Whenever Eduflack writes about the “successes” of New York City’s school improvement efforts under Chancellor Joel Klein, I get publicly flogged by some audience or another. Most take significant issue with my conclusions that NYC Department of Education has improved the quality of the public schools. Others take issue with giving Klein (and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg) credit for such school improvement. And even if I can get the opposition to acknowledge an uptick in student achievement in NYC, they will immediately retort that the gains are minimal, and not nearly enough to declare turnaround efforts in New York a success.
My responses to such criticism have been relatively simple. The test scores, at least on New York’s state exams, do show gains in both reading and math in NYC. If you don’t believe the final tallies coming from Albany, you should at least acknowledge that NYC has won the Broad Prize, and that Broad similarly crunched the numbers and found academic gains across the city. And if the gains aren’t big enough for you yet, first, give it time. Then remember how large the NYCDOE truly is. Upticks in a system that size are worthy of praise.
Always a glutton for punishment, Eduflack is going to raise the NYC achievement flag again. Today, we’re going to reflect on a forum hosted yesterday by the Alliance for Excellent Education. Offering a multi-hour symposium yesterday under the banner of “Informing Federal Education Policy Through Lessons from New York City,” the Alliance also put a spotlight on a new report it has released, “New York City’s Strategy for Improving High Schools.”
So let’s take a look at the most recent set of numbers, namely four-year high school graduation rates. The Alliance took a look at four different calculations of NYC graduation data from 2002 to the present. By NYC’s own calculations, grad rates rose more than 29 percent from 2002 to 2008, from 51 percent to 66 percent. According to the state calculation, rates increased nearly 52 percent, from 40 percent to 61 percent. EdWeek has the number increasing 35 percent from 2002 to 2006 (37 percent to 50 percent). And Jennifer Jennings and Leonie Haimson have the grad rates lifted nearly 18 percent from 2002 to 2007 (40 percent to 47 percent).
Let’s set aside, for a second, the fact that no one started with the same 2002 baseline. (yes, we still have problems with data collection and such) Even if we throw out the top score and the bottom score (in the Olympic tradition), we are still looking at a gain in NYC’s high school graduation rates of nearly 33 percent from where we started in 2002. In an era of drop-out factories and rising dropout rates, such numbers in NYC are worth paying attention to.
Whether you like the rhetoric coming out of NYCDOE or not, you can’t deny that the Klein plan has had a real impact, and an impact for the good. As other urban centers struggle to deal with graduation rate challenges, NYC has found real solutions. And it has done so applying a four-year graduation rate formula (a calculation many fear because it offers a lower grad rate than many want to admit.)
Moreover, NYC has been able to apply its high school reforms to help close the achievement gap. According the Alliance, “since 2005, the black-white and Hispanic-white [graduation rate] gaps have narrowed by 16 percent and 14 percent respectively.”
New York City may still be a work in progress, but aren’t these the sorts of numbers we are working toward? Klein and company offer a clear plan for how they are going to fix the problems (a plan so clear that it draws a with us/against us line). They take the necessary steps to implement that plan, regardless of the “friends” it may create. And then they have the data to demonstrate effectiveness, with both test scores and graduation rates rising. Isn’t that our ultimate end game? And if it isn’t shouldn’t it be?
Broad Prize
Teacher Pay in Gotham City
Over the weekend, Eduflack was fortunate enough to break from the mugginess of our nation’s capital to enjoy the mugginess of the capital of the world — New York City. After a busy and tough summer, I was fortunate enough to take in my fourth Mets game at Citi Field, this time preceded by the opportunity to be down on that perfect brown dirt and beautiful green grass, with my Fred Flintstone feet touching the same hallowed ground as my beloved New York Mets (before they all took to the DL this year). I even got to meet David Wright, a great treat (though odd since he is a few years younger than my youngest sister).
Hittin’ the Road with Rev. Al and Newt
Politics, and education reform, do indeed make strange bedfellows. When the Education Equality Project launched last year, many were left scratching their heads with regard to the Rev. Al Sharpton and NYC Schools Chancellor Joel Klein teaming up to improve the quality and results of our nation’s public schools. Since then, their list of signatories reads like a who’s who in both Democratic politics and education reform circles, including many leading urban mayors and superintendents.
I too want to see these proposals succeed, but I also know that if support is merely on the surface, real change will never take hold once good ideas are moved into status quo implementation and decisions are made that leave many states and districts in the cold when it comes to new innovation money. Are we playing for the love of the game, or will pay to play take effect, with SEAs and LEAs quickly losing interest when there isn’t a U.S. Treasury check there to reward their “loyalty?”
Looking for a Chicago Education Miracle?
Eight years ago, the education community was all abuzz about the “Houston Miracle” and how then EdSec Rod Paige was going to take the magic that transformed the Houston Independent School District into a Broad Prize winner, federalize it into No Child Left Behind, and leave a path of school improvement and student achievement in its wake.
As Goes Brownsville, So Goes the World
This morning, the Broad Foundation unveiled the big winner of the 2008 Broad Prize for Urban Education. Heading into the announcement in New York City, many believed that Miami-Dade would be the big winner. But when the name was announced and the check was awarded, Brownsville, Texas stood proud and tall.
Who’s on Deck for EdSec?
This month, Washingtonian Magazine did a two-page spread on who Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would select for their Cabinet, should they take ownership of the big desk in the Oval Office. Lots of interesting names to ponder and fuel cocktail party discussion.
