Year: 2010

Testing Throwdown in NYC

Eduflack accountability, Achievement gap, national standards

When are lower student achievement scores a good thing?  That seems to be the question thrown about up in New York City this past week, where Big Apple officials have been grappling with the reality that city students’ performance on the state’s math and reading proficiency tests fell after a newer (and harder) exam was put into place.

As always, it is most fun to read the evolution of such stories in the New York Post, which first reported on the plunge, and then editotrialized on the issue twice — first on Thursday praising the new “truth-telling” and then again today, condemning the United Federation of Teachers for jumping on the test score drop to “discredit all education standards.”  

It should be no secret that state standards — and the tests that measure those standards — have been a problem for some time.  Since the introduction of NCLB, we’ve witnessed states lowering their standards so that they could continue to demonstrate “adequate yearly progress,” regularly reducing the bar so the number of students hitting proficient increased year after year after year.  In this educational shell game, it meant reducing the standards again and again to keep up.

The NY Post refers to the problem as “junk tests” but the real issue seems to be the standards behind them.  Tests are only as good as what we are expected to measure.  Garbage in, garbage out.  Did anyone really believe that more than three-quarters of NY students were proficient in reading and math?  Of course not.  But New York State’s definition of proficient and a common sense definition of the same are quite different.  How else do you explain such strong proficiency numbers at a time when half of students require remediation?

One can’t fault the NYC DOE for playing the hands it has been dealt.  When taking the old state proficiency exam, Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein posted some long-term gains.  Year on year, test scores increased.  That is progress.  Now that they have a new test aligned to new standards, the game starts anew.  These scores serve as the year one baseline.  Next year, we expect to see gains.  And the year after that, more of the same.  Rince and repeat.

But those looking to discredit the improvements in NYC based on this one test are going to be sorely mistaken.  Just take a look at the other measures around us.  On the NAEP exam, the Nation’s Report Card which offers one standard measure for all students across the nation, NYC has seen gains in student achievement (while the rest of New York state has remained flat).  And as Eduflack wrote earlier this year, Chancellor Klein has shown real improvement on high school graduation rates.  So at a time when the teachers’ unions are calling for multiple measures to evaluate teachers, we are seeing that multiple measures support claims of NYC schools improvement.

Ultimately, while this makes for some lovely rhetorical skirmishes in the city that never sleeps, it doesn’t negate a very simple truth.  Over the last decade, NYC schools have come a long way.  But they still have a long way to go.  At no point do I remember hearing Klein declare mission accomplished.  Progress has been made, but there is still much to do, particularly in addressing achievement gap issues in New York.  The new test provides a clearer, stronger view of the challenges before NY educators.  And the pending adoption and implementation of Common Core standards offers a clearer picture of where one has to go.  

Instead of using the latest round of test scores to throw recent reforms out the window, improvements on measures such as NAEP and grad rates should show what is possible, and the growing need to redouble current reform efforts.  If anything, these scores demonstrate that more must be done.  
 

Around the Edu-Horn, July 29, 2010

Eduflack Edu-horn

RT @edfunding Murkowski amendment- increase Denali commission by cutting IES programs by $63 million. http://myloc.me/9Tpsu

RT @EdEquality @TNTP: Transcript of Obama’s #edreform speech at the National Urban League today: http://bit.ly/dtK4nV #education

RT @cathgrimes Gov. McDonnell said schools are getting $18 million more, thanks to the state surplus http://fb.me/sMhdFMvT

Turning around schools in the “least disruptive” ways — http://tinyurl.com/2afxgjk 

Obama vs. teachers? http://www.politico.com/arena/ 

Around the Edu-Horn, July 28, 2010

Eduflack Edu-horn

RT @usedgov Duncan highlights ED’s civil rights agenda, promises to advance civil rights by addressing inequities . http://go.usa.gov/OMH

FL adopts the common core — http://tinyurl.com/2dfsndk

RttT and the “quiet revolution” — http://tinyurl.com/36ggcys

RT @Education_AIR AIR to merge with Learning Point Associates; Learning Point CEO Gina Burkhardt named AIR Executive VP http://ow.ly/2hhKr

DC teachers union to sue over teacher performance firings — http://tinyurl.com/29a96jr

Duncan and mayoral control of Detroit Public Schools — http://tinyurl.com/32cyk57

Around the Edu-Horn, July 26, 2010

Eduflack Edu-horn

RT @usedgov Fifteen teachers from around the country selected as Teaching Ambassador Fellows for 2010-11. http://go.usa.gov/Ooz

RT @PoliticsK12 Blog: Race to Top Finalists Unveiled Tomorrow: Who Makes the Cut? http://bit.ly/bmucMH

RT @Larryferlazzo Civil rights groups skewer Obama education policy” Wash Post http://bit.ly/bragUt

Renting college textbooks — http://tinyurl.com/34zogyg

Test prep for kindergarten? http://tinyurl.com/22pbc4q

The Pollsters Respond: More on ESEA as a Voting Issue

Eduflack ESEA, NCLB

Earlier this month, Eduflack opined on a survey released by the Alliance for Excellent Education about reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the need for focus on high schools, and the role both topics may play on this November’s upcoming congressional elections.  While I found the findings interesting, I worried that we were reading a little too much into the numbers, giving the average voter a little too much credit for what they think they know about ESEA and its future direction.

