NAEP Geography: Our schools??? secret success

Michael J. Petrilli / July 21, 2011

Here’s a new problem facing American education policy: Something we’re doing seems to be working.

You wouldn’t know it from the “we’re all going to hell in a hand basket” rhetoric surrounding today’s education debates, but the last fifteen years have seen tremendous progress for poor, minority, and low-achieving students—the very children who have been the focus of two decades of reform. Curiously, both sides of the education battle want to sweep this news under the carpet.

Poor and minority students are learning
(Photo by Star for Life 19)

First the facts: In both the “basic skills” of reading and math, and in the social-studies subjects of history, civics, and now geography, African American, Latino, and low-income fourth and eighth graders have posted huge gains on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) since the early 1990s. For instance, between 1990 and 2009, black fourth graders made 35 points of progress on the mathematics NAEP exam; black eighth graders gained 24 points. The corresponding numbers for Latino children were 28 and 21 points, respectively. In reading, black fourth graders gained 13 points between 1992 and 2009; black eighth graders gained 9 points. In the just-released geography exam, black fourth-grade students gained 27 points between 1994 and 2010; Latino fourth graders gained 21 points. Similar progress was seen in history and civics.

To put this in perspective, 10 points is roughly equivalent to

» Continued

NAEP Geography: Our schools??? secret success

NAEP Geography: But what about the whole country?

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / July 21, 2011

Mike isn’t wrong when he notes with satisfaction that, on some indicators and at some grade levels, poor and minority students in the U.S. are doing better today than they were a decade or so back. Only a churl would say that’s not an accomplishment worthy of notice—and some pride.

This glass is barely one-third full
(Photo by Lihn Tihn)

But the big, glum headline over American K-12 education today is essentially the same as when we were declared a “nation at risk” twenty-eight long years ago: Our kids on average are woefully lacking in essential skills and knowledge across every subject in the curriculum.

Almost all the major trend lines are flat—at least until you decompose them by ethnicity. Sure, it’s great that minority students have made gains, but what does that do for our international competitiveness if the average score is unchanged or declining? Especially in a time when many competitor nations are moving up on some of those same metrics? And what’s the long-term payoff from early-grade gains if scores and outcomes in high school are flat or declining? Some say the early gains are like the pig in the python’s throat and it’ll just take time for them to reach the tail. But we’ve had enough experience by now with early-grade gains and high school sags to throw major doubt on that hypothesis. We simply haven’t found—at least on

» Continued

NAEP Geography: But what about the whole country?

The myth of the "good" school

Michael J. Petrilli / July 21, 2011

Matthew Stewart, a stay-at-home dad in a wealthy New Jersey suburb, is leading a battle against the “boutique” charter schools now being planned for his community. “I’m in favor of a quality education for everyone,” Stewart told Winnie Hu of the New York Times. But “in suburban areas like Millburn, there’s no evidence whatsoever that the local school district is not doing its job. So what’s the rationale for a charter school?” Easy: Different parents define “quality education” differently. One person’s “good school” is another person’s “bad fit.” Stewart may love his child’s public school, which might do a dandy job providing a straight-down-the-middle education to its (mostly affluent) charges. But the parents developing a nearby charter school want something more—specifically, a Mandarin-immersion experience for their kids. For this, Mr. Stewart labels them “selfish.” Why? Because “public education is basically a social contract—we all pool our money.” “With these charter schools,” he explains, “people are trying to say, ‘I want a custom-tailored education for my children, and I want you, as my neighbor, to pay for it.’” This, of course, implies that the “selfless” thing to do is to send one’s children to a school that’s a bad fit, or to write a check for private education. But when choice isn’t an option, energized public school parents turn to advocacy to mold their one-size-fits-all neighborhood school to their liking. Environmentally minded parents push for eco-friendly cafeterias and outdoor education. Numeracy hawks rally around Singapore math. Warm and fuzzy types press for drama classes and self-expression. And on and on it goes. Beleaguered

» Continued

The myth of the "good" school

Far-reaching IMPACT

July 21, 2011

D.C.’s much-discussed teacher-evaluation system, IMPACT, is making itself felt. On Friday, 206 District teachers (about 5 percent of the instructional staff) were fired due to poor performance. Among them, sixty-five were deemed “ineffective” (cause for immediate dismissal) and another 141 were rated “minimally effective” for the second year in a row. While firing any well-meaning, hard-working person can sound heartless, Gadfly sees several reasons to celebrate. D.C.’s terminations over the past two years mark a major milestone: the first time that teachers have been systematically, objectively assessed—and then held to account for their performance. Not even Montgomery County or Cincinnati (both of which are praised for their teacher-eval systems) can boast the rigors or consequences of IMPACT. What’s more, IMPACT has survived the Fenty-Gray mayoral shift (and the exit of its architect, Michelle Rhee). It looks like the evaluation system is here to stay. And the icing on this double-decker cake: While the Washington Teachers Union is still none-too-pleased with the evaluation system, D.C. teachers we’ve spoken with believe that IMPACT has actually improved their teaching. (The $25,000 bonus for which top teachers are eligible—there were 663—might have helped generate positive feelings, too.) IMPACT’s not perfect but this work-in-progress is years ahead of yesterday’s status quo.

» Continued

Why America Needs School Choice

Roadmap for Next Generation State Accountability Systems

July 21, 2011

With most states signed onto the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative, a major challenge ahead is aligning their accountability systems with these new standards (and assessments). Toward that end, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) has developed this roadmap for “next-generation” accountability systems. (This is version one.) It details eight elements, none of which will likely startle you. For example, we’ll need clear performance objectives aligned to the standards, meaningful differentiation of performance between districts and schools, and timely and transparent reporting of actionable student data. Also flagged here are helpful resources (from groups like Achieve and the U.S. Department of Labor) and state exemplars (FL, KY, IN, and TN) for those looking to revamp their accountability systems. Not a bad start. Thanks, chiefs.

Council of Chief State School Officers Task Force on Next Generation Accountability Systems, “Roadmap for Next-Generation State Accountability Systems,” (Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers, June 17, 2011).

» Continued

Roadmap for Next Generation State Accountability Systems