|
|
| Education Facts and Reports Archives
Chicago schools report contradicts Obama and Duncan President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan talk to school children in Chicago in December 2008, when Duncan was the superintendent of Chicago schools. By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY New research from a Chicago civic group takes direct aim at the city's "abysmal" public high school performance — and puts a new spin on the academic gains made during the seven years that Arne Duncan led the Chicago schools before he was named U.S. Education secretary. The Civic Committee of The Commercial Club of Chicago, a supporter of Duncan and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley's push for more control of city schools, issued the report June 30. It says city schools have made little progress since 2003. Its key findings stand in stark contrast to assertions President Obama made in December when he nominated Duncan as Education secretary. And though the findings are by no means as explosive, they're reminiscent of revelations from Houston in 2003, when state investigators found that 15 high schools had underreported dropout rates under former superintendent Rod Paige, who by then was George W. Bush's Education secretary. In December, Obama said that during a seven-year tenure, Duncan had boosted elementary school test scores "from 38% of students meeting the standards to 67%" — a gain of 29 percentage points. But the new report found that, adjusting for changes in tests and procedures, students' pass rates grew only about 8 percentage points. Obama also said Chicago's dropout rate "has gone downevery year he's been in charge." Though that's technically true, the committee says it's still unacceptably high: About half of Chicago students drop out of the city's non-selective-enrollment high schools. And more than 70% of 11th-graders fail to meet state standards, a trend that "has remained essentially flat" over the past several years. Even among those who graduate, it says, skills are poor: An analysis of students entering the Chicago City Colleges in fall 2006 showed that 69% were not prepared for college-level reading, 79% were not prepared for writing, and 95% were not prepared for math. "Performance is very bad, very weak," says Civic Committee president Eden Martin. Obama also said Chicago students' ACT test score gains "have been twice as big as those for students in the rest of the state." Again, technically true — ACT data show that Chicago students' composite score rose 0.9 points from 2002 to 2006, while Illinois' score rose 0.4 points. But Chicago students' composite score of 17.4 was lower than the statewide average of 20.5. Timothy Knowles, who directs the University of Chicago's Urban Education Institute, says the report highlights "a highly irresponsible state reaction" to the federal No Child Left Behind law. "In essence," he says, "many states have lowered (passing) scores on standardized tests to create the public appearance they are meeting federal standards. This practice sells children short — and the states that engage in it are, ironically, leaving themselves behind." Knowles says Chicago schools are moving in the right direction, with "some extraordinary new schools" and promising performance from black and Latino students, for instance. "However, the Civic Committee report reminds us these successes are fragile … and there is unambiguous evidence that Chicago has miles to go before it sleeps." Duncan spokesman Peter Cunningham says Chicago schools "made significant gains across a range of indicators" under Duncan. "While we still have a long way to go, it is absolutely misleading and irresponsible to suggest that there has not been progress." Blogger Alexander Russo, who writes about Chicago schools, says the findings show that nearly 15 years into mayoral control, the city school system "isn't nearly as improved as many have been led to believe." "What I find particularly appalling is that Duncan and Obama — supposed champions of transparency and using research rather than ideology — have cited Chicago's inflated test scores, even though they knew the increases were exaggerated." EducationNews.org
Report also shows plenty of room for improvement for fathers CHICAGO (June 12, 2009) – There are more reasons to celebrate dads this upcoming 100th anniversary of Father's Day. That’s because fathers are more involved in their child’s education than they were 10 years ago, according to survey results released today by the National Center for Fathering and National Parent Teacher Association (PTA). In fact, the report, (titled Survey of Father’s Involvement in Children’s Learning) shows double digit gains in the percentage of dads who are taking their child to school, visiting their classroom and attending school events. These gains are especially important because a father’s presence at school shows a child that education is important and, helps support student success. The key findings below show the increase of father involvement between 1999 and 2009 in percentage points.  
| • | Fathers increased their involvement in their child’s school: | | | • | Walk/take their child to school | +16 percentage points | | | • | Attend class events | +11 percentage points | | | • | Visit their child’s classroom | +11 percentage points | | | | | | | • | Fathers increased their interaction with teachers, school officials and other parents: | | | • | Attend parent-teacher conferences | +8 percentage points | | | • | Attend school meetings | +7 percentage points | | | • | Attend school-based parent meetings | +12 percentage points | | | | | | | • | Fathers increased their interaction with other fathers for support: | | | • | Meet with other dads for support | +20 percentage points | | | | | | While these positive results are encouraging, there are still a lot of fathers that haven’t engaged in critical activities with their child. For instance, below are findings from the survey that cite the percentage of dads answering that they “never” engage in the following activities: | | | | | • | Have lunch with their child at school | 74% | | | • | Volunteer at their child's school | 54% | | | • | Read to their child | 39% | | | • | Visit their child's classroom | 32% |
Simply put, research shows that greater involvement of men in the lives of children helps them achieve success socially, intellectually and academically. That’s why National PTA created Men Organized to Raise Engagement (MORE) of which NCF is a key member. The MORE partnership ensures greater father and male involvement to produce positive outcomes and successful relationships for children, parents, schools and communities. The report comes just in time for Father’s Day and just before National PTA installs its first-ever male president in its 113-year history. Charles “Chuck” Saylors will become the first man in American history to hold this position. Another related event includes the National Fatherhood Rally will which will be held on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on June 20th. Other rallies will be held across the country. The National Partnership for Community Leadership has called for one million dads to make a commitment to their children and encourage dads to make their commitment at www.fathers.com/rally. Contact the National PTA or NCF offices for the full report. About National Center for Fathering
The National Center for Fathering is a non-profit research and education organization whose vision is to see every child with an involved father or father figure. Based in Kansas City, its mission is to inspire and equip men through research, training, programs and resources to be the fathers, grandfathers and father figures their children need. The Center’s website at fathers.com serves as the portal to its many initiatives including Championship Fathering, WATCH D.O.G.S., the Father-Daughter Summit, Fathering Court, and training for dads and father trainers and coaches. Its CEO, Carey Casey, is the author of Championship Fathering (May, 2009).
