Learn About: 21st Century | Charter Schools | Homework
Home / Edifier


The EDifier

January 12, 2012

More States Improved Their Standards

Filed under: Public education,Report Summary — Jim Hull @ 12:05 pm

This morning, Education Week (EdWeek) released its annual special report Quality Counts 2012, which included its annual State of the States report card. For the fourth year running, Maryland earned top honors with a B plus while the nation as a whole once again received a C. The report card shows that states have been taking steps to improve their standards, assessments, and accountability systems: 20 states improved their grades in this area since it was last reported in 2010. Mainly, the improvement was due to 19 earning perfect marks in the Standards subcategory. On the other hand, states remained stagnant in their teacher policies, where most states earned grades similar or lower than the ones they received in 2010.

Here are some of the key findings from this year’s report card:

Summative Grades

How did the nation as a whole and each individual state perform across all policy and performance areas?

  • Overall, the nation received a grade of a C across all policy and performance areas, which remained the same as a year ago.
  • Maryland earned the highest grade (B plus) for the fourth consecutive year, followed by New York, Massachusetts, and Virginia, who all earned a B.
    • The vast majority of states (41) earned grades between a C minus and a C plus.
    • No states received an F. South Dakota earned a D plus.

Chance for Success

What are the odds that the average child who grows up in a particular state will do as well as the average child in the top-ranked state, at each stage of his or her educational life? (these stages are: the early childhood years, participation and performance in formal education, and educational attainment and workforce outcomes during adulthood)

  • Massachusetts ranked first for the fifth consecutive year by being the only state to receive an A, while once again New Hampshire and New Jersey each received an A minus. 
    • This means that children in Massachusetts have the best chance of achieving positive life outcomes.
  • On the other hand, children in Nevada, New Mexico, and Mississippi have the least chance of achieving positive life outcomes by earning a D and D pluses, respectively.
  • The nation as a whole earned a C plus.

K-12 Achievement

How do states compare on the academic achievement of their students in elementary through high school?

  • Overall, our nation’s schools improved from a D plus to a C minus in the academic preparation of school children.
    • The grade is based on the academic status and growth over time in math and reading scores, narrowing of poverty-based achievement gaps, as well as high school graduation rates and the performance on the advanced placement test.
  • Once again, Massachusetts received the highest grade with a B. Maryland and New Jersey scored slightly lower, but still earned B’s. 
  • Louisiana, West Virginia, Mississippi, and the District of Columbia all received failing marks, just as they did a year ago.

Transition and Alignment

How do states compare on implementing various education policies to better coordinate the connections between K-12 schooling and other segments of the education pipeline, such as early-childhood education, college readiness, and links to the world of work?

  • Arkansas, Maryland, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia are leaders in ensuring students are ready to move up the education ladder, earning A’s for their policy work in this area.
  • In contrast, six states earned D’s, while Nebraska earned an F, as it did last year.
  • Although the nation as a whole earned just a C plus, 33 states have defined college readiness, which is an increase of 13 states since 2009. 

 

School Finance

How much do states spend on their schools? Is the spending distributed equitably?

  • Although no state received an A, seven states received B minuses for adequately funding their schools.
    • On the other hand, four states — Idaho, South Dakota, Nevada, and North Carolina –received grades of D or D minus. No state received a failing grade.
  • As a whole, the nation received a C on funding education. However, on average, the nation spends more money on wealthier school districts than poorer districts nationwide.
    • Just six states spent as much or more on their poorer districts as on their wealthier counterparts. 




January 9, 2012

Are value-added measures accurate?

Filed under: Growth Models,Report Summary,Teacher evaluation — Jim Hull @ 11:43 am

It’s just one study, but a new study from Harvard and Columbia economists provides powerful evidence that value-added measures can be an accurate tool in evaluating the effectiveness of teachers. As CPE found in its report, Building a Better Evaluation System, although value-added measures are not perfect, they can be valuable tools in identifying highly effective teachers. This study provides even stronger evidence that this is indeed the case.

