Eduflack

What Parents Want from Student Assessments

2012-02-13T14:05:00Z

It is quite clear that student assessments are quickly becoming the driving force in public education. In state after state, we are now using student assessment to drive funding, teacher evaluation, and institutional direction. While many may squabble on what types of assessments to take and how to apply them, there is no denying that student assessment is now ruling the day.

So what is that parents (and teachers) actually want from the learning assessments administered in our classrooms? That is the question that the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) and Grunwald Associates asked earlier this month, and some of the responses were surprising. All told, Grunwald Associates surveyed more than 1,000 K-12 teachers, more than 1,000 K-12 parents, and 200 district administrators. The findings included:

* 90 percent of parents said monitoring their kids' progress in school, knowing when to be concerned about progress, and determining preparedness for the next stage of learning was "extremely" or "very" important;

* More than eight in 10 parents (84 percent) said formative assessments are useful for instructional purposes, while only 44 percent said summative assessments were;

* More than six in 10 teachers cited monitoring individual student performance and monitoring growth in learning over time as most important to them;

* With both parents and educators, 90 percent said it is important to measure student performance in math and English/language arts, as well as in other subjects like science, history, government and civics, economics, and technology and media literacy; and

* Only half of parents believe that summative assessment results are delivered in a timely manner.

And the big takeaways? Teachers value formative and interim assessments far more than they do summative assessments (and that opinion is trickling down to parents). The vast majority of teachers and parents want more testing (at least in more subjects) and want results delivered in a timely manner. And an inordinate amount of K-12 parents seem to understand the subtleties among formative, interim, and summative assessments (or at least pretended to in distinguishing between all comers in responding to this survey.

It is valuable to see that we continue to discern value from student assessments, regardless of the form they come in. But we also have a few key lessons learned from the NWEA/Grunwald data:

* We still aren't seeing that data is being effectively used in classroom instruction. Neither parents nor educators seem to believe that current data is being used to tailor and improve instruction in the classroom. Why not? With all the data we capture, we should be putting it into practice. If not, this is all a fool's errand.

* Testing turnaround time is taking too long. Teacher and parent alike seem to believe the turnaround time from taking the test to getting the scores is just too lengthy. Seems like the perfect opportunity to call for online, adaptive testing (whether it be formative or summative) where scores can be turned around and applied in real time.

* Parents follow the lead of their children's educators. On the whole, parents' responses aligned with the teachers leading their kids' classrooms. Both the frustrations and benefits of teaching, from the educators' eyes, is making it back to the parents at home. This relationship can serve as a valuable tool.

* There seems to be a call for adding testing to the school calendar. While some bemoaned those "horrible" "high-stakes" summative assessments, there was a strong call for more tests on the front end. This seems to run contrary to the drumbeat that there is too much testing in the classroom, and, if used properly, can be powerful in further shaping data-driven classrooms.

While such surveys will likely have little impact on the in-developed common core standards assessments or on current state exams, they do provide some interesting context as we look at how to use tests in educator evaluation and other such measures. Some food for thought.

How Tenure Reform Can Improve Teaching

2012-02-09T16:36:00Z

Does tenure reform denigrate the teaching profession? Earlier this week, Eduflack spotlighted teacher tenure proposals offered up in Connecticut. The significance of this is that Connecticut is a true-blue state, Dem legislature, Dem governor, with strong teachers unions. So efforts to eliminate "life-long tenure" demand one stand up and take notice.

A valued reader, though, commented that such an approach must mean that Eduflack is anti-teacher. Nothing could be furthest from the truth (if I were, I don't think my teacher mother would let me come home for Christmas). But I do believe, as Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy does, that one can be both pro-teacher and pro-reform.

As I've written on these electronic pages many a time, there are few professions as demanding, as necessary, and as downright hard as teaching. Far too many of us (Eduflack included) are just not cut out to be classroom teachers. Those who enter the profession do not do so for the pay, the pensions, or other such considerations. They do so to make a difference in the lives of kids, no matter how difficult it may be.

In return, they get low pay. They get berated by parents. They get attacked in the media. They become the punchlines for jokes and the targets of horrible urban legends.

Just last year, as a leader on a local school board, my district was working hard to find a way to provide raises to our educators, who had seen there salaries frozen for several previous years. We did give them the pay increases they deserved (or at least a start to what they deserved), but along the way, I heard some choice words from constituents about how teachers don't work full time and how they deserve low pay because they have those "huge" pensions coming to them. To folks like that, teachers are simply a commodity, not a partner in the process.

But I digress. If done correctly, efforts such as tenure reform can return a needed level of professionalism and respect to the teaching profession. Yes, tenure is earned. Yes, any teacher worth her salt is doing everything possible to encourage learning in her classroom. So why not have that check-in every five years to ensure that a tenured teacher remains on task? Use the process to applaud the leaders, while helping provide additional resources and supports to those who may be struggling.

Ultimately, tenure reform is a necessary component to current efforts to focus on educator quality. We start with certification, and what is necessary to gain entrance to the classroom. It is followed by educator evaluations and those measures necessary to determine if effective learning is happening in our classrooms. And it is followed by a tenure process that incorporates the key tenets of that evaluation system and ensures those goals are embedded in keeping our best educators in their classrooms for their entire careers.

Certification reform is about getting the highest-quality teachers in the classroom, dispelling the myth any warm body can teach. Educator evaluation is about demonstrating the effectiveness of our teaching force, not about targeting teachers for dismissal. And tenure reform is about demonstrating the effectiveness of all our instructional leaders, not about taking away benefits or collective bargaining rights.