About National PTA
PTA comprises millions of families, students, teachers, administrators, and business and community leaders devoted to the educational success of children and the promotion of parent involvement in schools. PTA is a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that prides itself on being a powerful voice for all children, a relevant resource for families and communities, and a strong advocate for public education. Membership in PTA is open to anyone who wants to be involved and make a difference for the education health, and welfare of children and youth.
National PTA Return to Top of Page
 Executive Summary
By The Editors
At a time when only seven in 10 American students graduate from high school in four years, President Barack Obama is demanding that the nation raise its educational sights even higher, asking all Americans to commit to at least one year of education after high school.
Ultimately, he wants the United States to retake a pre-eminent place in the global education arena by boasting the world’s highest proportion of college graduates by 2020.
President Obama is the most prominent of a growing number of American policymakers to embrace the idea that some form of postsecondary education is crucial to students’ success after high school. The 2009 edition of Diplomas Count, titled Broader Horizons: The Challenge of College Readiness for All Students, examines that idea.
As this report points out, what it means to be ready to attend college is open to argument, with no firm consensus on how to measure college readiness or ensure that all students clear such a bar.
Return to Top of Page
The New Marketplace:
How Small-School Reforms and School Choice Have Reshaped New York City's High Schools by CLARA HEMPHILL AND KIM NAUER
WITH HELEN ZELON AND THOMAS JACOBS The Center for New York City Affairs at The New School today issued a report on the city's public high schools, revealing that Chancellor Joel Klein's high school reforms created valuable new opportunities but also caused collateral damage. Klein's reforms created 200 new small high schools and expanded high school choice, but weakened large high schools attended by tens of thousands of vulnerable students at risk of dropping out. "The New Marketplace: How Small-School Reforms and School Choice Have Reshaped New York City's High Schools," explains that the majority of city teens continue to attend large high schools, despite the small schools initiative. | the Report: | The 72-page report is the result of an 18-month investigation by 10 reporters, researchers and editors. Its findings include: Attendance and graduation rates are higher at new small schools than at the large schools they replaced. Principals and students report the new schools are safer. Yet many small schools remain fragile, with attendance and graduation rates declining. (See "Handle with Care") As the city closed the lowest-performing large schools to make way for small schools, thousands of students, including many new immigrants and children with special education needs, were diverted to the remaining large schools. Many of those schools suffered overcrowding and declining attendance and graduation rates. Some were subsequently closed. (See "A Case of Collateral Damage") Twenty-six of 34 large high schools in Brooklyn, Manhattan and the Bronx saw their enrollments jump significantly as other high schools were closed. Of these, 19 saw their attendance decline and 15 saw their graduation rates decline between the fall of 2002 and the spring of 2007. Fourteen saw both attendance and graduation rates decline. The expansion of school choice under Klein gave thousands of students entrée into schools they wanted to attend, decreasing the number of students rejected by all their high school choices from 31,000 in 2002 to 7,445 in 2009. (See "Winners and Losers: High School Choice") However, the school-choice system depends on well-informed adult guidance. Many students lack adequate support in choosing and ranking their schools, and guidance counselors are under-equipped to support them. Special needs students and children of immigrants have a particularly difficult time getting the information they need to make an informed choice. Thousands of students have been assigned to schools they did not choose or that are not appropriate for their educational needs. Students are assigned to schools up to 90 minutes from home, each way, by bus or subway. The more extensive the system of school choice, the more it sorts children into those who can navigate the admissions process and those who cannot.
The report also offers a number of recommendations, including: The city should not limit its high school reform efforts to the creation of small schools. Midsize and large schools can be effective and should be supported. The DOE should recognize that large high schools still serve the majority of students in New York City, and support them accordingly. The city must ensure that the "default schools"—schools where kids who are not picked by the school choice process wind up—get the support they need to be successful.
| The New School |
The Real Cost of High-School Dropouts
Cities in Crisis Cities in Crisis 2009: Closing the Graduation Gap prepared for America’s Promise Alliance by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, shows that despite some progress made by several cities from 1995-2005, the average graduation rate of the 50 largest cities is well below the national average of 71%, and there remains an 18 percentage point urban suburban gap. Cities in Crisis 2009 finds that only about half (53%) of all young people in the nation’s 50 largest cities are graduating from high school on time. Cities in Crisis 2009 was released on April 22 as a follow-up to the original Cities in Crisis report released in April 2008.