The report doesn’t dismiss the limitations of value-added that I discussed in my report: most importantly, that value-added scores tend to fluctuate from year to year, although even one year’s worth of value-added data can be useful. However, the Harvard/Columbia report points out that teacher value-added scores averaged over three or four years are accurate measures of a teacher’s true effectiveness. They were able to determine this in two ways:

1) By finding that when a previously identified highly effective teacher transferred to a new school, that school’s achievement improved within the grade the teacher was assigned. Conversely, when a highly effective teacher left a school, the school’s achievement fell in the grade the teacher previously taught.  Furthermore, the change in scores in both instances matched the change predicted based on teacher’s value-added score.

2) Students of highly effective teachers had better life outcomes than students who had average effective teachers. Students of highly effective teachers were less likely to be teenage parents and more likely to go on to college as well as earn higher wages and save more for retirement.  

These are very important findings, especially considering the authors actually set out to show that value-added measures didn’t work – that they had more to do with student motivation or principal selection or other factors outside the control of teachers, as the authors stated in this New York Times article. Yet, they proved themselves wrong. The data not only showed that teachers matter, but that they matter a great deal to their students’ long-term outcomes. They also showed that value-added measures can be an effective and reliable tool administrators and policymakers can use to ensure all students have access to good teachers. – Jim Hull





December 7, 2011

Urban districts making progress, but more work needed

Filed under: Achievement Gaps,Assessments,Data,NAEP,Report Summary — Tags: , , , , — rstandrie @ 5:48 pm

Earlier today, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released the fifth installment of the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA), which reports on the performance of fourth- and eighth-graders on NAEP reading and mathematics in participating urban districts. Overall, both math and reading results show our urban schools have made significant progress over the past decade, yet a long climb remains until they close the gap between themselves and our high performing suburban districts.

There are some important takeaways from these results. First, the data over the past decade clearly shows that urban districts can and do improve student achievement. Second, change doesn’t happen overnight. Although the data shows that in some districts students are achieving nearly two years more of learning compared to their peers a decade earlier, those gains came from long, gradual improvement. It’s important to remember that our urban schools are on the right track. Let’s not derail their successes by trying to accelerate those gains without knowing what is making the gains possible.

Below are some of the major findings from both the math and reading assessments.

Math

Fourth Grade

  • Atlanta (3 points), Austin (5 points), Baltimore City (3 points), and Philadelphia (4 points) were the only districts to significantly increase their scores from 2009 to 2011. During this same time period, scores for the nation increased by 1 point. 
  •  Boston and Washington, D.C. made the greatest gains from 2003 to 2011 by increasing scores 17 points each. Such increases are roughly equivalent to about a year and half worth of learning.
    • During this time, Cleveland was the only participating district that did not improve its performance.
  • Austin (TX), Charlotte (NC), and Hillsborough (FL) were the only urban districts to score higher than the overall national average while San Diego’s score was not significantly different from the national average.  Charlotte was the only district to do so in 2009.
  • Eight urban districts scored higher than the average for students attending schools in large cities (cities of populations of 250,000 or more). This was up from seven districts in 2009.
  • The percent of students scoring at or above Proficient varied dramatically among urban districts, from 48 percent in Charlotte to just 3 percent in Detroit.
    • Only three districts increased the percent of students reaching the Proficient level since 2009, although seven out of nine districts increased their percentages since 2003.
    • Students at the Proficient level are able to “draw a line segment of a given length.”

Eighth Grade

  • Six districts significantly increased their scores from 2009 to 2011. This was up from just two states that increased their scores between 2007 and 2009. 
  • From 2003 to 2011, nine out of ten districts made significant gains in their performance, with Atlanta (22) and Boston (20) all making gains roughly equivalent to two years’ worth of additional learning.
    • Cleveland was the only district to not make significant progress during this time period.
  • Austin and Charlotte were the only districts to outscore the nation as a whole, while Boston and Hillsborough’s scores were not significantly different from the national average.
  • Six urban districts did score higher than the 2011 average for students attending schools in large cities, which is an increase from five districts in 2009.
  • The percent of students scoring at or above proficient varied just as it did at the fourth grade level. Austin had the highest percentage at 38 percent, while Detroit once again had the lowest percentage at just 4 percent.

