Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Pitt 9 19


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Pitt 9 19

  1. 1. Federalism and Education Reform LRDC 50th Anniversary Marshall S. Smith 9/19/2013
  2. 2. Overview • US education – a federalist system. • Is the US system effective? Quality? Equality? • 4 current approaches to education reform: – – – – Governance and management Choice and competition Human Capital reform Testing and aggressive accountability • A different approach: evidence, improvement, persistence, technology • Going to Scale 12/01/13 2
  3. 3. Brief History x 12/01/13 3
  4. 4. 1607-1870 • 1600s – mid 1700s: First schools, tutors, (local), private • 1789: 10th Amendment (states) and enumerated powers authority (federal) • 1830s -1900 Common school movement (states and local) • 1870 14th Amendment: Equality, (federal) 12/01/13 4
  5. 5. 1870-1960 • 1870-1915 Growth state authority • 1919 Vocational Education Act (federal) • 1900 - 1940 Progressive education movement: One best system (local and state) • 1954 Brown v Board (federal/equality) • 1958 Sputnik – NDEA (federal) 12/01/13 5
  6. 6. 1960-1974 Equality: Federal Era • • • • • • • • 1963 March on Washington 1964 Civil Rights Act, Head Start 1965 Voting Rights Act 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Title I: Education for Disadvantaged 1967 Bilingual Education Act 1969-1970 Desegregation of the South 1966-1972 Experimenting Society 1973 Education for All Handicapped Act 12/01/13 6
  7. 7. 1976-2000 State/federal reform Balance • 1978 Carter improves ESEA in late 70s • 1983: Nation at Risk Report • 1982: Reagan reduced federal role but in 1988 - Title I state assessments and accountability for Title I students. • 1988-1992 Rise of standards -- systemic reform: Governors, civil rights groups, unions, business leaders, education groups. 12/01/13 7
  8. 8. 1994 - 2001: Clinton: ESEA: State Standards Based Reforms +Charters • To bring coherence, focus and equality to pubic system. Provide public choice via charters. • Student Standards: leveraged Title I for standards & systemic reform for all students in a state. • Align resources to Standards – Curriculum – Professional development – Assessments and Accountability (performance standards) – Human and social capital 12/01/13 8
  9. 9. 2002-Now • 2002 - 2013 NCLB: Retained standards based reform – more testing (3 to 8 grades) with new federal accountability sanctions. • 2009-2013: NCLB + Other federal initiatives: – Race to the Top: Teacher Evaluation; failing schools: – Waivers from NCLB accountability – Preschool initiative • 2007 -2013: Development and implementation of Common Core standards. (States and locals) 12/01/13 9
  10. 10. Federal System looks coherent and top down 12/01/13 10
  11. 11. US Federalism – Three tiered system – complicated in practice • Lots of feedback loops -- not just top down.. • Politics in difficult democracy at all levels: school boards local and state, other elected officials; public unions. • Interconnections – lots of people and institutions have a stake. • Layers of regulation: aging programs in a new environment. • Unlike other countries 12/01/13 11
  12. 12. Taking Stock: Evidence about how the system has worked • Multiple purposes– academics, daycare, socialization. Need institutions for K-8. • Complexity make system resilient. • Ponderous – political – slow to change. • Lacks links to other systems (health, preschool..) • System appears same across states, districts, schools but complexity creates variability in resources, outcomes. • Is something working? -- economy, democracy relatively quite strong for 100 years. • Lets look at education achievement and attainment. 12/01/13 12
  13. 13. How are we doing? Were we ever first in World? • Data from earliest international assessment measures. Never first in test scores. US 11th of 12 nations in 1967 math and science international assessments. Now improving. • High school graduation rates and college going. First in both in mid 1900s. Not improving very quickly and relative to other developed nations we are falling behind. • University system still strongest in world. 12/01/13 13
  14. 14. Progress in achievement over past 20 years • US scores from the National Assessment of Education Progress – total scores and gaps by subgroups including race, poverty and language and at achievement gaps. • Then results comparing US to other nations on the two main international assessments, TIMSS and PISA. 12/01/13 14
  15. 15. US Gain scores last 20 years: NAEP Math 8th grade 10pt = grade level 1992 2011 2011-1992 Total 267 283 16 pt (1.6 gl) White 276 293 Black 236 261 Hispanic 247 269 Asian 290 302 17 pt (1.7 gl) 25 pt. (2.5 gl) 22pt. (2.2 gl) 12 pt. (1.2 gl) 12/01/13 15
