| Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. |
|
|
Snap Schott: |
SCHOTT IN THE NEWS Blacks' test scores lag, but New Jersey is a bright spot
By Stacy Teicher Khadaroo | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Look behind the curtain of national averages, and you'll gain new insights into the gaps between whites and blacks in test scores: "The stark fact is that the gaps in school and life experiences that mirror the gaps in school achievement are still with us like an unwanted guest," said Paul Barton, senior associate at the Educational Testing Service's Policy Information Center, during an event Tuesday in Washington to release the new report. States and school districts continue to grapple with how to close achievement gaps and the opportunity gaps that contribute to them, which persist despite the fact that American schools have been officially desegregated for more than half a century. Just last week, school officials in Philadelphia voted to settle a desegregation lawsuit that had been brought in 1970 in an effort to close gaps between white and minority students. The district agreed to channel more resources to low-performing racially isolated schools, where at least 9 out of 10 students are of one race. And in Minneapolis, debates have cropped up over the district's latest effort to change the formula for assigning students to schools to even out racial distribution, resources, and achievement levels. "Achievement Gaps" is the latest US Department of Education analysis of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which periodically samples student performance in various subjects and grade levels. This report focuses on the achievement of public-school students. As previous NAEP reports have shown, gaps have been narrowing the most at the fourth-grade level in mathematics. Fifteen states narrowed those differences between 1992 and 2007 (see chart). Four states narrowed the gaps in eighth-grade math. In reading, only three states narrowed the gaps at fourth grade, and no states saw a significant change at the eighth-grade level. New Jersey narrowed gaps in both reading and math for fourth grade. One reason behind the state's progress is a funding distribution system that has sent more resources to schools in high-poverty areas to bring them up to the funding level of more-successful schools, says Michael Holzman, a research consultant for the Schott Foundation for Public Education in Cambridge, Mass. Newark, N.J., is one of just four large districts in the United States where African-American males graduate from high school at rates comparable to the national average for white students, he says. Department of Defense schools have smaller math and reading gaps than the national average, according to the new report. "There are many aspects to the military approach to education and development that are worth emulating," said Hugh Price, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, at the Washington event Tuesday. Mr. Price is also a former president of the National Urban League. "These include ... teamwork, motivation, and self-discipline ... accountability and consequences ... mentoring and monitoring, and providing frequent rewards and recognition."
Teacher Incentive Hike Survives in Key House Panel
By Erik W. Robelen But the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education rejected the president’s call to triple spending for a program aimed at helping to turn around low-performing schools. Overall, under the budget package, the department would receive $64.7 billion in discretionary funding in the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, an increase of $1.2 billion, or 1.8 percent, over the current year¬—excluding the massive influx of federal aid included in the economic-stimulus measure enacted in February. The budget total approved by a voice vote of the panel is about what President Obama requested, according to subcommittee materials, though it does not reflect his proposal to shift Pell Grants for low-income college students to the mandatory side of the budget. The subcommittee bill matches President Obama’s request to increase the maximum Pell grant award to $5,500, an increase of $200 per grant. (Even factoring in the Pell Grant shift, the total spending request listed in the subcommittee summary document differs slightly from that provided by the Education Department because of differences in how the figures are calculated.) “This bill is fiscally responsible and makes hard choices among competing priorities,” Rep. David R. Obey, the chairman of the subcommittee, said in discussing the bill. Although the panel’s Republicans did not vote against the bill, the Appropriations Committee’s ranking minority member raised some concerns about it in a press release. “Already this year, Democratic proposals have put our country into more than a trillion dollars worth of debt—not including interest,” said Rep. Jerry Lewis of California. “There are some good programs in this bill that deserve to be funded,” he added, but he contended that Democrats are failing to make the “tough decisions” on spending priorities that are needed to ensure long-term fiscal sustainability. TIF Increase Survives The bill as approved by the House panel would provide $446 million for the Teacher Incentive Fund, more than quadrupling the $97 million provided this fiscal year and close to meeting President Obama’s request of $487 million. That would be in addition the $200 million provided for the program under the stimulus law, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The result may come as something of a surprise, given that during a recent hearing before the subcommittee, Rep. Obey expressed some skepticism about the program’s effectiveness. ("Key Democrats Question Parts of Obama Budget," June 10, 2009.) The spending plan meets the president’s call to include $50 million for a new high school graduation initiative, and would match his request of $11.5 billion for special education state grants, which is the same amount as provided in the fiscal 2009 budget, not counting stimulus dollars. However, the panel rejected a bid by Mr. Obama to shift $1.5 billion of Title I aid to districts into two other programs. He has proposed to roughly triple the $545 million Title I school improvement grants program and wants to create a new, $500 million Title I Early Childhood Grants program. Instead, the subcommittee bill would maintain Title I grants to districts at $14.5 billion, the same level as appropriated for the current fiscal year, not including stimulus aid. “We’re delighted that Chairman Obey did not go along with the president’s proposed cut in Title I funding,” said Mary A. Kusler, the assistant director for advocacy and policy at the American Association of School Administrators. “That sends an important signal.” In other areas, according to materials provided by the subcommittee, the bill would provide more than $400 million for “new approaches to improving reading instruction in our schools”; $10 million for a new Promise Neighborhoods program Mr. Obama has proposed to support communitywide approaches to lifting children out of poverty; and $156 million for charter school grants, well below the $268 million the president requested. The next step for the House bill is consideration by the full House Appropriations Committee, but at press time no date had been set.