For far too many, education reform is seen as a punitive action, as an effort to assault our classrooms and attack our teachers. And yes, in some instances, that has indeed been the case. But it does not and should not be that way. At its heart, education reform is about strengthening the teaching profession while improving the learning processes for all of our students.

Real reform, real school improvement, cannot happen without educators. Our teachers and principals cannot do it half way, they can't sit on the sidelines and hope to wait out reforms, and they certainly can't ignore the proposed changes. They need to be full partners in the process, and agents for improvement in the classroom. We need to trust all educators to implement with fidelity, and we need to provide them the resources and supports to do it right.

To get there, we need to continue to build a public confidence in our educators. We need to demonstrate that the strongest, most effective teachers are teaching "my" kids. To do that, we need to use the continuum of certification, evaluation, and tenure. All teachers -- from first years to veterans -- should be held to the highest standards. They should be evaluated every year. Those who need additional supports should get it. And those who are exemplary should be rewarded for it.

Most educators I talk to are not afraid of such measurements or such expectations. They just ask that it be applied fairly and with a common sense that can often be lacking in public education. Couldn't agree more.

Pro-Teacher, Pro-Reform

2012-02-09T09:04:00Z

And we won't get drawn into making a false choice between being pro-reform or pro-teacher. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I am both. I'm pro-teacher, as long as that doesn't mean defending the status quo, and I'm pro-reform, as long as that isn't simply an excuse to bash teachers.

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy, 2012 State of the State Address

Teacher Tenure Reform in Blue

2012-02-09T00:02:04Z

What does tenure reform look like, particularly in a blue state with strong teachers unions? Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy offered up a glimpse of the future of tenure today as part of his State of the State Address.

Rather than summarize, let's read from one governor who is jumping to the top of the "ed reform guv" lists.

But we must do one more thing.

I’m a Democrat. I’ve been told that I can’t, or shouldn’t, touch teacher tenure. It’s been said by some that I won’t take on the issue because it will damage my relationship with teachers.

If the people in this chamber — and those watching on TV or online, or listening on the radio – if you’ve learned nothing else about me in the past 13 months, I hope you’ve learned this: I do what I say I’m going to do, and I do what I think is right for Connecticut, irrespective of the political consequences.

And so when I say it’s time we reform teacher tenure, I mean it.

And when I say I’m committed to doing it in the right way, I mean it.

Since 2009, 31 states have enacted tenure reform, including our neighboring states of New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. It’s time for Connecticut to act.

For those watching or listening who don’t know what tenure is, it's basically job security. Let me explain.

Right now, if you’re a teacher and you have tenure, your performance in the classroom has to be rated “incompetent” before a dismissal process can even begin. Even then – even if you’re rated “incompetent” – it can take more than a year to dismiss you.

And to earn that tenure – that job security – in today’s system basically the only thing you have to do is show up for four years. Do that, and tenure is yours.

The bottom line? Today tenure is too easy to get and too hard to take away.

I propose we do it a different way. I propose we hold every teacher to a standard of excellence.

Under my proposal, tenure will have to be earned and re-earned. Not earned simply by showing up for work – earned by meeting certain objective performance standards, including student performance, school performance, and parent and peer reviews.

And my proposal says, you should not only have to prove your effectiveness once, after just a few years in the classroom. My proposal says that if you want to keep that tenure, you should have to continue to prove your effectiveness in the classroom as your career progresses.

I’m trying to be careful in explaining this tenure reform proposal because I know there are those who will deliberately mischaracterize it in order to scare teachers. So let me be very clear: we are not talking about taking away teachers’ rights to a fair process if an objective, data-driven decision is made to remove them from the classroom.

I believe deeply in due process.

I believe just as deeply that we need to ensure that our children are being taught only by very good teachers.

So for those teachers who earn tenure – by proving that they are effective teachers – it’s the job of the local school district to make sure that you have every chance to continue to succeed. That means that if you start to struggle at any point after you’ve earned tenure, the district will provide support and professional development to help get you back on track.

And finally, my proposal says that we need to do a better job of recognizing our great teachers. That’s why I’m proposing to allow local school districts, if they so choose, to provide career advancement opportunities and financial incentives as a way of rewarding teachers who consistently receive high performance ratings.

Over the next few weeks, we’ll continue to have this discussion about tenure and I’m confident we can put in place a system that best serves our students, and their teachers.

Now let me be clear: in having that discussion, Connecticut will not join the states trying to demonize and antagonize their way to better results.

And we won’t get drawn into making a false choice between being pro-reform or pro-teacher.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, I am both.

I’m pro-teacher, as long as that doesn’t mean defending the status quo, and I’m pro-reform, as long as that isn’t simply an excuse to bash teachers.

Game on, Connecticut!

An Encouraging Step on Charters

2012-02-07T12:57:45Z

"For too long charter students have been second-class citizens in Connecticut and putting additional dollars is an encouraging step forward but it's by no means the complete solution," said Patrick Riccards, CEO of education-reform group ConnCAN.

Connecticut Set to Boost Charter Funds, The Wall Street Journal, February 6, 2012

Jobs and Ed, Ed and Jobs

2012-02-01T13:14:50Z

One has to be living under a rock not to recognize that that education and jobs share a strong bond. As we look for ways to rebuild our economy and create new jobs, it is clear that reforming our K-12 education systems, ensuring all students have access to the knowledge and skills necessary to perform in our future economy, is a non-negotiable.

Over at National Journal's Education Experts Blog, this is the question of the week. On those electronic pages, dear ol' Eduflack opines on both the need for education reform and our failures to address the skills gap we now have.