LOST OPPORTUNITY: New Report Finds that Minority and Low-Income Students Have Only Half the Opportunity to Learn in the Nation’s Public Schools as Their White Peers In its Lost Opportunity report, the Schott Foundation for Public Education establishes an “initial” metric for determining the Opportunity to Learn for students. The Schott Foundation provides a state-by-state comparison of both academic proficiency (as illustrated by the percentage of students scoring at or above proficient on the eighth grade National Assessment of Educational Progress - NAEP reading exam) and access to high-performing schools (as measured by the Schott Foundation’s Opportunity to Learn Index, or OTLI). Realizing if the U.S. is to provide every student a true opportunity to learn, the country must first ensure that all students, even the most disadvantaged, have access to the high-quality resources necessary for success. The Schott Foundation used resource models to identify the four core minimum resources that are necessary if a child – regardless of race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status – is to have a fair and substantive opportunity to learn: - High-quality early childhood education;
- Highly qualified teachers and instructors in grades K-12;
- College preparatory curricula that will prepare all youth for college, work and community; and
- Equitable instructional resources.
Opportunity to Learn, NationallyThe report’s data indicate that, nationally, students from historically disadvantaged groups have just a 51 percent Opportunity to Learn, when compared to White, non-Latino students, as measured by the OTLI. The effects of these inequities are disproportionately concentrated in a few states. California and New York each account for 15 percent of the nation’s Opportunity to Learn inequity impact. Texas accounts for an additional 12 percent. Illinois, Michigan and Pennsylvania account for 5 percent each. New York’s share of the economic effect of inequity is nearly three times its percentage of the national population. Opportunity to Learn, State-by-StateThe interstate opportunity gap is stark. Looking at the 50 states and the District of Columbia, only eight states can be identified as providing both at least a moderately proficient and a high access education for all students. Sixteen states were found to provide a moderately proficient education for most students, but demonstrated low access when it came to providing that education to historically disadvantaged students. Disturbingly, 17 states were found to provide high-access, low-proficiency education to their students. While these states are to be recognized for breaking down the barriers between White students and Black and Latino students, and between high income students and low-income students, it cannot be missed that these states are doing so at the lowest common denominator. In many cases they provide an equal, yet very inferior education to students. Most disturbing are the nine states at the bottom, which show both low-proficiency and low-access public education ratings. Even with significant disparities in equity, these states are unable to provide even moderate quality education to any significant number of their students. Moving Forward The federal government must make access to a high-quality opportunity to learn a federally guaranteed right for every American. We cannot have equity without quality. And we cannot have true quality without real equity. The Lost Opportunity data should serve as an eye-opener for every federal, state and local policymaker and community advocate grappling with decisions on educational priorities. The federal government should develop and implement a national opportunity to learn resource accountability system to track student access to core educational resources. To support this system, the following recommendations are presented: The federal government and community advocates should support, monitor and track states in the adoption and implementation of “Opportunity to Learn plans” for their states. The federal government and community advocates should take steps to use data systems to ensure that states and localities are achieving the highest return on investments from taxpayer dollars. With such data, policymakers, advocates and educators will be equipped with the information necessary to close the opportunity gap and improve public education for all students. A similar frame should be used to certify that charter and magnet schools. are Opportunity to Learn schools; corporation and local businesses are opportunity to learn businesses; communities are building opportunity to learn environments; and families and parents are fostering opportunity to learn homes. Noting that President Obama has set a national goal for the United States to produce the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020, advocates called on the President to immediately establish a National Interagency Commission on the Opportunity to Learn to determine the necessary sustained investments, coordination and partnerships to ensure that students in all states have a fair and substantive opportunity to learn by 2020. The Federal Government should establish an Opportunity to Learn Education Trust Fund to provide resources to states to support the implementation of the state’ Opportunity to Learn Resource Equity Plans and stabilize the implementation of the plans during economic down times.
The nation now recognizes the strength of its public schools is directly and inextricably linked to its social, civic and economic strength. The U.S. will be a stronger nation and global citizen—economically and socially—with a better-educated citizenry when all Americans have access to the pathways of success and opportunity. If every child is to have an opportunity for success, every student MUST first receive a true Opportunity to Learn.