Reading

Fourth Grade

  • None of the 18 districts that participated in both 2009 and 2011 saw any significant changes.  During this same time period scores for the nation remained flat.
  • Austin (TX), Charlotte (NC), Hillsborough County (FL), Jefferson County (KY), and Miami-Dade (FL) scored slightly higher than the overall national average.
  • Austin, Charlotte, Hillsborough County, Jefferson County, and Miami-Dade scored higher than the average for large cities (cities of populations of 250,000 or more).  
  • The percent of students scoring at or above proficient varied dramatically among urban districts from 44 percent in Hillsborough County to just 7 percent in Detroit.
    • However, 45 percent more students in large cities were proficient in 2011 than in 2003

Eighth Grade

  • Charlotte (6 points) was the only school district to significantly increase their scores from 2009 to 2011.  During this same time period students nationally increased their scores 2 points.
  • Austin, Charlotte, Hillsborough County (FL), Jefferson County (KY), and Miami-Dade scored higher than the average for large cities.
    • A few districts had slight score decreases since the first year they participated.  The District of Columbia’s score decreased by 3 points since 2002, Fresno’s (CA) score decreased by 2 points since 2009, Miami-Dade’s score decreased by 1 point since 2009, and Milwaukee’s score decreased by 3 points since 2009.
  • Hillsborough County was the only district to outscore the nation as a whole while Jefferson County and Miami-Dade didn’t score significantly different from the national average.
  • The range of students scoring at or above proficient was wide just as it was at the fourth grade level. Charlotte had the highest percentage at 34 percent while Detroit once again had the lowest at just 5 percent.
    • However, overall 50 percent more students in large urban cities were proficient in 2011 compared to 2003.

 

– Jim Hull and Mandy Newport

 

 





November 4, 2011

The not-so-good news second– NAEP reading

Filed under: Achievement Gaps,Middle school,NAEP,Public education,Report Summary — Jim Hull @ 11:02 am

Earlier this week, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released the results of the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading for 4th and 8th graders.

Overall, there was little or no change from the 2009 scores. However, achievement at both levels has consistently been on the rise since 1992. During this same time period, the Black/White achievement gap narrowed at both the 4th and 8th grades. Although there has been some gains in reading over the past two decades, those gaisn pale in comparison to the the gains being made in math.

The findings

Fourth Grade State Level

  • At the state level, public school students’ scale scores were higher in 2011 than 2009 in four states (Alabama, Hawaii, Maryland, and Massachusetts).
    • Two states saw decreases in their scores (Missouri and South Dakota).
  • The percent of students reaching the Proficient level in 2011 ranged from 19 percent in the District of Columbia to 50 percent in Massachusetts.
    • Three states (Louisiana, Maryland, and Pennsylvania) significantly increased the percent of their public school students reaching the Proficient level from 2009 to 2011.
  • Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Virginia achieved the highest scale scores, while the District of Columbia, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, and New Mexico earned the lowest scale scores.
  • When it came to educating minority students, Black students who attended Department of Defense schools (DoDEA) scored higher than Black students in any other state or jurisdiction. DoDEA schools, along with Maryland, did the same for their Hispanic students.