  16. 16. US gain scores last 20 years: NAEP Reading 4th grade 11pt = grade level 1992 2011 2011-1992 Total 215 220 5 pt (0.5 gl) White 223 230 Black 191 205 Hispanic 194 205 Asian 215 234 7 pt (0.7 gl) 14 pt. (1.4 gl) 11 pt. (1.1 gl) 19 pt. (1.9 gl) 12/01/13 16
  17. 17. Poverty and English Language learners: NAEP 8th Math. 1998 2011 2011 - 1998 Total 269 283 Yes Free Reduc Lunch 250 269 No 277 295 Yes ELL 226 244 No 270 285 14 pt (1.4 gl) 19 pt (1.9 gl) 18 pt (1.8 gl). 18 pt. (1.8 gl) 15 pt. (1.5 gl) 12/01/13 17
  18. 18. Poverty and English Language learners: NAEP 4th reading. 1998 2011 2011 - 1998 Total 213 220 Yes Free Reduc Lunch 195 207 No 226 234 Yes ELL 174 188 No 215 224 7 pt (0.7gl)) 12 pt (1.2 gl) 8 pt (0.8 gl). 14 pt. (1.4 gl) 9 pt. (0.9 gl) 12/01/13 18
  19. 19. International comparisons: TIMSS and PISA assessments differ in their aims • Trends in International Math and Science studies (TIMSS) serves a traditional purpose of testing student knowledge of the content that they have opportunity to learn by grades 4 and 8. • Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) says their assessment is forward-looking, focusing on young people’s ability to use knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges, rather than merely on the extent to which they have mastered a specific school curriculum. “ 12/01/13 19
  20. 20. International: 8th grade TIMSS Science 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 513 515 527 520 525 Singapor 580 e 568 578 567 590 England 538 544 542 533 US Finland 533 535 MA 552 556 567 •TIMSS measures learning from the curriculum. •US gains slowly – compare to England, way behind Singapore •MA second in world ahead of roughly 55 other jurisdictions and nations 12/01/13 20
  21. 21. TIMSS 8 grade 2011 th MATH Science Child Poverty Size Finland 514 552 5-7% ~ 6 million MA 561 567 ~ 15% ~ 6 million MINN 545 533 ~ 15% ~ 5.4m N Carolina 537 532 ~ 26% ~ 9.8m Ontario 512 521 ~ 15% ~ 13m 12/01/13 21
  22. 22. PISA 2009 • PISA Academic Performers • • • • • • • • • • • Science Score Reading Score Math Score Shanghai, 575 Shanghai, 556 Shanghai 600 Finland 554 Korea 539 Singapore 562 Hong Kong 549 Finland 536 Hong Kong 555 Singapore 542 Hong Kong, 533 Korea 546 Japan 539 Singapore 526 Taiwan 543 UK 514 UK 494 UK 492 Canada 529 Canada 524 Canada 527 US 502 US 500 US 487 US Asian 536 US Asian 541 US Asian 524 Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 12/01/13 22
  23. 23. Summary • US student achievement has gained some over past 20 years. • Lags a few developed world nations in content knowledge and basic skills (TIMSS) and lags more on advanced skills such as applying knowledge to new and challenging problems (PISA). Parts of system (MA) do very well on TIMSS. • Gaps between subgroups of US students are persistent and large. Huge problem! • Lag behind many OECD nations in secondary and college student attainment. US gaps persistent. • Girls out attaining boys -- similar in other OECD countries. 12/01/13 23
  24. 24. Summary: Challenges: • Quality: Improve basic and especially advanced knowledge and skills: Behind many OECD countries in problem solving, analysis, collaboration, transfer. Address issues of lagging secondary school and college graduation. • Equality: Reduce Huge Gaps: Poverty, English Language, Race, Gender (Achievement, Attainment). 12/01/13 24
  25. 25. Four current “remedies” to improve system, create equality • • • • Simplify and rationalize governance More choice and competition Aggressive Accountability for schools. Narrow focus on human capital. (Teacher evaluation systems) 12/01/13 25
  26. 26. Remedy One: Governance • Strategy One: Piece meal. –Mayors replace superintendents, eliminate school –boards. Governors exert more influence. –Happening in a few places: little positive evidence . • Strategy two: Systemic. –Eliminate political elements. Eliminate federal role. Professional educators manage and determine direction. –Would take decades, constitutional change? 14000 elected boards would create political firestorm. Seems unlikely! 12/01/13 26
  27. 27. Remedy 2 Choice •Vouchers for private schools – Data not promising. •Charters: Roughly 5000 (5+ percent) Public choice. Little apparent effect in transferring good practice. Average achievement scores less or same: Exceptions: Few charter management organizations (CMOs) – Aspire, Hi Tech High, KIPP, etc. •Portfolio districts -- NYC, Washington DC, New Orleans: Not much positive evidence. •Many large districts already have a lot of choice. •A place in reform for charters, especially good CMOs. Cannot expect overall strong system change. 12/01/13 27