I offered up the counterpoint to the data originally compiled on the Alliance’s behalf by Lake Research Partners.  The good folks over at Lake Research Partners — namely Celinda Lake and Chris Matthews — wanted to set the record straight and ensure that we (and I mean that collectively, dear ol’ Eduflack included) don’t misconstrue the findings.  So I’m going to yield the rostrum to Lake and Matthews to offer that clarification.  So without further ado …

“Eduflack made some assertions and questions about the recent AEE poll that we would like to respond to:

1. The poll finds that 8 in 10 voters want to see NCLB changed in the reauthorization of ESEA, while 11 percent say NCLB should be left as it is. Eduflack questions this finding, asking: “Are we to believe that virtually all likely voters recognize that ESEA is up for reauthorization this year; and that 80% understand the components of the current NCLB bill well enough to know that the current law needs to be altered?”

The findings of the poll should not be construed in this way at all. The poll does not indicate that voters know that ESEA is up for reauthorization this year. As AEE and the pollsters asserted at the press conference introducing the poll, if we had to guess, we would agree with Eduflack and say that most voters don’t know this. However, we certainly can say from this survey that when ESEA is introduced to voters in the survey, with concise and accurate information, that ESEA reauthorization is seen as important to voters. And when it comes to NCLB, nearly 90 percent of voters in the survey have an opinion on the NCLB policy: 47% have a favorable opinion and 44% an unfavorable opinion. We agree with Eduflack, in that most voters do not fully understand all of the intricate components of the current NCLB bill, we see in this in the focus groups we conduct throughout the country. Yet, this research shows that they do have a base of knowledge about NCLB, which combined with their own experiences and views that public high schools are in urgent need of improvement, lead us to be confident that voters can weigh-in on whether NCLB should be changed or just reauthorized as it is.

So, to answer Eduflack’s question on whether the survey findings “assume an education policy knowledge among likely voters that is far out of whack with reality” — they do not. We can say with confidence that the survey met voters where they were in terms of knowledge, gave them a small, neutral, and unbiased amount of information about ESEA, and then asked voters to evaluate and make a choice based on that information as well as all the other knowledge and experiences they already have about public education and NCLB.

2.Eduflack also questioned whether “education could really takeover the economy as a key voting issue in November.” AEE and the research team of Lake and Bellwether have not made that assertion, and we would not make it as education does not rank before the economy right now in any polls we have seen. The new AEE poll does allow us to say, however, that education is an important issue and when voters do focus on the issue it is seen as important factor in how they will evaluate Congressional incumbents this fall. The AEE poll also shows that voters link the quality of public high schools and the state and progress of the national economy and our ability to compete in the global economy as well.”

Anyone else want to weigh in?

Around the Edu-Horn, July 23, 2010

Eduflack Edu-horn

RT @Larryferlazzo Check-Out Who Applied To Be A “Promise Neighborhood” http://bit.ly/c2ZUJb

National registry would consolidate digital education materials http://sbne.ws/r/5dhl (from ASCD)

Edujobs are out of the spending bill — http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40137.html

RT @gtoppo LAUSD superintendent Cortines to retire in spring 2011. http://bit.ly/cS9TTh

U.S.: From leaders to laggards in college grad — http://tinyurl.com/22lr4n3

Around the Edu-Horn, July 21, 2010

Eduflack Edu-horn

RT @cpylevdoe Virginia response to Fordham review of Standards of Learning: http://tinyurl.com/24tdeqq

RT @D_Aarons new @wallacefdn study: Learning From Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning http://bit.ly/cOwkPM

Competitive admissions for comm college nursing programs — http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/07/21/nursing 

No more writing proficiency in IL? http://tinyurl.com/2btxsbh 

The cost of buying school textbooks in AL — http://www.waff.com/Global/story.asp?S=12815296
 

Measuring Up to Common Core

Eduflack accountability, assessment, national standards

In recent months, we have been hearing a great deal about how individual states’ academic standards measure up to the Common Core.  Both Texas and Virginia have proudly proclaimed that their state standards are far superior to the proposed shared standards, and as a result they have refused to pursue Race to the Top and to sign onto Common Core Standards.  When California agreed to Common Core in principle last year, it did so only after proclaiming that the Golden State had the best standards in the union, and Common Core could cut out the middle man and just adopt California standards.  And this week in Massachusetts, many are trying to delay the adoption of Common Core, believing that the Bay State’s standards are better than where NGA and CCSSO landed earlier this year.