No agreement on mayoral control as Senators stalemate in all-night session in Albany
BY GLENN BLAIN AND KENNETH LOVETT Updated Friday, July 17th 2009, 7:06 AM ALBANY - Mayor Bloomberg may have to wait until September to regain control of city schools. After a day of fruitless negotiations, state senators were set to leave the Capitol for summer break without voting on an Assembly-approved bill that would extend mayoral control. Instead, in another slap at the mayor, a different bill that would seriously weaken mayoral control moved out of committee and was debated on the floor starting at 1 a.m. The bill however was soundly defeated 40-15 with 11 Democrats and 29 Republicans voting against it. Sponsor Sen. Kevin Parker (D-Brooklyn) said the idea behind moving the bill was to put the Senate in a position to negotiate a compromise with the Assembly later in the summer. "The mayor has stalled the negotiations because the mayor decided he doesn't want mayoral control, he wants to control the Senate," Parker said. Some insiders said it's hard to see what kind of bargaining power such a defeat gives the mayor's critics. An hour after the vote, city Department of Education lobbyist, Micah Lasher, questioned how Parker's bill made it to the floor for a vote and not the Bloomberg-backed bill that passed the Assembly. "Given that the 'assembly bill' has two to three times more support, it's unclear exactly what the criteria is to bring bills to the floor," Lasher said. "Is it, for example, a majority of the conference? Because that didn't happen here. There's clearly not a majority in this case and there's not a majority of the Senate." The Assembly bill, which would extend the expired 2002 law with only some minor changes, is supported by Bloomberg, all 30 Senate Republicans and at least a handful of Senate Democrats. But a key group of Democratic senators wants further changes. Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott spent the day in Albany on Thursday meeting with various senators, urging them not to leave town before taking "an up or down vote" on the bill. "If it happens, quite frankly, our children in New York City will be left with a dysfunctional school system no matter who the board president may be because the system itself is dysfunctional," Walcott said.Although senators couldn't pass mayoral control this week, they did manage to approve $85million worth of pork project spending in the dead of night. Among the spending was $1,000 by Sen. Joseph Addabbo (D-Queens) for Feathered Friends Parrot Adoption Services. Sen. Thomas Duane (D-Manhattan) earmarked $5,000 for the Alternatives to Marriage Project, which advocates for "equality and fairness for unmarried people."
Low test standards are a form of social promotion, say experts
Changes in the way the state is grading math and reading tests may have undercut Mayor Bloomberg's controversial decision to end social promotion, test experts say. The mayor's policy requires that third-, fifth-, seventh- and eighth-graders earn a minimum score on state tests to move on to the next grade. To earn a promotion this year, however, elementary and middle school students in every grade needed fewer points on both the state math and reading exams than they did in 2006. "What appears to be happening in the last four years [is] the hurdle is getting lower," said Fred Smith, a Bloomberg administration critic and former testing analyst for the Board of Education. Smith was was one of the experts who reviewed the numbers and provided results to the Daily News. In 2006, for example, third-graders had to get 44% of points on the math tests to earn a promotion, compared with 28% this year. "I have kids who really struggle as readers," said Claudia de Luna Castro, who teaches fourth and fifth grades at Harlem's Central Park East II and had no students who scored at level one. "It always makes me wonder when I see data that doesn't match my experience of my kids." A top Education Department official defended the city's reliance on the state tests. "The number of points you need to get correct one year to the next is not indicative of an easier or more difficult test," said Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger, a DOE senior adviser. State officials said that the testing program was crafted by McGraw-Hill and overseen by a panel of experts. "Students had to get fewer questions right in 2009 than they did in 2006 [to earn the same score]," said state Education Department spokesman Jonathan Burman, "because items on the 2009 test were more difficult than they were in 2006." The Daily News recently reported the tests may have gotten easier. State Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch said the tests were not rigorous enough. "You can equate tests," she said, "but if you're not demanding a high enough standard, what you're equating is a low-level test." "Ultimately, these children will struggle because they will find themselves in high school or somewhere they are not ready for," said Carol Boyd, a parent leader with the New York City Coalition for Educational Justice. "We're moving them along, but we're setting them up to fail."