From National Journal:

It’s shameful that we can’t fill open jobs in an economy like this. And it is deplorable that one’s ability to get a strong public education depends, in large part, on race, family income, or zip code. We have no excuse for not preparing our kids, all of our kids, to meet the demands of a 21st century economy. Education is an economic development strategy – the best one that’s out there. We should be redoubling our efforts to ensure that policy makers see economic development and education as two sides of the same coin, and look to them to guide states, localities, and the nation toward meaningful reforms that will prepare all of our kids for college, career, and a productive life.

Happy reading!

SOTU MIA

2012-01-25T19:23:00Z

Earlier today, Eduflack examined the educational highlights of President Obama's State of the Union address. The Cliff Notes version -- strong on effective teachers, keep every kid in high school until age 18, college is expensive. But what is equally interesting is what was NOT included in the SOTU, particularly as a lead-up to the presidential campaign.

What was missing?

Race to the Top -- No mention whatsoever of the crown jewel of the Obama education reform platform. No talk about the progress states like Delaware and others are making. No discussion of the new world order likely coming out of the first few rounds of RttT. (But there was that veiled reference to RttT driving states to adopt the Common Core, but only the insideriest of insiders will have caught the "for less than one percent of what our Nation spends on education each year, we've convinced nearly every State in the country to raise their standards ...")

Early childhood education -- Despite the hundreds of millions of dollars the Obama administration just awarded to the winning states in the RttT Early Learning edition, there was no mention of ECE or the importance of ensuring all kids are ready to learn when the hit kindergarten.

Principals -- In the President's focus on effective teachers, he seemed to forget that a great principal is just as important -- if not more so -- in improving student learning and turning a school around. Using "educators" is the common catch-all phrase, but Obama decided to focus just on teachers.

ESEA -- No call to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. No sense of urgency to act, as we have heard in previous years. Have we officially determined this is a 2013 activity now?

Parental engagement -- In one of his earlier SOTUs, Obama got all Bill Cosby on us and called for greater parental involvement in the K-12 process. This year, nothing. If we are serious about real reform, it can't all be on the backs of the teachers Obama singled out. It requires involved and committed parents, clergy, business leaders, and community voices too.

Choice -- Embracing the entire public school infrastructure -- traditional publics, public charters, magnets, and technicals -- used to be a part of the President's educational stump speech. But when talking about the need for all kids to finish high school, there was no mention of ensuring all of those kids actually have access to good high schools.

Competitive Grants -- Similar to the failure to mention RttT, we saw no mention of the Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund, no discussion of the impacts of recent educational budget "consolidations," and no teaser on ARPA ED. Are competitive grants moving to the back burner?

What else are we missing? Anyone? Anyone?

"Teachers Matter"

2012-01-25T13:23:02Z

Last evening, President Barack Obama delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress and the nation. The speech focused on the four pillars the President and his team see as necessary for turning around the United States and strengthening our community and our economy. No surprise for those following the pre-game shows, education stood as one of those four pillars.

Five paragraphs committed to education. One pointing out our states and districts are cutting education budgets when we should be strengthening them. One on the importance of teachers. One on high school dropouts. Two on higher education and how we fund a college education. (We have a sixth if you include the President's call to do something to help hard-working students who are not yet citizens.)

So let's go ahead and dissect what the President offered up last evening.

"Teachers matter."

Absolutely. No question about it. We cannot and should not reform our K-12 educational systems without educators. Teachers (and I would add, principals) are the single-greatest factor in education improvement. They need to be at the table as we work toward the improved educational offerings the President and so many other dream of.

"So instead of bashing them, or defending the status quo, let's offer schools a deal. Give them the resources to keep good teachers on the job, and reward the best ones."

Sign me up. As the son of two educators, the last thing I want to do is bash a teacher (I'll get in trouble with my mom if I do). As I've said many times on this blog, teaching -- particularly in this day and age -- is one of the most difficult professions out there. Most people aren't cut out to do it, or at least do it well. We need to make sure our precious tax dollars are being directed at recruiting, retaining, and supporting great teachers. We should reward classroom excellence with merit pay and other acknowledgements. But the President is also right in noting we cannot defend the status quo. We can no longer debate whether reform is necessary. Reform is necessary. The discussion must now shift to how we change how we teach, not whether we change.

"In return, grant schools flexibility: To teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test; and to replace teachers who just aren't helping kids learn."

Yes, yes, yes. Great educators know how to help virtually all kids learn. They know to tailor their instruction based on data and other research points. We should be encouraging that and empowering teachers to do so each and every day. But we can't lose sight of that last clause (and many may have missed it last night over the cheap applause line of not teaching to the test). We must "replace teachers who just aren't helping kids learn." In our quest for a great educator in every classroom, we must also realize not everyone is cut out to teach. We need serious educator evaluation systems that ensure everyone is evaluated, everyone is evaluated every year, and those evaluations are based primarily on student learning. And, like it or not, student performance tests still remain the greatest measure we have for student learning. So if we can't get struggling educators the professional development and support necessary to excel in the classroom, we need to be prepared to transition them out of the school.

And lastly, President Obama's "bold" call to action to ensure every student is college and career ready.

"I call on every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen."

And here we have the President's big educational swing and a miss. This is a process goal, not an outcomes goal. Based on AYP figures and recent on school improvement and turnaround, we know that far too many kids -- particularly those from historically disadvantaged populations -- are attending failing schools. This is particularly true of secondary school students.

Why force a student to stay in a school that has long been branded a "drop-out factory?" Why keep a kid in school until he is 18 when he only reading at the grade level of an eight-year-old? Why stick around for a high school diploma when it also requires massive remediation to attend a postsecondary institution?