  28. 28. Remedy 3 Aggressive Accountability • Some favor ramping up NCLB accountability formula for schools, districts and teachers. • Clinton ESEA accountability tested in 3 grades, modest state determined accountability; • NCLB 7 grades assessments, breakout by subgroup – created federal requirements -- much more rigid and punitive accountability. • NCLB requirements retained in Obama years – Congress – administration could not pass ESEA. 12/01/13 28
  29. 29. Remedy 3: Does Aggressive Accountability work? (school based) • No high achieving nation has such a system. • Almost all nations focus on high stakes testing for students – twice or so during their school years -- they determine options for students. • Data comparing Clinton years with Bush and Obama years show no added value favoring increased accountability. (see charts) Few gains and little gap closing • Significant unintended consequences: – narrows curriculum. With multiple choice tests reduces writing, problem solving, cooperation. – Low teacher retention—Reduces public support. 12/01/13 29
  30. 30. Comparison: Effects of Moderate (1996 to 2003) v Aggressive Accountability (2003 to 2011) 8th grade NAEP Math: 1996 2003 2011 2003-1996 Pt gain & grade/deca 2011-2003 Total 269 276 283 White 279 287 293 7pt 0.8g/dec ade 6pt 0.8/g decade Black 239 252 262 7pt 1.0g/dec ade 8pt 1.1g/dec ade 13pt 1.9g/d Hispanic 249 258 269 9pt 1.3g/d 11 pt 1.4g/d 12/01/13 10pt 1.25g/d 30
  31. 31. Comparison: Moderate (1996 to 2003) v Aggressive Accountability (2004 to 2011) 4th grade NAEP Reading: 1998 2003 2011 2003-1996 Before NCLB (5 yrs) 2011-2003 After NCLB (8 years) Total 213 216 220 3pt 0.6gr/dec 4pt. 0.5g/d White 223 227 230 4pt 0.8g/d 3pt 0.4gr/d Black 192 197 205 5 pt 1.0g/d 8 pt 1.0g/d Hispanic 192 199 205 7pt 1.4g/d 6 pt 0.8g/d Asian 211 225 234 14pt 2.8g/yd 9pt 1.1 gr/d 12/01/13 31
  32. 32. NCLB effects • NAEP 8th grade Math: • Total nation and Hispanic gains per year similar before and after NCLB. Whites and Blacks gained faster before NCLB than after. • Blacks reduced gaps with whites both before and after NCLB but more before NCLB. The Hispanic/white gap did not change before and decreased some after NCLB passed. • NAEP 4th grade reading: – Total nation and black gains per year are similar before and after NCLB. Whites, Hispanics and Asians gained faster before than after NCLB. – The black/white gap was slightly reduced prior to NCLB and was somewhat more reduced after NCLB. The Hispanic/white gap was reduced prior to NCLB and slightly less reduced after. 12/01/13 32
  33. 33. Remedy 4 Increase Human Capital • Improve quality of teachers, principals, and superintendents. Two basic approaches. Use Accountability to incentivize and Improvement. • Accountability “reform” is NCLB and Obama human capital strategy: Use test scores as primary measure of teacher quality. Little careful attention paid to improvement. 12/01/13 33
  34. 34. Does teacher accountability using test scores improve teacher performance? • Seen that aggressive school performance accountability is not related to added value of schools. • Long history of studies indicate that aggressive performance incentives or punishments do not provide good results in complex environments like schools and classrooms. Rand study, NRC study. • Teacher evaluation by test scores complicated by psychometric problems -- effectiveness varies by year, by grade level taught by content area, by year of teaching. • So far lots of complexity -- little evidence of effectiveness. • Accountability through transparency and on-time improvement and support is an alternative. 12/01/13 34
  35. 35. Human Capital Improvement: Use evidence based methods. • Other successful nations focus mostly on improvement. Finland, Canada, Singapore. • Use improvement methodology. Rapid feedback • Teacher and principal performance reviews critical. Multipart teacher assessment. Professional monitoring – spot problems by November. • Sustained, high intensity, professional development – focused on improving practice. • Professional networks for support. • Teacher mentoring inducation for first two years. • Coaches – strong evidence of effectiveness. • Greatly strengthen pre-service teacher training. 12/01/13 35
  36. 36. Summary • None of the high intensity “reforms” (dramatic change in governance, greatly increased choice, and increased intensity of school and teacher accountability) show clear evidence or promise of regularly increasing quality or closing gaps within a 10-15 year period. • However, smart, moderated and sustained change in three of these areas (choice, accountability, human capital) show evidence that they are useful in a reform strategy. 12/01/13 36
