Education Industry