Test scores drove charter decision
By James Vaznis, Globe Staff | July 17, 2009 For years, Governor Deval Patrick had expressed skepticism, if not downright opposition, to expanding the number of charter schools allowed in Massachusetts. As recently as January, he went so far as calling the issue a “total red herring’’ because there was still room to launch more of the schools under state law. But yesterday, Patrick and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino, another critic, appeared together to officially unveil a proposal to effectively double the number of charter schools in the state’s worst-performing districts. Standing by their side was President Obama’s education secretary, Arne Duncan, who well may be credited with moving the charter school movement forward in Massachusetts after years of dissension, using stimulus money as the carrot. Duncan and Obama are threatening to exclude states that do not expand charter schools from more than $4 billion in federal funding. “Politically speaking, leaving money on the table is not a good idea,’’ said Jim Stergios, executive director of the Pioneer Institute, a supporter of charter schools. Patrick denied that the Obama administration had any influence on his change in position, saying that he was instead swayed by the persistently bad test scores coming out of several school districts. “I love our president and our administration, but I make up my own mind,’’ Patrick said. Menino, on the other hand, said in an interview yesterday that Duncan’s strong push for more charter schools, which could better position the city for more federal aid, played a key role in shifting his view, which differs somewhat from Patrick’s. Menino wants the city to control new charter schools in Boston, rather than having the state oversee them. “I would like to apply for that money,’’ said Menino, adding that those dollars “would be very handy in Boston.’’ Massachusetts is among a handful of states that have jumped onto the bandwagon in the months since the Obama administration first began its push for more charter schools. Both Illinois and Tennessee have decided to expand charter programs. Charter schools can vary somewhat in structure from state to state. In some cases, states have direct oversight, while in other cases, the schools fall under the jurisdiction of local school districts. Generally, the schools have no teacher unions and operate under fewer regulations than traditional schools. The flexibility is intended to foster innovative teaching methods that could boost achievement. In Massachusetts, most of the 62 charter schools operate independently, although a handful, including one in Boston, are part of a local district. The schools, created under the state’s 1993 Education Reform Act, have become a haven for students and parents fleeing bad schools. Several are top MCAS performers and boast graduating classes in which nearly all go to college. The proposal would allow for addition of 27,000 new charter school seats in about 30 districts, which would ultimately double the capacity in those districts. Duncan does not view charter schools as a panacea for the ills of urban education, where failing schools often flounder for years, losing generations of students. But he believes they hold great promise. As head of Chicago’s school system, he saw firsthand how charter schools can bolster student achievement. Duncan, who had oversight of charter schools, said yesterday that he opened many, turned away more than 100 proposals he deemed weak, and shut down three because of academic failure. “I’m not a fan of charters,’’ Duncan said. “I’m a fan of good charters.’’ Patrick, who enjoyed strong support from teachers unions during his gubernatorial run three years ago, initially resisted calls for more charter schools, which have been opposed by the unions and enmeshed in controversy over funding. Every student who leaves a district for a charter school takes with them a certain amount of state aid, creating a budget drain for some districts. Instead, Patrick said he first wanted to test out a new kind of school, modeled after charter schools, that he hoped would mute the funding debate. These so-called readiness schools would function under the oversight of local school committees, rather than the state. The governor is still pushing ahead with his readiness schools, but decided this winter he could no longer hold off on raising the limit on charter schools in the state’s worst districts. He came to the decision after reviewing test scores and graduation rates that showed a lingering achievement gap among various groups of students, said Paul Reville, the state’s secretary of education. Of particular concern are low achievement levels for black, Latino, low-income, and special education students, as well as those who are learning to speak English. Just a few weeks after Patrick made his “red herring’’ comment, he included a modest increase in the charter school cap in his budget proposal. But it ultimately went nowhere. Yesterday, the governor unveiled a more radical proposal that enjoys support from charter advocates, but opposition from teacher unions and other educator groups. The Legislature will hold hearings on the bill and is likely to raise questions about how the schools are funded. Duncan applauded the charter legislation yesterday, as well as the creation of the readiness schools, particularly Patrick’s plan to orchestrate a state takeover of some of the worst schools. He said the state could emerge as a national model for aggressive public education overhaul, fitting nicely with the state’s long tradition of having the highest academic standards nationally. “You have a chance to make history in the next few years,’’ Duncan said. But for many in Massachusetts, history was made yesterday. “It really is quite stunning how quickly the stars have aligned here in Massachusetts,’’ said Paul Grogan, president of the Boston Foundation, a longtime supporter of charter schools. “It’s an amazing turnabout.’’