  37. 37. A fifth approach: Improvement and Equalizing Opportunity: Two Parts. • An overall strategy for total system improvement of achievement and attainment. • A specific strategy to provide opportunity to learn for all low income and English Language Learners. This strategy would be embedded in total system improvement effort. 12/01/13 37
  38. 38. Improvement Strategy • Retain state standards based reform – Adopt or adapt very high quality college and career ready standards such as Common Core. – Aligned Curriculum – Aligned Human capital strategies – Aligned assessments and Improvement accountability. • Use deliberate continuous improvement strategies. • Emphasize social capital -- team effort. • Create institutions that are socially, emotionally and physically safe for students and adults. • Eliminate “magic bullets” and projects not directly related to reforms. Reduce categorical and regulatory structures • States, districts commit to following strategy for 8 to 12 years. 12/01/13 38
  39. 39. Equality Strategy supportive and vigorous strategy for closing the achievement and attainment gaps. • National effort to prepare low income and ELL students for school: – – – – – health, Nutrition pre-school, Academic focus: develop rich oral language production/vocabulary. Non-academic focus: develop self-regulatory skills • Strategic powerful reforms during school years • • • • • 12/01/13 In context of overall strategy: Equalize resources in states and districts. Language development, Supportive mentors Mindset 39
  40. 40. Supportive new evidence for four parts of the proposal • • • • Use of common core Continuous improvement Preschool Language 12/01/13 40
  41. 41. Evidence: Common Core standards: Improving Quality and Depth • Common Core: Math, English Language Arts, Science. • Implementation: Major reform in today schools. Wide support. • Not a curriculum!!! A powerful and engaging template for state standards based reform. • College and career ready. Competitive with other parts of world. • Coherence: Building blocks. Learning progressions. • Enable and promote teacher professional networks. • 45 states -- even if only 35 states they are now sharing content and strategies for effective teaching and learning. • Many think this is the most important reform of education since the 60s. 12/01/13 41
  42. 42. Common Core Standards as reform driver for ELA • The standards call for ”critical types of content for all students, including classic myths and stories from around the world, foundational U.S. documents, seminal works of American literature, and the writings of Shakespeare," but states, districts, and schools make content decisions. • Standards for writing include: All students achieve the ability to "write logical arguments based on substantive claims, sound reasoning, and relevant evidence." The standards also focus on students' mastery of research, opinion writing, analytical, and presentation skills. • The speaking and listening standards require students to "gain, evaluate, and present increasingly complex information, ideas, and evidence." Use and understanding of media and technology are also required. 12/01/13 42
  43. 43. Common Core and math • At the K–5 level, provide students with a "solid foundation in whole numbers, arithmetic, fractions and decimals—build the foundation to successfully learn more demanding math concepts and procedures, and move into applications," • The standards "stress not only procedural skill but also conceptual understanding," to develop students' skills more deeply. Middle school standards prepare students for rigorous math courses at the high school level. • At the high school level, students practice applying mathematical ways of thinking to real world issues and challenges." The standards "set a rigorous definition of college and career readiness; students should develop a depth of understanding and ability to apply mathematics to novel situations, as college students and employees regularly do" 12/01/13 43
  44. 44. Evidence: Improving Quality and Depth: Continuous Improvement • Sustained effort toward continuous improvement culture -- at all levels: schools, states, districts. Examples Long Beach, MA, Union City, Montgomery County, Austin, Ontario, Garden Grove, Finland, Singapore, China working on it. (Back office and front office) • In classrooms effective use of formative assessment, professional support networks, rapid feedback loops. • Social Capital as well as human capital -- Networks, support systems, trust. Bryk , others data. 12/01/13 44