No, the call should not be to require students to stick around a bad situation, giving us nothing more than a process win. Instead, we should be focused on improving the outcomes of high school. How do we demonstrate the relevance of a high school curriculum? How do we engage kids? How do we provide choices for a meaningful high school education? How do we show the college and career paths that come from earning that diploma? How do we make kids see they want to stick around, and don't have to be mandated to do so?

At this point in time, we all realize that a high school diploma is the bare minimum to participate in our economy and our society. For most, some form of postsecondary education is also necessary. Until we improve the quality and direction of our high schools -- and help kids see that dropping out is never a viable option -- that mandatory diploma will be nothing more than a certificate of attendance. We need to make a diploma something all kids covet ... not a mandatory experience like going to the dentist.

"Choice Can, Should, and Must Inform"

2012-01-24T12:41:46Z

It is School Choice Week! Of course, that means yet another debate focused on whether schools of choice should play a role in our K-12 public education infrastructure. By now, you would think such a debate would be unnecessary, yet the beat goes on.

Over at National Journal's Education Experts Blog, the question of the week is "Is school choice a useful tool to fuel common ground on education policy?" First up to offer a resounding "yes" to the question is dear ol' Eduflack.

As for the continued question at hand, I opine:

It is unfortunate that, in 2012, we must continue a debate about whether all students should have access to high-quality school options. It is unfortunate that too many children don’t have the opportunity to attend public schools that can change their destinies. And it is truly unfortunate that we continue to look for excuses and justifications for denying students access schools that are proven to be effective when it comes to addressing all students’ learning needs and preparing all kids – regardless of race, family income, or zip code – for college and career.

And in answer to the question of the week:

Choice can, should, and must help inform the entire education policy agenda. Ultimately, our goal must be to provide great public schools to all students, no excuses. Public school success, regardless of the wrapper it might wear, serves as the exemplar for driving change. We should be agnostic about where solutions come from, as long as they are real, effective solutions that work for our kids. The stakes are too high for us to accept anything less.

Happy reading!

Take the Test? Me?

2012-01-20T11:17:00Z

When we talk about the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, we usually like to focus on the freedom of speech part. Some of us (including us former reporters) like the freedom of the press thing. The recent Occupy movement has given us new-found interest in the right of peaceable assembly. And come election time, we often hear about freedom of religion.

But what about that fifth First Amendment right? How often do we give attention to our right to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances?"

This week, clause five takes on special significance for dear ol' Eduflack. Courtesy of the good folks over at Change.org, I am now the target of an online petition.

For those unfamiliar, Change.org is a terrific site where folks can post their grievances on any topic you care about. Oppose the war in Afghanistan? Wanna stop the Keystone pipeline? Demand the return of tan M&Ms? Doesn't matter, Change.org is your site. Post up a petition, spread the word, and work toward that goal of 100,000 signatures. When you hit the magic number, great things will come to the petitioners.

This week, a petition was posted opposing the use of standardized tests in K-12 education. Using standard language of attacking those dreaded "bubble exams," the petitions note:

Students are put under pressure like never before to meet high expectations on Standardized Tests. Not only that, but teachers are held accountable for these tests scores, putting just as much pressure on teachers all over the United States. Ultimately, destroying the true purpose of school and education. Basically, it doesn't matter how much a teacher helped a student go from a struggling reader to a student now never seen without a book in his hand. It doesn't matter that the teacher inspired and motivated the student to want to graduate high school instead of dropping out on her 16th birthday just 2 months away.

The petition's call to action? Before subjecting our kids to more of those dreaded bubble sheets, the politicians responsible for such horrific measures of accountability should first take those standardized tests themselves. "If you are in a position of power in the education system and think the tests are good and valuable, the theory goes, then you should feel comfortable taking them yourself and sharing how you performed," the petitioners write.

The petition is addressed to nine parties. The U.S. Senate, which is working to enact ESEA reauthorization, is target one. It is followed by folks like CA Gov. Jerry Brown, NJ Gov. Chris Christie, PA Gov. Tom Corbett, NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo, CT Gov. Dannel Malloy, and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg. But wait, there are two other targets on the list. The first is former DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee, now the head of StudentsFirst. The second? Patrick Riccards, your friendly neighborhood Eduflack.

For the record, I do think student tests are good and valuable. I believe that the ultimate measure of our public education systems should be outcomes. If we are serious about improving student learning, we need to enact some measures to ensure that is happening. Standardized tests may be far from perfect, and they may not be the only measure of student learning, but they are an important component to determining our success. Like it or not, we need quantifiable measures of student progress and school achievement.

Sure, technically I'm not "the Government." But folks should feel free to bring me their redress of testing grievances. Will I take the test? I'd be happy to. But as the head of an education advocacy organization, I'd like to have some of those voices defending the status quo and chanting "all is well" when we talk about improvement in the testing room right there with their own No. 2 pencils.

Sadly, we are only up to 27 signatures on the petition. When we hit the magic number, I'm ready for my bubble sheet.

Flackin' for School Districts

2012-01-19T06:17:00Z

The world has clearly changed for school districts. While we are hearing more about test scores and teacher contracts these days, we are just as likely to hear about social media, editorial board meetings, and a superintendent's "message."

While some may see this as a troubling sign for what is to come in our schools, I would argue it is actually a strong signal of the increased importance of K-12 education in our social landscape and our community priorities. LEAs, particularly those in urban areas, now need communications professionals (if they do their jobs properly) to ensure that information and data is properly shared, community stakeholders are effectively engaged, and transparency and sunshine rule the day.