Changes urged in special ed instruction
By James Vaznis, Globe Staff | July 9, 2009 The Boston public schools are keeping too many students with disabilities out of regular classrooms and may be wrongfully identifying some students for special services because of shortcomings in teaching literacy or dealing with behavior problems, according to a report released last night at a School Committee meeting. Nearly 41 percent of the district’s 11,000 special education students receive instruction in substantially separate settings than the district’s other students, a rate almost three times higher than the state recommends, according to the report by the Council of the Great City Schools, a research and policy group that represents the nation’s 67 largest urban districts. The problem appears to worsen as students get older. In kindergarten, roughly 25 percent of special education students are taught in separate settings, a percentage that mostly climbs from one grade level to the next, topping more than 40 percent in the high school years. The percentage of students taught in more costly, out-of-district placements also notably rises in the middle and high school years. The isolation, many special education specialists say, can greatly diminish the amount of learning that students with disabilities absorb because expectations in segregated settings can be lower than those in regular classrooms. The lack of opportunity to mingle with other students also can prevent special education students from feeling part of the basic fabric of a school, leading to apathy or depression, specialists say. Boston has struggled teaching special education students, whose scores on the MCAS exam in English and math fall below state standards. Special education students also have the lowest high school graduation rate of any student group in Boston, a mere 37 percent for the 2007-08 school year, about 23 percentage points lower than the district average for all students. “Boston isn’t alone in this,’’ Michael Casserly, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, said in an interview before the meeting, in explaining the need to lessen reliance on separate classroom settings. “School systems in big cities have tended to have more separate programs,’’ he said. “Only in the last several years have they tried to integrate services more holistically.’’ Tight finances have led many districts to try to reduce spending on special education, often seen as a budget buster because out-of-district placements for one student can costs tens of thousands of dollars annually. Also, the federal No Child Left Behind Act holds schools responsible for the performance of various categories of students, such as those enrolled in special education, which has led many districts to restructure their programs to increase achievement. Some 20 percent of Boston’s 56,000 students received special education services last year, about 3 percentage points higher than the state average and notably higher than other cities nationwide. Superintendent Carol R. Johnson asked the city schools group last year to examine Boston’s special education programs and make recommendations for improvement. Johnson, who this month began chairing the group’s board of directors, has set an ambitious goal of increasing the graduation rate of special education students to 70 percent by 2012, as part of her overhaul of the district’s schools. In an interview, Johnson said a number of principals have expressed interest in finding ways to include more special education students in regular classrooms. Those leaders will be able to look for guidance to a handful of schools that practice full inclusion, such as the Mary Lyon and the William Henderson schools. “We want to make sure when a student has a need that we really target services so we can keep them in regular classrooms,’’ Johnson said. The report recommended that the district find ways to reduce its special education enrollment by shoring up reading instruction. It said that some schools might be enrolling students in special education, not because of a disability, but from a lack of appropriate reading instruction in the regular classroom. But the city is heading in the right direction, the report stated, by adopting a new districtwide literacy program. It also gave the district kudos for starting a program to more effectively deal with students who have chronic behavior problems. Other recommendations included working more closely with parents, revamping the district’s leadership structure for special education and the use of its staff, and creating stronger guidelines that ensure that nonnative English-speaking students are being identified for special education because of a disability and not because of a language issue. John Mudd of Massachusetts Advocates for Children, a nonprofit group working on behalf of disadvantaged students, expressed concern about reducing special education enrollment, noting that the district tried that a decade ago with mixed results. He said the district would be better off focusing its effort on boosting achievement of special education students. “It’s an urgent issue that needs to be addressed as fast as possible,’’ Mudd said.