Present, Engaged, and Accounted For The Critical Importance of Addressing Chronic Absence in the Early Grades National Center for Children in Poverty Executive SummaryAt the core of school improvement and education reform is an assumption so widely understood that it is rarely invoked: students have to be present and engaged in order to learn. That is why the discovery that thousands of our youngest students are at academically at-risk because of extended absences when they first embark upon their school careers is as remarkable as it is consequential. Schools and communities have a choice: we can work together early on to ensure families get their children to class consistently or we can pay later for failing to intervene before problems are more difficult and costly to ameliorate. continue reading the executive summary at National Center for Children in Poverty (nccp.org). full report
Adequacy and Efficiency of Preschool Education in California California's sizeable achievement gaps in English-language arts and mathematics in second and third grades have early roots, with the same groups of children that lag in academic performance in elementary school trailing in measures of school readiness when they enter kindergarten. Participation in effective preschool programs has the potential to narrow these gaps, but the state's current system of publicly funded early care and education programs are not designed to maximize the child development and school readiness benefits. New data collected for the project on preschool use and quality shows most California children attend center-based preschools, but quality of programs falls short. These findings are highlighted in the first three reports from the California Preschool Study: Who Is Ahead and Who Is Behind?Gaps in School Readiness and Student Achievement in the Early Grades for California's Children Early Care and Education in the Golden StatePublicly Funded Programs Serving California's Preschool-Age Children Prepared to LearnThe Nature and Quality of Early Care and Education for Preschool-Age Children in California
First-Ever Report on Mental Health of NH Children -- Birth to Age 6 Early Childhood Mental Health is the social/emotional well being of children aged birth to six years, and promotes the capacity to experience, manage and express emotions; develop and sustain stable relationships with others; safely explore the environment and learn; and demonstrate developmentally appropriate behavior. This study examines the availability, accessibility and quality of early childhood mental health supports and services for New Hampshire's youngest children and their families.
FINE Newsletter, Volume I, Issue 2
Issue Topic: Family Involvement Policy
Resources & Research From Harvard Family Research Project Written by Harvard Family Research Project's Heather Weiss and Naomi Stephen, this chapter—which will appear in the Handbook of School–Family Partnerships, edited by Sandy Christenson, Ph.D. and Amy Reschley, Ph.D.—presents a comprehensive, integrated family, school, and community partnership framework that can help level the playing field for disadvantaged children and ensure that they have access to the parental involvement and community engagement practices of their more advantaged peers in order to enhance their learning. The authors discuss the strong developmental research case for family–school–community partnerships and emphasize the need for continued evaluations to demonstrate the types of partnerships and involvement practices that are best correlated with positive student outcomes. Instead of narrowly defining education reform as initiatives that take place within the walls of K–12 school buildings, Weiss and Stephen argue for the need to address the wide range of external factors that influence children’s learning success, and illustrate how family–school–community partnerships provide opportunities to broaden our definition of schooling and understanding about where learning takes place.
Focusing on the need to combine governmental and nongovernmental supports to develop more comprehensive and continuous partnership efforts, the chapter proposes a set of recommendations for moving ahead on a national strategy to support family–school–community partnerships, including: Building strategic and coherent advocacy efforts through a broad national leadership coalition of organizations and individuals in order to help increase the likelihood of sustained legislation and public support Developing integrated infrastructure supports via national and state legislation, policies, and funding with earmarks for key infrastructure supports, such as training, technical assistance, and performance monitoring and evaluation Strengthening and utilizing practitioner–private sector partnerships as a resource for training, innovative tool development, and other infrastructure supports Providing training frameworks and other supports for pre- and in-service professional development Conducting more rigorous evaluations, including longitudinal studies, in the family involvement and partnership field to strengthen the research and evaluation base for family–school–community partnership efforts Contributing to knowledge development and innovation through promoting the research and development infrastructure for school improvement and increasing practitioners’ ability to get and use data to improve their practices
This resource is part of the May 2009 FINE Newsletter. The FINE Newsletter shares the newest and best family involvement research and resources from Harvard Family Research Project and other field leaders. To access the FINE Newsletter Archive, visit www.hfrp.org/FINENewsletter.
FINE Newsletter, Volume I, Issue 2
Issue Topic: Family Involvement Policy
Tips & Tools From Harvard Family Research Project This resource from Harvard Family Research Project includes a comprehensive list of data collection measures for use in the evaluation of and research on family involvement programs. As evidence mounts that family involvement can support children's learning, there is an increasing call in the field for common data collection instruments to measure home–school communication and other aspects of family involvement. This resource from Harvard Family Research Project compiles instruments developed for rigorous program impact evaluations and tested for reliability. This article is part of the May 2009 FINE Newsletter. The FINE Newsletter shares the newest and best family involvement research and resources from Harvard Family Research Project and other field leaders. To access the FINE Newsletter Archive, visit www.hfrp.org/FINENewsletter.
FINE Newsletter, Volume I, Issue 2
Issue Topic: Family Involvement Policy
Resources & Research From Harvard Family Research Project What, in conjunction with good schools, is necessary to increase the chances that all children, especially disadvantaged ones, will enter and leave school with the skills they need for 21st-century success? This report from Harvard Family Research Project (HFRP) makes a research-based case for federal provision of out-of-school complementary learning supports from birth through high school, particularly for poor children, so that all students gain the skills that economists, educators, and employers agree are necessary for success in the 21st century. Four decades of consistent research evidence demonstrate it is necessary to redefine learning—both where and when it takes place—and to follow up with innovations that enable communities to move to a complementary learning approach, if the country is to achieve its national goal of educating all children. Read this report and learn about: - Research and evaluation evidence that shows the benefits of out-of-school complementary learning opportunities in family involvement, after school programs, and summer learning programs.