Diane Orson, over at WNPR in New Haven, CT, has a terrific piece on the topic (and not just terrific because it includes dear ol' Eduflack.) In her "The Changing Role of School Spokesman," Orson tells the story of why school district communications is important, and what we should expect from the role.

As I note in the piece:

"And I think as we look at how we talk about what's happening in the schools, it really has to be a data driven discussion. We’re no longer just writing about spring break and how local sports teams are doing. This is now a very deep dive discussion into performance measures and data. And that requires a sophistication we’ve haven’t seen in education communications in the past."

Some of you may have already heard it on NPR's Morning Edition and All Things Considered. But if not, it the piece is well worth the listen.

Educator Eval ... With a British Accent

2012-01-17T18:27:08Z

Over at Education Sector, there is a new report out focused on accountability efforts in England. The Report, On Her Majesty's School Inspection Service, offers an interesting look at how expert "inspection teams" can evaluate the success of local schools and local teachers.

Riffing off EdSector's new report, dear ol' Eduflack has a guest blog post on Quick and the Ed, examining what we might be able to learn from the British inspectorate and how those lessons could be applied to current U.S. efforts to key in on educator evaluation. The most important point? British evaluations are all about the kids, with the vast majority of their multiple measures focused on students and student learning.

By now, we all realize that effective educator evaluation requires multiple measures. While many want to focus on just the inputs that go into teaching – what our educators are bringing to the classroom – it is equally, if not more, important for us to focus on student achievement. And England makes clear that student learning is the most important element to its evaluation system.

Definitely some food for thought as SEAs look for the most effective ways to build effective evaluation systems and determine the best ways to measure educator effectiveness.

The Importance of Good Teachers

2012-01-12T13:11:25Z

Most of us can point to that one educator who truly affected our lives -- both in and out of the classroom. We remember the one teacher who really pushed us to achieve. Or the instructor who refused to let us take the easy way out. And while we may not remember much about that year in the seventh grade, say, we definitely remember that educator from that year.

Which is why it is always so interesting when you hear folks arguing that "good teachers" can't be measured in terms of student performance. Yes, there are multiple measures that need to go into determining educator effectiveness. Yes, there are inputs a teacher brings to the classroom that need to be factored in. But at the end of the day, those teachers who likely left their marks on our lives also left their marks on our GPAs.

This morning, we have two interesting pieces out there reflecting on the importance of good teaching and good teachers. The first is from Nicholas Kristof in today's New York Times. Kristof is reflecting on last week's mega-study which showed the impact a strong teacher can have on the life of a student. As Kristof notes:

What shone through the study was the variation among teachers. Great teachers not only raised test scores significantly — an effect that mostly faded within a few years — but also left their students with better life outcomes. A great teacher (defined as one better than 84 percent of peers) for a single year between fourth and eighth grades resulted in students earning almost 1 percent more at age 28.
Suppose that the bottom 5 percent of teachers could be replaced by teachers of average quality. The three economists found that each student in the classroom would have extra cumulative lifetime earnings of more than $52,000. That’s more than $1.4 million in gains for the classroom.

To complement Kristof's keen analysis of an important piece of research, we have a new study coming from Education Trust. In typical EdTrust fashion, EdTrust-West looks at more than 1 million students and 17,000 teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District. One of the major takeaways? Good teachers in LAUSD can close the achievement gap for Black and Latino students. The disappointing reality? Historically disadvantaged students in the City of Angels often have the worst instructors.

We should all be able to agree that all teachers should be evaluated every year to determine the sort of job they are doing. We should all be able to agree that good teachers have a demonstrable impact on their students, including on student achievement measures. We should all be able to agree that those good teachers are particularly important levers in the lives of low-income and minority students. So with all of this agreement, why do we fight teacher effectiveness measures with such gusto? Why do we fear outcomes being part of educator evaluation?

Research such as that reflected on by Kristof and released by EdTrust makes a few facts clearer than ever. Good teachers are essential if we are to improve student learning and close the achievement gaps. We can determine who those good teachers are, and we can use test scores to help get there. We need to do everything possible to determine who those good teachers are and ensure they are where they are needed the most. And while it is not in the research, we need to properly pay and support those teachers that are making the sort of differences we expect to see in our classrooms.

Enough for today's lesson. Class dismissed.

Happy Birthday, Nicklebee!

2012-01-10T13:14:47Z

Yes, we are now smack in the middle of celebrating the 10th anniversary of our beloved No Child Left Behind. As we should expect from something that has been on the "out" list the past three or five seasons, many of the birthday wishes are focusing on the failures or shortfalls of the law. Yes, shocker!

So over at the National Journal Education Experts Blog, Eduflack focuses on some of the strengths of the law -- those positive specifics that we must continue to improve and build on. Accountability. A strong focus on achievement gaps. A commitment to evidence-based decision making. Choice. All made enormous steps forward in the NCLB era, and all are essential if we are to improve public education in the post-NCLB era. After all:

At the end of the day, NCLB will best be remembered as an unfinished legacy, one with great promise, but real challenges in delivering on those promises. But we cannot deny that NCLB succeeded in moving K-12 education away from a discussion of process and inputs (as it had been for so many iterations of ESEA before it) and towards a focus on outcomes. We have started to see students and families as the customers in the process, with providers (the public school system) improving the quality of their product. And now, parents can look at test scores and other achievement measures to determine the return on investment for their local education dollar.

Enjoy!

Setting Aside the Vitriol in School Improvement

2012-01-09T13:16:40Z

If we know anything, it is that we have much work in front of us if we are serious about providing all students -- regardless of race, family income or zip code -- access to truly great public schools. There are no quick fixes here, nor should we be foolish enough to think one entity has all of the answers to just do it alone.