Fourth Grade National Level

  • Nationally, scores did not increase between 2009 and 2011. As a matter of fact, scores have remained unchanged since 2007.
    • However, since the first year of NAEP in 1992, scale scores in reading have increased by nearly a half a year’s worth of learning (4 points). 
  • The percent of fourth-graders scoring at or above NAEP’s proficient level has increased slightly since 1992 (29 percent in 1992 vs. 34 percent in 2011).
    • Moreover, the percent of fourth-graders scoring below NAEP’s basic level has decreased slightly from 38 percent in 1992 to 33 percent in 2011.
  • Since 2009, achievement gaps have remained relatively unchanged, because there was no significant change in performance for White, Black, or Hispanic students.
    • The Black/White achievement gap was 26 points while the Hispanic/White gap was 24 points.
    • However, since 1992 the Black/White achievement gap has decreased from 32 points to 25 points, which has reduced the gap by about 20 percent. 

Eighth Grade State Level

  • At the eighth grade level, 10 states (Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, and Rhode Island) improved their scores from 2009 to 2011. No state had a decline in scores. 
  • Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Jersey obtained the highest scores, followed by Vermont, Montana, New Hampshire, and DoDEA schools. On the other hand, Alabama, California, the District of Columbia and West Virginia lagged furthest behind.
  • Just as in the fourth grade, eighth graders in DoDEA schools outperformed Black students in all other states/jurisdictions. DoDEA schools also had the highest-scoring Hispanic students.

Eighth Grade National Level

  • Nationally, scores increased by one point from 2009 to 2011 and have increased by five points since 1992.
  • The percent of students reaching NAEP’s proficient level has increased from 29 percent in 1992 to 34 percent in 2011. The percent scoring below NAEP’s basic level decreased from 31 percent to 24 during the same time period.
  • As at the fourth grade level, the Black/White achievement gap remained statistically unchanged between 2009 and 2011, although Black students increased their score by three points.
    • But between 1992 and 2011, the gap has narrowed by five points.
  • On the other hand, the Hispanic/White narrowed by two points between 2009 and 2011 and by four points since 1992.

For more information on NAEP, check out the Center’s report The Proficiency Debate: A guide to NAEP achievement levels. – Jim Hull

NAEP Reading Report

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012457.pdf





October 28, 2011

STEM for all

Filed under: 21st century education,High school,Report Summary — Tags: , , , , , , — Jim Hull @ 4:18 pm

You may not think of Advanced Manufacturing, Utilities and Transportation, and Mining when you think of working in a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) related field. But according to a report from Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce these are just some of the industries, historical providers of blue-collar, middle class jobs, that are now looking for STEM workers. And although overall jobs are disappearing from most of these industries there is actually a shortage of STEM workers in these fields.

There is also a supply shortage of more elite STEM occupations, such as scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists, but focusing on the shortage in these high-level occupations overshadows the fact that the demand for workers in STEM occupations is increasing at every level, not just the college-educated.

Yet the problem does not end there. Not only is there a shortage of workers in STEM occupations, but of even greater to concern is the fact there is a shortage of workers in non-STEM fields that require basic competency in STEM skills. Specifically, the report states:

“The concern for STEM shortages tends to focus on the possibility of an insufficient supply of STEM workers, but the deeper problem is a broader scarcity of workers with basic STEM competencies across the entire economy.”

Simply put, math and science education shouldn’t be limited to preparing top students for STEM careers. All students have the basic STEM skills they need to compete in a more technologically demanding job market. The good news from the report is that our K-12 system already produces enough talent in math and science to fill our need for traditional STEM workers.

Yet, 75 percent of these students do not go onto major in a STEM related field in college. To make matters worse, of the students who do start college with a STEM major, just 38 percent graduate with a STEM degree. Although our students are taking the math and science courses in high school to be prepared for STEM work, are those courses are rigorous enough to adequately prepare students for a career in a STEM-related field?  

Either way, the report highlights the fact STEM education should not be reserved for our best and brightest students. In the near future, STEM skills will be a basic requirement for many of the jobs our current students will be applying for. It’s imperative our schools provide all our students the rigorous math and science courses they need to compete in the 21st Century job market. – Jim Hull

To see what percent of jobs will be STEM jobs in your state by 2018, check this out.





Older Posts »
RSS Feed