- What federal leaders can do to build state and local capacity for complementary learning services and interventions that measurably contribute to children’s development, particularly their academic outcomes.
- Legislative and policy tools and examples of public–private partnerships that enable innovation, accountability, and evaluation for continuous learning and improvement of complementary learning pathways.
- Six recommendations for the federal government to develop, implement and test a national strategy for complementary learning, culminating in a proposal for a “Pathways to Educational Success Act.”
Commissioned by the Center for Education Policy (CEP) as part of a series of 11 papers on “Rethinking the Federal Role in Elementary and Secondary Education,” the report was presented at a forum on Capitol Hill in November 2008. For a full copy of this and other papers in that series, visit the CEP web site at www.cep-dc.org.
Californians Want Change in Public Schools but Balk at Higher Taxes
Worried About State Budget Cuts, Residents Say Better Use of Funds Is Key
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 29, 2009—Californians worry that the state’s budget gap will hurt public schools, but they are also increasingly likely to say that spending money more wisely—rather than just spending more—will lead to better quality K–12 education, according to a survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Residents believe the public schools have plenty of room for improvement: A solid majority of residents (58%) say that the system needs major changes. While most (61%) agree that more state funding would lead to higher quality public schools, there is even stronger agreement (85%) that better use of existing state funds would improve schools. When asked to choose among three options for improving public education, half (49%) say that better use of existing funds is the answer—12 points higher than two years ago (37% April 2007). Only 6 percent say increased funding is the key (11% 2007); 43 percent choose a combination of better use of funds and increased funding (48% 2007). Although most Californians (56%) are very concerned that the state’s budget gap will cause significant cuts to schools, they are divided about whether they would be willing to pay higher taxes to keep funding at current levels: 48 percent would and 49 percent would not. During the last economic downturn, Californians were much more willing to raise their own taxes for K–12 education (67% in June 2003 and January 2004). “Californians are concerned about school quality and they’re concerned about school funding. But that hasn’t translated into more support for taxes and spending,” says Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. “They’re looking for reform and innovation that can lead to gains in school performance and student achievement.” Most Want K–12 Schools Spared in State Budget In a recession that has hit California particularly hard and facing a fiscal crisis that threatens every part of the state budget, a majority of residents (58%) say that K–12 education is the area they most want to protect from spending cuts. Californians have held this view since June 2003, the first time PPIC asked the question and a period when the state was also struggling with a budget deficit. Today, majorities across parties, regions, and demographic groups agree. For public school parents, the state’s budget troubles are more than a future concern. Most (72%) say their children’s schools have already been hurt a lot (28%) or somewhat (44%) by recent cuts. In less than a month, Californians will decide a package of ballot measures that address the state’s budget gap and would affect school funding. The results could change the way two earlier initiatives passed by voters will be carried out: Proposition 98, the 1988 measure that established minimum funding levels for public schools and community colleges, and Proposition 37, which created the state lottery in 1984 to provide more money for schools. In light of the current budget situation, how important is it to voters to guarantee minimum funding levels for schools each year? A strong majority of Californians (68%) say it’s very important. Residents also feel that it’s very important (68%) for schools to get a dedicated stream of funding from state lottery profits. When it comes to determining how state money should be spent on public schools, residents would prefer that their local school districts (49%) or local schools (33%) rather than the state (13%) make the decisions. Most agree (77%) that local schools should have more flexibility than they do now in how to spend money. In another indication that they have greater confidence in their local schools than in the state’s decisionmakers, more Californians say they would vote yes on a local school construction bond measure (60%) or new parcel tax to provide more money for local schools (54%) than would be willing to pay higher taxes to maintain K–12 funding levels statewide (48%). But support for a local school construction bond falls to 54 percent among likely voters-—just short of the 55 percent required for passage. The percentage of all adults and likely voters who would approve this type of bond is the lowest since the PPIC Statewide Survey began asking this question in 1999. High School Dropout Rate Seen as Big Problem What needs improvement in the schools? There is little consensus. Teacher quality (13%), class size and overcrowding (11%), and teaching the basics (10%) are the top responses to this open-ended question. When asked specifically about three education issues—the high school dropout rate, student achievement, and teacher quality—the responses are strikingly different. A strong majority (70%) say the dropout rate is a big problem, with blacks (85%) and Latinos (82%) much more likely than whites (65%) and Asians (51%) to hold this view. Forty-three percent of residents say student achievement is a big problem, with blacks (54%) more likely than others (43% whites, 41% Latinos, 38% Asians) to agree. Teacher quality is seen as a big problem by just 29 percent; blacks (42%) are more likely than others (29% Asians, 29% whites, 25% Latinos) to hold this