GUEST COMMENTARY Secretary Duncan: Keep Charters out of the Muck, Please
by Gordon Macinnes Secretary Arne Duncan used his speech before the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools to spotlight the “bottom 5%” of America’s public schools. Numbering about 5,000, Duncan urged the charter school community to consider taking on some of these schools and turn them around. He was clear that not every charter school operator is up to this challenge, naming a few multiple-site groups like KIPP and Green Dot as possible candidates. Wrong audience. Bad idea. If my analysis of New Jersey’s worst-performing schools is any guide, then Secretary Duncan’s plea should be ignored. Expecting charter schools to suddenly operate as turn-around specialists in the nation’s toughest schools is akin to asking the school nurse to perform a liver transplant. To define the “bottom 5%,” I used the mean scale scores from the 2008 state assessment of 3rd grade language arts. The mean scale score provides a precise number for each of 781 NJ schools in which the 3rd grade test was given. I selected the 39 schools with lowest scale scores for review. Not surprisingly, most of them were near the bottom on the same test in 2004. The 3rd grade literacy test is the threshold test, since kids who do not read at grade level by then have only a 14% chance of ever reading at level. An elementary school that does not teach its students to read and write well is not meeting its primary responsibility. Here are the findings that prompt my conclusion that little in the experience of charter school innovators prepares them for operating a public school, even if in the same neighborhood.
The one shared characteristic of district and charter school students is their poverty. In fact, charter school students in the five largest NJ cities are slightly more likely to be eligible for free or reduced lunch (73.8% to 66.8%) than district students. ] Secretary Duncan’s appeal ignores the central role that is frequently played by the district central office in the performance of individual schools. Of the 39 5% NJ schools, 31 are in Camden (10), Newark (8), Trenton (5), Paterson and Jersey City (4 each). Four are charter schools. Equally poverty-stricken districts like Elizabeth and Union City, not only have no charter schools, but their students regularly perform close to the state average on literacy assessments. These successful districts rely, not on searching out the hero principals Secretary Duncan invokes, but by working closely with teachers and principals to improve classroom pedagogy. And, they emphasize the connection between high-quality preschool and the primary grades with an intensive focus on early literacy. The persistence and spirit of enterprise required to open and operate a high-performing charter school are to be admired and replicated as often as possible. Secretary Duncan is right to hail the achievements of effective charter schools. However, the experience of attracting students from families seeking better educational opportunities, whose children are free of serious impairments, and who command the English language is entirely different from turning around a failing school in the poorest neighborhoods in the nation. Secretary Duncan did not under-estimate the difficulty of the objective, only the experience and capacity of charter schools to meet the test.
News from the Rauch Foundation
A Letter to the Editor written by John Wenzel, a board member of the Rauch Foundation, appeared in the New York Times this morning. John wrote to the newspaper in response to an editorial called "Lessons for Failing Schools'. Click here to read the original editorial, and here to view reader responses. John's letter to the editor is shown below for your convenience. To the Editor: The Rauch Foundation is a Long Island-based family foundation that supports innovative and effective programs designed to: 1) Give disadvantaged, young children a better start in life 2) Improve the natural environment on Long Island and in Maryland and 3) Build management skills and develop leadership in the nonprofit sector. Based in Garden City, NY, the Foundation seeks to promote systemic change by supporting programs that address the root cause of problems, rather than short-term approaches.
Announcement
TWO FREE WEBINARS! At the CPER Convening this past May, there was widespread agreement that the injection of over $100 billion of federal stimulus funds for education has created a tremendous opportunity for education organizing. As funds are allocated to states and districts, there will be a need for independent community voices to track the use of stimulus dollars and encourage investments that reform educational systems and improve educational quality for low-income students and students of color.
This 60 minute webinar will look at each of the major pots of education funds in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the way they are distributed, including current time tables, and the conditions for their use (including the Act’s focus on improving standards and assessments, improving teacher quality and distribution, support for struggling schools, and reform-related data systems). This session is designed to put participants in a better position to seek a seat at the various state and local tables where stimulus-related decisions are quickly being made and to then push for core reforms that advance the right to high-quality education, consistent with CPER members’ goals and strategies for quality, equity, and democracy. 2. Stimulus Funding for PreK – 12: Public School Modernization and Construction presented by Mary Filardo, Executive Director of the 21st Century School Fund
This 60 minute webinar will provide an overview of stimulus grant and bond funds available for PreK - 12 public building infrastructure and participants will have the opportunity to identify and discuss opportunities to organize to affect investment in public school facilities. What other types of stimulus information and tools would be helpful in advancing your work?
|
|
The Snap Schott is distributed by the Schott Foundation for Public Education. For more information, please visit www.schottfoundation.org. |
|