  45. 45. Evidence: New Preschool Findings of long-term effects • Belief over past 40 years -- typical Head Start like preschool had short term achievement gains lost by 2nd grade. • At the same time some high cost “Cadillac” preschool programs seemed to have the same loss of effects – but follow--up studies showed long term gains appearing in late adolescence -- fewer drop out, more going to college, fewer becoming pregnant, fewer being incarcerated. Large cost benefit gains to society -- incalculable gains to students. • Head Start not a Cadillac program -- because programs differed most of us thought there would be no long-term effects. No specific Head Start follow-up studies. 12/01/13 45
  46. 46. New Preschool Evidence • But recent data suggest otherwise - three studies with follow-up data from Head Start indicate that long-term effects were clear and just short of those of Cadillac preschools. • One long term national survey study – not designed to assess Head Start found enough examples of HS students with non-HS siblings to create long-term trend lines. Achievement gains for HS kids disappeared in 2nd and 3rd grades -- but study also found long-term gains in lower dropout rates, increased college going, fewer incarcerations, less pregnancy. • Other studies found similar results. • Not sure what the causal mechanisms are is -- postulate non cognitive effects like self – regulation or mindset. • But policy implications seem clear!! Very important findings. 12/01/13 46
  47. 47. Language Study • “Meaningful Differences “describes a major study of the size of working language young children and their mothers. • Children from different backgrounds typically develop language skills around the same age, but the subsequent rate of vocabulary growth is strongly influenced by how much parents talk to and encourage talking with their children. • Children from professional families (who were found to talk to their children more) gain vocabulary at a quicker rate than their peers in working class and welfare recipient families. • By age three, the observed cumulative vocabulary for children in the professional families was about 1,100 words. For children from working class families, the observed cumulative vocabulary was about 750 words and for children from welfare-recipient families it was just above 500 words. 12/01/13 47
  48. 48. More Language • New studies in early K-6 classrooms about power of accountable talk – other names for similar phenomena. • Productive, accountable talk by students -- being asked to explain a concept or the solution to a problem – being treated as a real person when they ask a question -- talking with – not talking to. • All of this expands vocabulary and increases understanding. Other oral language and vocabulary interventions also work. 12/01/13 48
  49. 49. Still more language: English Language Learners • Many students in CA and throughout the nation have a native language not English -- English not spoken at home. • CA law is that a child in this situation may spend only one year in school learning English before she is tested in English for content areas. • Studies clear that original language ought to be learned well -- lots of oral interaction – then first reading taught in the that language. • Then second language introduced in 2nd grade orally with lots of give and take and then reading later -- they learn to read well in English after learning to read well in native language – they are then bilingual – a gift!! They are special. • A more enlightened policy world might challenge all kids to have two languages – a pathway to deeper understanding of language and culture. 12/01/13 49
  50. 50. Challenge: How could such a solution go to scale • Could we take these two strategies to scale in the US complex federalist system? Or at least to most of the states. • There is evidence, examples, need, and with the exception perhaps of the bilingual approach not generally disruptive. • Powerful challenge to conventional ways of governing -- expecting results in a few years, “magic bullets”, changing superintendents bi-yearly. • Separate the two strategies. 12/01/13 50
  51. 51. Making Strategy 1 happen • There are similarities between the early 1990s State standards based reforms and the current effort to implement the common core standards. • In both the states (Governors, Superintendents, state boards) exercised leadership and garnered widespread support from the business, civil rights, labor and considerable bipartisan support. • Though the two cases have some basic similarities the situation in Washington is very different now than in early 1990s. The best we can hope for from current Washington is support an environment that does not get in the way of a local and state effective implementation of the common core reforms • This suggests that we need another, more bottom up, approach. 12/01/13 51