negative view. Californians got a reality check on the high school dropout rate last year, when the state used a new student tracking system and found that nearly one in four students in the class of 2007 had dropped out of high school. Latino and black students had even higher rates. Today, 60 percent of residents in the PPIC survey say they are very concerned that students in lower-income areas have a higher dropout rate. This is a 7-point increase since the new dropout figures were released (53% April 2008). Blacks (82%) are far more likely than others (60% Latinos, 59% whites, 52% Asians) to be very concerned. Although nearly all Californians (96%) say it is important for K–12 schools to prepare students for college, less than half say the school system does an excellent (4%) or good (42%) job of doing so. Local Schools Get Passing Grades, State Leaders Fare Poorly Even as many Californians see education quality as a big problem, 53 percent give their neighborhood schools a grade of A (19%) or B (34%). Public school parents have an even more positive view: 63 percent of these parents award their schools a B or higher, with 25 percent giving A grades to local schools and 38 percent giving B’s. Californians give their state leaders far worse grades. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s overall job approval rating matches his record low (32%) and marks the second time a majority of Republicans have disapproved of his performance (54% today, 53% March 2009). His approval rating on education is even lower. Just 20 percent approve, a historic low that has dropped 5 points since April 2008 and 16 points since April 2007. Majorities across parties disapprove of the way he is handling K-12 education (65% Democrats, 56% independents, 52% Republicans). The legislature’s overall approval rating remains low (23% vs. 18% last month) and drops to a record low 18 percent on education issues. More than six in 10 (63%) disapprove of the way the legislature is handling education. Majorities across parties, regions, and racial/ethnic groups share this view. MORE KEY FINDINGS - Obama retains 70 percent approval rating—page 11
In stark contrast to the ratings of California elected officials, President Obama’s approval rating has been at least 70 percent each of the three times that PPIC has surveyed California residents. - Parents have high aspirations for their children—page 14
An overwhelming majority (85%) of parents want their youngest child to get a college or graduate degree, and many parents (45%) are very confident that they have the resources and information needed to make this happen. Fewer (24%) have the same level of confidence in the resources provided by their local schools. White parents and those with higher incomes are much more likely than lower-income or Latino parents to be very confident in their own resources and those of their local schools. - Californians recognize resource inequities—page 21
Nearly eight in 10 Californians (77%) say schools in lower-income areas have less money for teachers and classroom materials than those in wealthier areas, a finding that holds true across all regions, demographic groups, and political parties. If new money were available, a large majority (70%) would spend more of it on lower-income schools. - High school exit exam is popular—page 22
Most Californians (69%) think students should pass the exit exam to graduate, with Latinos (80%) most likely to agree. Most Californians are very (55%) or somewhat (32%) concerned that students in lower-income communities have higher failure rates on the test. - Career technical education gets strong backing—page 25
Vocational education is very important to most (71%) of Californians. But just 31 percent of those who say it’s very important think schools are doing a good or excellent job at preparing students for the workforce. - Californians value data collection—page 26
The development of data systems to track student, school, and fiscal information is a state and national priority that residents also feel is very (56%) or somewhat (34%) important.
ABOUT THE SURVEY This is the fifth PPIC Statewide Survey focusing on K–12 education. It is part of a series funded by The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation that is intended to inform state policymakers, encourage discussion, and raise public awareness about a variety of K–12, higher education, environment, and population issues. Findings are based on a telephone survey of 2,502 California adult residents, including 2,250 interviewed on landline telephones and 252 on cell phones. Interviews took place April 7-21, 2009. They were conducted in English, Spanish, Chinese (Mandarin or Cantonese), Vietnamese, and Korean. The sampling error for the total sample is ±2 percent and slightly larger for subgroups. For more information on methodology, see page 29. This is the 97th PPIC Statewide Survey in a series that has generated a database of responses from more than 206,000 Californians. Mark Baldassare is president and CEO of PPIC, where he holds the Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Chair in Public Policy. He is founder of the PPIC Statewide Survey, which he has directed since 1998. PPIC is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Return to Top of Page
Return to Top of Page
Return to Top of Page
25th Annual MetLife Teacher Survey
Looks Back on More Than Two Decades of Education Reform Today’s teachers are more satisfied and better prepared, but significant challenges remain
Washington, DC – February 25, 2009 – Have 25 years of reform improved American education? According to the newly-released MetLife Survey of the American Teacher: Past,Present, and Future, there’s encouraging news: today’s teachers feel more satisfied in their careers, more respected, and better prepared than teachers in the past. They also view academic standards and curriculum as stronger, and students as better prepared. The survey reveals that a majority of today’s teachers (62%) are very satisfied with their careers, compared to 40% in1984. Two-thirds (67%) of teachers think that the training and preparation teachers receive does a good job of preparing them for the classroom, compared to 46% in 1984.