Yet we continue to see extreme vitriol permeating our discussions about school improvement. Instead of focusing on the merits of ideas and the importance of outcomes, we continue to personalize the fight and resort to name calling and bullying to try and protect a status quo that we all realize cannot remain.

Over at the CT News Junkie this morning, Eduflack has a commentary on why real school improvement efforts require a team effort. It is a valuable read that is applicable to virtually any state working toward reform.

For us to be truly successful, we must engage the entire educational “village” – the village we saw firsthand at last Thursday’s education reform summit. From the teachers unions, to superintendent and board of education groups, to think tanks, to community organizations, to advocacy groups, we’re all in this together. And as the adults in the village, it’s our job to focus on the kids. We must stop with the name-calling and the feigned procedural concerns. When we look back in 20 years and ask “What became of the Year for Education Reform?” the worst possible thing would be to say that this unprecedented moment was hijacked by a few status quo defenders who won out by making everyone feel icky. What a disappointment that would be. Can’t we do better, Connecticut?

A "Sensible Fix" for the Achievement Gap

2012-01-05T13:59:44Z

It is no secret that our nation's achievement gap is significant. The odds that a white or upper class student succeeds in public schools is significantly higher than the odds of an African-American, Latino, or low-income student receiving the same benefits. And as frightening as the size of the gaps may be, the persistence of such gaps are even more damaging.

Over at The Washington Post, Jay Mathews points us in the direction of a "startlingly sensible achievement gap fix." Mathews writes about the specific efforts undertaken by Arlington (VA) Public Schools starting pre-NCLB (1998) and running through the end of the true NCLB era (2009).

As Mathews notes:

From 1998 to 2009, the portion of black students passing Virginia Standards of Learning tests in Arlington rose from 37 to 77 percent. For Hispanic students, the jump was from 47 to 84 percent. The gap between non-Hispanic white and black passing rates dropped from 45 percentage points to 19. Between Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites, the gap shrank from 35 points to 12.

Now those are the sorts of numbers we are all looking for when we talk about closing the gaps and providing great public schools for all students. The full work of the Arlington team is available in a new book, "Gaining on the Gap: Changing Hearts, Minds, and Practice." But Mathews offers a clear view on what Arlington, and its then superintendent, did:

He insisted on measuring each major ethnic group, plus low-income students, students with disabilities and students learning English, on: the percentage passing first-year algebra with a C or better by the end of eighth grade; the percentage passing advanced courses in grades six through 12; the percentage completing the third year of a foreign language by the end of grade 11; the percentage of sixth- through eighth-graders taking electives in art, music and theater, the percentage meeting or exceeding criterion levels on the Virginia Wellness-Related Fitness Tests, and several other measures.

And this is in addition to the requirements under NCLB/AYP and the Virginia SOLs.

For all those that say student data and achievement numbers are not a fair measure of a school and its success, Arlington County, Virginia is providing them wrong. By effectively collecting and utilizing data, Arlington was able to confront the problem of the achievement gap and target real solutions for fixing it. And the results speak for themselves.

Mathews' piece is definitely worth the read, as is the book by the Arlington leadership team. We cannot keep ignoring the achievement gap, nor can we discount its significance. Arlington and other places demonstrate there are real solutions out there, even sensible ones.

It Takes an Educational Village ...

2012-01-03T13:26:34Z

In years past, we used to talk about how it took a village to truly improve public education. It wasn't just up to teachers to do what they do behind the schoolhouse doors between the hours of 8 and 3. Parents needed to take a more active role. Local policymakers needed a greater understanding. Community leaders -- from youth groups to churches -- needed greater connection. And even the business community needed greater focus on skills and outcomes.

Oh, how the times have changed. In our post-NCLB environment, we are now hearing more and more vitriol about those "outside forces" trying to influence what is happening in our public schools. We have rallies and blogs and media coverage on how school improvement should be left exclusively to the trained, certified educators in the system. All others should watch from the sidelines, being told, in the words of Kevin Bacon in Animal House, "Stay calm! All is well!!"

But we know all is not well. From third-grade reading proficiency levels to high school graduation rates and all measures in between, all is not well in our public schools. Yet another generation of students has fallen through the cracks, leaving school either less than proficient or without a high school diploma all together.

The point of this is not to place blame. There is plenty of blame to go around. Our struggles are team struggles. Parents, teachers, administrators, community leaders, elected officials, business community, and students themselves all bear significant responsibility for where we stand today, and play an important role in where we need to head tomorrow. (And as a parent, a taxpayer, a former school board chairman, and an advocate, Eduflack is right in the middle of those who bear responsibility.)

Which is why it was so disconcerting to read the December 23 Wall Street Journal. In the print edition (sorry folks, somehow it got edited out of the online version), the WSJ reported on the hire of Chicago/Philly/Recovery District Supe Paul Vallas as the new head of Bridgeport (CT) Public Schools. The article noted that the hire was made possible, in part, because of philanthropic contributions to help the academically and financially struggling district bring in a talent like Vallas.

In the piece, the reporter spoke to a leader at the Bridgeport Education Association, who referred to those local Connecticut philanthropists as "robber barons," and questioned the legitimacy of their contributions.

We will forget, for a moment, the philanthropic support that Bridgeport Education Association and its parent National Education Association receive. While those dollars may come from a different "clan" of philanthropic and corporate support, there is not question that NEA and BEA are beneficiaries of similar outside support, and that such support is serving a real public good when it comes to teacher effectiveness and improved instruction.

But it was yet another example of the venom with which some speak when discussing the role of public/private partnerships and the growing philanthropic interest in improving our public schools. Local community members, who want to see their local schools improve and have the financial means to help jumpstart a reform process, are now "robber barons?" Really?