Well now the Fordham Institute has weighed in, offering up a state-by-state analysis of how current state standards measure up to the Common Core.  And what do they say?

* Overall, the math Common Core is stronger than the ELA Common Core.  With math, 39 states’ standards are inferior.  With reading, 37 states’ standards are inferior (but three are superior).
* Texas scores an A- compared to the reading Common Core, but only a C on math.
* Virginia scores a B+ on math and a C on ELA
* Massachusetts posts an A- on math and a B+ on ELA

Some of the more “interesting” findings:
* Washington, DC scores an A for both its current ELA and math standards.  Who knew that Michelle Rhee and company could claim they have the best standards in the nation, better than Massachusetts  or the rest?
* Indiana and California also scored As in both categories.  So according to Fordham, Cali, DC, and Indiana are the tops.  How many would get that right on Jeopardy?
* And some of the laggards?  Montana earned dual Fs.  Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wisconsin earned and F and a D each.  Connecticut, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina, and Rhode Island come in with Ds.  See any surprises in those lists?

How about our two Race to the Top Phase I winners?  Tennessee picked up an A- on ELA and a C on math.  Delaware an F on ELA and an B on math.

What does all of this tell us?  We still have a lot of work to do.  I don’t think that anyone truly believes that the strongest academic standards in the nation belong to Washington, DC.  Nor do we see the worst standards coming from states in New England or the Northeast.  

Fordham is offering up a great deal of food for thought here.  If anything, it shows why we need that common yardstick by which to measure student performance for all.  But I suspect this is just the first in a long list of analyses, points, crosspoints, and other discussions of standards, common standards, and what is to come.
  
   

Data in Education Storytelling

Eduflack Media, NCLB

How do we use data to better tell the local story?  That was the big question Eduflack was asked over the weekend speaking at the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media’s Harold W. McGraw Hr. Seminar for Reporters New to the Education Beat.

For those who don’t know (and you really should), the Hechinger Institute is a terrific outfit being run out of Teachers College, Columbia University.  Back in May, Eduflack wrote about Hechinger’s new efforts in education reporting.  But at its core, Hechinger is about supporting members of the education media, providing the technical assistance and support necessary to support a strong and effective cadre of education reporters across the nation.
In talking with a terrific group of new education reporters (though not necessarily new to reporting) about how they can use education to localize stories, it begs an important question — what can those of us who engage with the education media to do the same.  And for this question, Eduflack has a top five list to guide the discussion:
1) Personalize the story — The most effective stories we can tell are those that are personal.  The individual who is affected by a new policy.  The student who has succeeded under a new curriculum.  The teacher who is raising student achievement scores.  We all like to hear a story.  Facts and figures and data can then be used to help fortify the story.  Trying to pitch a story on teacher incentives?  Paint a picture of that real, individual teacher who can be a case study.  Depict the teacher and her classroom.  Then strengthen the piece with the data, the state test scores and related data points that demonstrate teacher achievement, both for the individual and for the school/district in particular.
2) Know your data sources — There is more to the tale of the tape than simply student test scores on the state assessment.  In offering up a policy story, know which data sources to direct to.  What can we find at the national level?  What can we find at the state level?  What can we find at the local level? 
3) Capture the continuum — Once you identify the data sources, know how they connect and support each other.  If you’re pitching a state or local education story, be able to show the data that substantiates the pitch from the local level all the way up to the national level.  The data shows it works, and the continuum shows it works on a large or a small scale.
4) Acknowledge not all data is created equal — For the last decade, reporters have been hounded with “data.”  Since NCLB, everyone has “research” proving their point.  Unfortunately, much of the third-party “research” circulated out there is little more than marketing collateral for those promoting the policy.  There is good research, and there is bad research.  Reporters ultimately have to distinguish between the two.  But if you are selling bad or squishy data to a reporter, you lose credibility very quickly.  Want to tell an effective story, do so with the strongest data possible.
5) Think beyond the data — Data helps sell the story, but most of the time, it isn’t the story itself.  Long gone is the era when education media would write full stories on the latest research study to cross their desks.  Too much research on too many topics just makes such an approach untenable.  Instead, more and more reporters are looking for good data to enhance stories on the key themes they are covering.  So be prepared to position specific studies on how it can impact the discussion of teacher quality or turnaround schools or a host of other issues that reporters are being asked to cover.  While the data may not be the headline, it can definitely serve as a foundation for a good education news article.