Not all of the news is good, however. The comparison to the past also reveals that some longstanding challenges have increased, including a lack of student facility in English, the mixture of student learning abilities in the classroom, and poverty. Today, half (49%) of teachers say that poverty hinders learning for at least a quarter of their students, compared to 41% in1992. More teachers (43%) agree that their classes have become so mixed in terms of students’ learning abilities that they can’t teach effectively, compared to 39% in 1988. And, nearly twice as many teachers today, as compared to 1992, say that a lack of facility in English hinders learning for at least one fourth of their students (22% vs. 11%) with the problem even greater in urban schools (30%). Urban schools generally showed less progress in many areas when compared to rural and suburban schools.
The survey is the 25th in an annual series commissioned by MetLife and conducted by Harris Interactive®. It examines the views of teachers, principals, and students to document current attitudes, identify trends, and consider the future. The opinions voiced cover a wide array of topics, including teacher satisfaction with careers, academic standards and curriculum, student success, professional communication, school conditions, parent and community relations, and challenges beyond the classroom. Significantly, this year’s survey also provides a unique opportunity to compare changes in teacher attitudes over the past two and a half decades.
The National Math Panel Final Report
Blame for School Achievement Gap MisplacedNew policy report explains how poverty's effects are the real culprit Contact: David Berliner -- (480) 861-0484; berliner@asu.edu
Kevin Welner -- (303) 492-8370; kevin.welner@gmail.com
TEMPE, Ariz. and BOULDER, Colo., March 9, 2009 - A new report issues a fundamental challenge to established education policies that were promoted by the Bush administration and are likely to be continued by the Obama administration. These policies are based on a belief that public schools should shoulder the blame for the "achievement gap" between poor and minority students and the rest of the student population. But the new policy report argues that out-of-school factors are the real culprit--and that if those factors are not addressed, it will be impossible for schools to meet the demands made of them. "Schools are told to fix problems that largely lie outside their zone of influence," says David Berliner, Regents Professor of Education at Arizona State University, and author of the report, Poverty and Potential: Out-of-School Factors and School Success. The report is jointly published by the Education Policy Research Unit (EPRU) of ASU and the Education and the Public Interest Center (EPIC) at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Berliner's report comes as debate continues over the renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act, which imposed stiff accountability measures on schools in return for federal aid. NCLB requires public schools to demonstrate "adequate yearly progress" toward the eventual elimination of gaps in achievement among all demographic groups of students and imposes a variety of sanctions if they fall short. "This report provides exactly the type of information that should guide policy," says EPIC director Kevin Welner of CU-Boulder. "It clearly and concisely explains why poverty must be directly addressed by anyone who hopes to close the achievement gap. Just as importantly, it explains why just tinkering with NCLB is a fool's errand." Last week, Education Secretary Duncan told the Washington Post that those who would use the social ills of poor children as an excuse for not educating them "are part of the problem." Welner agrees. "But," he says, "those who point to schools as an excuse for failure to address social ills are equally at fault." Berliner explains that NCLB "focuses almost exclusively on school outputs, particularly reading and mathematics achievement test scores." He says, "The law was purposely designed to pay little attention to school inputs in order to ensure that teachers and school administrators had 'no excuses' when it came to better educating impoverished youth." Yet, as explained in the new report, that position is not merely unrealistic, but certain to fail. Berliner says that NCLB's accountability system is "fatally flawed" because it makes schools accountable for achievement without regard for out-of-school factors. Berliner reviews a half-dozen out-of-school factors that have been clearly linked to lower achievement among poor and minority-group students: birth weight and non-genetic parental influences; medical care; food insecurity; environmental pollution; family breakdown and stress; and neighborhood norms and conditions. Additionally, he notes a seventh factor: extended learning opportunities in the form of summer programs, after-school programs, and pre-school programs. Access to these resources by poor and minority students could help mitigate the effects of the other six factors. Because of the extraordinary influence of the six factors that Berliner identifies, "increased spending on schools, as beneficial as that might be, will probably come up short in closing the gaps." Instead, he calls for an approach to school improvement that would demand "a reasonable level of societal accountability for children's physical and mental health and safety." "At that point," he concludes, "maybe we can sensibly and productively demand that schools be accountable for comparable levels of academic achievement for all America's children." Find David Berliner's report, Poverty and Potential: Out-of-School Factors and School Success, on the web at:
http://epicpolicy.org/publication/poverty-and-potential
Return to Top of Page
State Schools Chief Jack O'Connell
Responds To Quality Counts 2009 Report SACRAMENTO — State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell today provided the following statement regarding the release of Education Week's Quality Counts 2009: Portrait of a Population report. The annual report provides a nationwide report card on key indicators of student success. This year's edition also includes a particular focus on English learner students. "While Quality Counts 2009 found that California has among the highest academic standards in the nation, it also reports that California ranks 47th in the nation in terms of per-pupil spending. This is a sad distinction considering the challenges we face to improve student achievement and close the achievement gap that exists between students who are white or Asian and their peers who are African American, Latino, or learning the English language. "More than 1.5 million English learners attend school in California. It is critical to our entire state's economic future that these students succeed in school and are well-prepared for success in the competitive global economy. The Quality Counts 2009 report highlights our challenge to close the achievement gap that is leaving too many of our English learners behind. "I am deeply concerned that our state budget crisis and the deep cuts to education proposed by Governor Schwarzenegger will lead to a widening of this gap. He has proposed to cut funding for a full week of the school year. This would lead to a shorter school year for most districts that serve high proportions of minority and low-income students, while the wealthy districts that serve many white and Asian students will be more likely keep the full school year intact. Research shows that time in class is a critically important factor in improving student achievement. This proposal presents a major setback in our efforts to narrow the gap."
Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2009 
This report describes how the education system in the United States compares with education systems in the other G-8 countries--Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom. Twenty-seven indicators are organized in five sections: (1) population and school enrollment; (2) academic performance (including subsections for reading, mathematics, and science); (3) context for learning; (4) expenditure for education; and (5) education returns: educational attainment and income. This report draws on the most current information about education from four primary sources: the Indicators of National Education Systems (INES) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Return to Top of Page
EDUCATION WATCH: TRACKING ACHIEVEMENT, ATTAINMENT,
AND OPPORTUNITY IN AMERICA’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS
52-report series helps measure impact of federal stimulus funding on academic opportunities and outcomes for the nation’s students
As the U.S. Department of Education begins to distribute the funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the onus is on states to ensure that this investment boosts overall achievement and closes gaps.
To measure how effectively states are using the infusion of federal support, the public will need accurate, reliable data. In a state-by-state snapshot of public education in America, Education Watch State Reports present critical indicators of student achievement, attainment, and opportunity.
The data in these reports and the accompanying “quick look” chart mark the starting line in America’s “Race to the Top”—the federal effort to provoke bold, enduring progress in education. Education Watch reveals which states are farthest along the course, which are gaining on the leaders, and which are barely out of the starting blocks. Throughout the duration of ARRA spending, The Education Trust will provide updates on state progress as new data become available.
Read more about the Education Watch State Reports series here. The Education Trust Return to Top of Page
Pre-K enrollment, funding up; worry about economy By JENNIFER C. KERR – 18 hours ago WASHINGTON (AP) — The recession could spell trouble for the nation's youngest schoolchildren, despite positive trends in spending and enrollment for state pre-K programs, according to a report released Wednesday. At least nine states are likely to make cuts to pre-kindergarten programs including some of the biggest — California, Florida and New York, said Steve Barnett, one of the authors of the annual report on state-funded preschool. Barnett, director at the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, said enrollment cuts, fewer dollars per pupil, and delaying expansion plans are some of the steps that states are considering. A spokesman for New York Governor David Paterson says the state's 2010 budget maintains spending on pre-K programs at current levels, but doesn't have additional money to expand them. The institute is urging the federal government to match state spending with up to $2,500 for every additional child enrolled in state pre-K programs as a way to grow preschool so that all of the nation's 4-year-olds can have access by 2020. Barnett said a good preschool program helps children acquire rich vocabularies and learn about numbers and shapes. "They also learn how to take responsibility for their actions and to get along with other children," he said. "These things are the foundation for success in school and in life." Currently, more than 80 percent of all 4-year-olds attend some kind of preschool program, according to the report. About half of those go to a public program, either state pre-K, Head Start or special education. The other half attend private programs. Thirty-three of the 38 states with state pre-K programs increased enrollment for the 2007-2008 school year, the report said. Oklahoma has nearly 90 percent of its 4-year-olds in a public education program, the best enrollment ranking in the study. At least seven other states — Florida, Georgia, Vermont, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and New York — have more than half of 4-year-olds attending some type of a public preschool program. Spending on state pre-K programs increased from $4.2 billion to $5.2 billion last year, said Barnett. The researchers also ranked the quality of the programs, looking at 10 benchmarks such as class size, teacher-to-child ratios and whether the teacher has a bachelor's degree. North Carolina and Alabama were the only two states that met all 10 benchmarks. Louisiana, Maryland, Arkansas, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Washington met nine of the 10 standards, said the report. On the Net: · National Institute for Early Education Research: http://nieer.org San Jose Mercury News Return to Top of Page
One Dream, Two Realities: Perspectives of Parents on America's High Schools Regardless of incomes, education, and performance at the school, say the authors, parents believe that their involvement is central to their child's academic success. What parents need is an access point that many are not finding. Selected reported findings include: (1)) Parents see a more demanding world: (2) Parents share high aspirations for their children; (3) Parents, especially parents of students in low-performing schools, understand that their involvement is important; (4) Only 15 percent of parents of students at low-performing schools feel the school is doing an adequate job of challenging students; (5) School performance, more than grades, drives parent satisfaction; (6) While all parents recognize the importance of their engagement with their children's education, only parents from high-performing schools feel they are regularly and meaningfully engaged in their children's academic success; and (7) Most parents who are not engaged enough feel that they need to do better. Barriers to and opportunities for parental involvement are discussed. (Contains 19 endnotes, 8 figures and 1 table.) [This report was produced in association with Peter D. Hart Research Associates.] Return to Top of Page
| |
|