A century ago, our public schools (both K-12 and higher ed) were hardly the models to write home about. We lacked the educational resources offered by libraries, museums, and the performing arts. We saw our medical schools take a significant step forward because of folks like Carnegie. Libraries benefited from people like Ford. General education and research supported by the likes of Rockefeller.

There is now an entire literature dedicated to the role of corporate philanthropy and the societal benefits that derived from such giving. Today, we see large foundations the result of those original "robber barons," foundations that are committed to improving children's health, education, and society as a whole. They do so without a profit motive, just hoping to make a difference with the resources the have available.

Ultimately, we are doing our kids, our schools, and our community a disservice when we try to run off well-meaning philanthropists with name calling, insinuation of ulterior motives, or promoting a general sense of "ickiness" because the private sector wants to get involved in our public schools. Instead, we should be embracing such involvement. No, I'm not saying all those involved in ed reform are Carnegies and Rockefellers, nor am I saying that some do not come to the table with a specific agenda. But for all of those who argue that additional resources are needed in our public schools, yet must acknowledge that beloved tax base doesn't allow for it, there are alternative paths. Through private support, we can invest in technology or STEM or improved teacher support or the arts or a plethora of other areas that individuals, foundations, and companies want to get behind.

So where do we go from here? To start, we need to turn down the rhetoric a little and realize there is a role for many at the school improvement table. For educators, we need to realize it ultimately becomes an all or nothing bargain; we can't say this outside funding is OK, but this isn't. Either we believe in public/private partnerships, or we don't. We depend on philanthropic support, or we don't.

And what about those business types and educational philanthropists? First off, be transparent in your giving and proud of your support. Be vocal about your giving -- who you are giving to, why you are giving, and what your expected outcomes are. And don't let others define your motives.

Ultimately, it really does take an educational village to improve our public schools. Teachers, parents, community leaders, policymakers, taxpayers, the business community, and students all have a vested interest in seeing our schools improve and our kids succeed. And all have a potential role they can play in the improvement process. Now is not the time to say I can do this myself, and try to walk the road alone. We need all the help we can get.

An Ed Reform Gov in a Blue State?

2011-12-21T13:32:26Z

For the past few decades, we often talk about who the latest "education governor" is, particularly among Democrats. In the late 1980s, Bill Clinton of Arkansas tried to take the mantle from the esteemed Jim Hunt of North Carolina. For a bit, it shifted over to Gaston Caperton of West Virginia, as he emerged from a devastating state-wide teachers strike. And most recently, it was Virginia's Mark Warner, who ushered in the 21st century in the Old Dominion by focusing on high school reform.

But recent history points primarily to Republicans as the "education governors." Lamar Alexander in Tennessee. George W. Bush in Texas. Jeb Bush in Florida. Mitch Daniels in Indiana. Republicans seem to have the upper hand when it comes to conditions for pushing forward with reforms. And while many may question the final outcomes, it is those Republican state leaders, be they in red or purple states, that stand as leaders in education.

This week, we may have seen the start of a major shift in the "education governor" formula. A true-blue Democrat, in one of the truest of blue states boldly laying out an ambitious set of priorities for education reform. The leader? Dannel Malloy, the governor of Connecticut.

Governor Malloy was sworn into office this past January, elected in a 2010 cycle that wasn't particularly friendly to Democrats. Much of his first year has been spent focused on natural disasters and an unmanageable budget. He addressed the latter in the most unusual of ways for a governor -- he both cut spending and raised taxes. Connecticut is now looking at a potential budget surplus for the year, and that's following some significant investment in economic strength and jobs creation in the Nutmeg State.

Through it all, Malloy pledged that 2012 would be the "year of education reform." He recognized the important that strong public schools played in strengthening the state's economy. He knew he couldn't give it the full attention it needed in year one of his administration. But in year two, it would be game on.

Yesterday, Malloy threw that first pitch of that ed reform game in Connecticut. In a bold pronouncement to the state's legislative leaders, Malloy offered six key principles that would guide the 2012 legislative session. He urged leaders to act on these six issues -- six topics that are intertwined and interconnected to ensure progress. And he tasked his new Education Commissioner with presenting specific proposals in the next month or so to address these themes.

So what is Connecticut's new education agenda?

1) Enhance families' access to high-quality early childhood opportunities

2) Authorize the intensive interventions and enable the supports necessary to turn around Connecticut's lowest-performing schools and districts

3) Expand the availability of high-quality school models, including traditional schools, magnets, charters, and others

4) Unleash innovation by removing red tape and other barriers to success, especially in high-performing schools and districts

5) Ensure that our schools are home to the very best teachers and principals -- working within a fair system that values their skill and effectiveness over seniority and tenure.

6) Deliver more resources, targeted to districts with the greatest need -- provided that they embrace key reforms that position our students for success.

Expanding school choice. Removing red tape. Valuing educator effectiveness over years on the job. Focusing resources on the students who need them the most. This is not a status quo agenda from a typical Democratic politician. This is the start of an audacious plan focused on actually improving public education for all students, whatever it takes. These principles can serve as the very model for how a post-NCLB governor of a blue state can take real action steps that get to the heart of what ails our public schools.

Obviously, the devil is in the details. Connecticut must now look to its State Department of Education to offer up specific policy proposals that ensure effective teachers and principals for all students. The SDE must move forward ideas on how to fix a school funding formula that has been broken for decades. And it must do all of this under the reality that there may not be buckets of new money to spend, and we need to expand choice and provide more direct interventions simply by spending existing dollars better than we have in past years.