  52. 52. Other differences between 1990 and now that might help • High quality common core standards • Understanding importance of Continuous Improvement and of perseverance and practice. • Technology -- as part of the instructional systems and as part of the improvement strategy. 12/01/13 52
  53. 53. How to make this happen? A mechanism • Need a mechanism to spur State and District bottom-up reform. • We find great enthusiasm for common core reforms among teachers and other educators. • States and local districts hard at work implementing the new standards and related parts of the system. • The process of implementation will be lengthy, requiring change based on data and smart feedback loops -- it will take a long time. 12/01/13 53
  54. 54. Thus a possible approach to Strategy 1 • Implement Common Core – use feedback to improve work in classroom, prof development, training of principals others. This is a practical example of continuous improvement. • This process of continuous improvement could be deliberately spread to other activities in schools and districts. • Technology could support: use for professional networks, for analysis of data from assessments, for record-keeping etc. • Commit to ten years. Implement with these processes the other parts of Strategy I. 12/01/13 54
  55. 55. A California story • Until 2010 state limping along blindly working on federal reforms -- little capacity at state level -some development of policy infrastructure. • A half a dozen big districts doing smart things on their own (Long Beach, Garden Grove etc. ) • Gov Brown passes bill that eliminates 2/3rds of CA categorical programs and puts in place an 8 year implementation of a weighted pupil formula for the state -- this is a start on creating an environment where districts and schools can make sense of effective policy. 12/01/13 55
  56. 56. More on CA • The common core implementation now involves various organizations of districts, county offices, local foundations, creating networks of districts to implement common core -- creating teacher professional networks to help support teaching of Common core. • Independent groups working with CDE to create greater capacity. Areas of technology and professional improvement. 12/01/13 56
  57. 57. Implementing Strategy 2: Creating Equal Opportunities • This is the hard one - it probably requires the Congress to act rationally. • Getting everyone ready for school requires preschool (2 years), health, and nutrition. Some Districts and states could do this. New Jersey does it. • In theory could be done easily by Washington: retain Health Care, keep food stamps in place, increase Head Start by 50% and change the curriculum. Very, very little additional cost and huge savings in the short and long runs. • 12/01/13 57
  58. 58. More implementing strategy 2 • At the local state levels implement the additional measures for Phase 2 into the schools: expanding language, evidence based ELL provisions in place, mentors (supportive adults) for middle and secondary schools, extra support for kids falling behind, monitor Mindset (students and teachers), use curriculum and instruction that engages the students. • Create multiple pathways in secondary schools as do the Finns and others. • Provide resources in fair way. 12/01/13 58
  59. 59. Creating a priority of improving educational quality and equal opportunity is not only an education issue • It is the symbol of a society that values everyone. Leave the world a better place. • Even in midst of what appears to be a dysfunctional Congress and a fractured nation there is a sense of possibility among many educators. • Compare to feeling in the 60s. 12/01/13 59
  60. 60. Final Thoughts • These seem to be very boring solutions -- practical steps, using evidence, hard work, sustained effort. • These solutions need to be done - or we will slip even more – to accomplish the push for equality we must create serious smart learning environments (strategy 1). • On horizon are major changes through technology: MOOCs for secondary school, cognitive tutors, flipped classrooms, technology for language learning, science experiments, credit for performance, lots more individualized and independent learning. • I believe they too will work best in an environment that supports quality and equality. 12/01/13 60