But one thing troubled Eduflack greatly. There is no mention of the U.S. Department of Education. After all of the money and attention spread by Ed in 08. After the dogged pursuit of the issue by Richard Whitmire and EWA. No mention of who would lead federal education in this NCLB 2.5, merit pay, voucher/charter whack-a-day world.
So Eduflack is going to take it upon himself to fill the Washingtonian’s holes. Let’s set aside the campaign advisors that Alexander Russo so kindly provides on his Campaign 08 wiki. Let’s forget the whispers Eduflack has heard over the last year, mentioning everyone from UFT/AFT Randi Weingarten to Eduwonk Andy Rotherham to even NLNS CEO Jon Schnur. All good fun, yes, but who do we really think will be heading ED in a Democratic administration?
Eduflack’s narrowed his choice down to a top three … and a dark horse.
Candidate A – NC Gov. Mike Easley. Gov. Easley is one of the top education governors out there. He gets it, and speaks passionately about key issues, particularly school-to-work concerns. Sure, he is a lawyer by trade, but not everyone is perfect. One could see him in the Secretary Riley model, a strong southern governor who knows how to lead and motivate. The downside, as a NC governor, he will always be in Jim Hunt’s shadow on education issues. And he has endorsed Hillary in advance of the NC primary, which could hurt him with Obama later on.
Candidate B — Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm. Cut from the same cloth as Easley, Granholm is smart, articulate, and a true motivator. She’s also made major education moves in Michigan, from PreK programs to instituting a comprehensive reform to high school graduation requirements. The downside, we still time to see the effectiveness of her reforms and Michigan’s test numbers are still waiting to see the Granholm bounce.
Candidate C — NYC Chancellor Joel Klein. He has the results, he has the national recognition, and he is ripe for a new challenge. What more is there to do in NYC. He’s won the Broad Prize and test scores are up. NYC is now the model for urban reform. Let’s see what he can do on the national stage under a reauthorized NCLB. The downside, another lawyer who may try to run ED like he ran his department at Justice. Who at ED is up for that?
The Darkhorse — Rep. George Miller. We seem to look to governors to serve as EdSec. Just look at Lamar Alexander and Richard Riley. Many would say the superintendent experiment with Rod Paige didn’t work (Eduflack doesn’t believe that. In fact, Eduflack finds Paige to be one of the brightest, thoughtful educators he has had the pleasure of working with (post ED). It’s unfortunate that DC saw an overly scripted EdSec, courtesy of DPC, and not the real and true Paige. Paige has gotten a raw deal these past few years, in my opinion). NCLB needs reauthorization. ED needs someone who understands Congress. Who better than a co-author of the original NCLB law, an ed reform champion, and one who has stood up to the status quo. Let’s give the keys to Miller and let him enforce the spirit of the law he helped write in 2001. The downside, of course, is why would he want to give up the Ed Committee Chairmanship to run a tough agency during a difficult time?
Let’s see Washingtonian and the whispering class chew on these names for a while, and see what they think. If not these four, then who?
And don’t worry, Senator McCain, Eduflack has a few names for you as well. As you confer with Lisa Graham Keegan on ed issues, try floating names like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (if you don’t choose him for VP) or Congressman Buck McKeon. Heck, in another year, Paul Vallas may be ready for another challenge too. He could be McCain’s token Democrat in the Cabinet.
And the Prize Goes To …
If you look at public education across the United States, there is not a single district, school, or student we can afford to give up on. It may be hard. It may take time. It may require suspending previous thinking. But Eduflack would like to believe any school can be turned around with the right culture, knowledgebase, commitment, curriculum, measurement, and feedback loop. Don’t believe me? Take a look at the Broad Prize.
Nearly impossible to miss, yesterday the Broad Foundation awarded the New York City Public Schools with the annual Broad Prize, the sixth urban school district to win the prestigious award. A $1 million pot speaks volumes about the impact of the Prize, but what does the Prize tell us about urban school reform?
If you look at NYC — along with past winners like Houston, Garden Grove, Long Beach, Norfolk, and Boston — you see a collection of urban school districts that, a decade or two ago, we were ready to complete give up on. We see districts that many, especially those who knew them best, said were beyond repair. Spurred by a desire to improve and encouraged by the prize across the Broad finish line, these school districts did the impossible. They made real change. They reinvented the school culture. They demonstrated real student achievement. Simply, they got the job done.
And this year’s winner? Chancellor Klein and company have much to be proud of, even without the oversized Broad check. In reading and math, NYC outperformed other New York districts serving students of similar income levels. African-America, Hispanic, and low-income students showed great improvement in reading and math. The city has made real strides in closing the achievement gap.
This isn’t a revolution. By definition, a revolution has a finite end. Instead, NYC and its fellow winners have started a movement. An ongoing process of improvement and success designed to continue to gain momentum.
What lessons can we learn from the Broad Prize, aside from the notion that school improvement is a universal possibility? Interestingly, the Broad Prize can serve as a teaching tool for those who are weighing the future of NCLB and AYP. Much has been written, spoken, and shouted about the issue of multiple measures. Is there one — and only one — way to effectively measure student achievement? Or are there a number of factors that must be taken into account when evaluating the success of a school or classroom?
If Broad is any indication, the true measure of school improvement requires multiple measures. Looking at quantitative and qualitative data, analyzing a range of topics and issues, taking all facets of the school and the operating environment into account, Broad makes its decisions. It is a complicated process.
It’s one thing to give an award to the urban school district that simply shows the greatest year-on-year improvement in student achievement. It is something completely different to recognize that there are a number of factors — some immeasurable — that contribute to the overall success of a school district.
It’s enough to give even the strongest of data-driven decisionmakers a little something to think about.