While Connecticut is still a long ways from solving its achievement gap crisis and ensuring that all students have access to great public schools, Malloy's announcement is an important step forward for Connecticut's students, schools, and the state as a whole. He has signaled that a Democratic governor in a strong union state can get serious about statewide education reform. And he has done it in a way that builds on what we have learned from similar efforts in other states, building on the successes and hopefully avoiding the pitfalls.

Yes, Connecticut, we can have an ed reform governor with a real ed reform agenda.

Reconnecting McDowell County, WV

2011-12-19T09:04:00Z

Readers of Eduflack know I often speak of my roots and connections to West Virginia. I am a proud graduate of Jefferson County High School in Shenandoah Junction, WV (Go, Cougars!) But I am particularly privileged to have served on the staff of one of the greatest U.S. Senators in our nation's history, the Honorable Robert C. Byrd.

Working for Senator Byrd, I was able to see much of what makes West Virginia and the nation great. I had the ability to travel the Mountain State's 55 counties, from its beautiful ranges to its research universities, its large cities to its company towns, its river rapids to its coal mines. Yes, West Virginia has much to be proud of. But it is also a state with communities ravaged by poverty, poor health, and struggling schools.

Which is I was so taken by an announcement made last week by the American Federation of Teachers. On Friday, the AFT officially launched "Reconnecting McDowell County," a "comprehensive, long-term effort to make educational improvements in McDowell County the route to a brighter economic future."

Reconnecting McDowell County has an impressive list of partners, including WV Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, the WV Congressional Delegation, Benedum Foundation, Blue Cross Blue Shield of West Virginia, College Board, Safe the Children, WV AFL-CIO, and the West Virginia State Police, just to name a few.

The effort's Covenant of Commitment is a particularly interesting read. The effort is focused on six key issues: 1) education; 2) services for students and their families; 3) transportation, technology, and other issues; 4) housing; 5) jobs and economic development; and 6) the McDowell Community. In the Covenant, the partners note:

We understand that there are no simple solutions -- no easy answers or quick fixes. Together, we are striving to meet these challenges, but we know we won't accomplish that in a day, a month, or even a year. We will find ways to measure our progress, and we believe that the changes we propose and implement must be judged by rigorous standards of accountability. We accept that this will be a long-term endeavor, and we commit to stay engaged until we have achieved our goals of building the support systems the students need and helping the residents of McDowell County to take charge of their desire for a better life ahead.

Yes, I realize that McDowell County is not alone its history, its current challenges, or its desire to change. Across the nation, we have counties, cities, and communities that face similar struggles. What makes this interesting is that Reconnecting McDowell is committed to demonstrating the demographics do not equal destiny. Old industrial towns, even old coal towns, can be reborn in the 21st century. We can rebuild currently struggling schools around a new culture of improving instruction, greater accountability, and rising student performance. And we can work together to put all of the conditions -- from housing and health to education and jobs -- in place for achievement and success.

We should all keep an eye on Reconnecting McDowell, looking at its metrics and watching its progress. And we should be asking why we aren't launching similar efforts in other states, in other counties, and in other communities across the nation. The principles laid forward by Reconnecting McDowell are universal.

Saving American Education

2011-12-15T14:05:33Z

So how do we "save American education?" As a nation we obviously spend a great deal of time diagnosing the problems, while offering a few targeted solutions. But what does comprehensive treatment of the problem really look like.

That's actually the question that Jay Mathews of The Washington Post recently posed to Mark Tucker, the head of the National Center for Education and the Economy. And Tucker's answers may surprise some. His top five solutions?

1) Make admissions to teacher training programs more competitive

2) Raise teacher compensation significantly

3) Allow larger class sizes

4) End annual standardized testing

5) Spend more money on students who need more help getting to high standards

It is an interesting collection of recommendations, which Tucker and NCEE offer based on observing what other countries have done to improve their educational offerings. But it begs an important question -- are these reforms that the federal government should be leading, or reforms that need to be driven by the states? Can the United States of America really follow the lead of Singapore, a nation no larger than Kentucky?

Yes, it is important we focus on educator effectiveness. That starts with getting the best individuals into our teacher training programs and continues with ensuring schools are able to recruit, retain, and support those truly excellent educators. And yes, we should pay those teachers better, but only after we have developed teacher evaluation systems focused on student achievement measures.

And you will get no disagreement from Eduflack on the need to spend more money on the students who need the most help. The time has clearly come to overhaul our school finance systems to ensure that scarce tax dollars are going where they are needed the most. We shouldn't be funding schools based simply on an historical perspective, doing what we do because it worked a few decades ago. We need to fund our schools in real time, recognizing that all schools -- be they traditional public, magnet, technical, or charter -- are treated fairly and equitably when it comes to funding formulas and per-pupil expenditures.

But eliminate testing? While I like Tucker's idea of three national exams that identify student performance at the end of elementary school, 10th grade, and 12th grade, do we really believe that is enough? Is one test between kindergarten and high school really sufficient, particularly when we know a third of our elementary school students are reading below grade level and the real trouble spot for our schools is the middle school years?

Instead of cutting back on the number of tests, we should first look to use our testing data more effectively. Empower teachers with formative and summative assessment data to tailor their instructional approaches to meet student needs. Let the data guide what happens in the classroom. We need to change the mindset that the test is the end product. It needs to be the starting line, providing educators with a strong diagnosis for how to proceed with the work at hand for a given school year.

That's how we can save American education. Data-driven decision making. Evidence-based instruction. By better understanding and applying the research, we have the power to focus on effective teachers, getting the resources where they are most needed, and actually improving student achievement. Without it, we will just continue to feel our way in the dark.