A Quiet Crisis

939 views

Published on

A Quiet Crisis - Shirley Ann Jackson

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
939
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A Quiet Crisis

  1. 1. A QUIET CRISIS: BROADENING THE PIPELINE OF STUDENTS IN K-12 MATHEMATICS NCTM ANNUAL MEETING 2004
  2. 2. <ul><li>Quiet ‘kwī-ət </li></ul><ul><li>marked by little or no motion or activity </li></ul><ul><li>Crisis ‘krī-səs </li></ul><ul><li>an unstable or crucial time whose outcome will make a decisive difference, for better or for worse </li></ul><ul><li>Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>We tire hearing of ‘crises,’ but consider that: </li></ul><ul><li>There is declining student interest in mathematics, computer science, physical sciences and engineering </li></ul><ul><li>Half of the technical workforce is over 40 and one-third of technical workers are over 50 </li></ul><ul><li>Despite decades of efforts, this workforce is over 75% male and 80% white </li></ul><ul><li>And, there is an increase of foreign-born technical workers, from 11.2% in 1980 to 19.3% in 2000. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Higher Education Pipeline <ul><li>Minority = Black/African American, Hispanic, and American Indian </li></ul><ul><li>Source: Joan Burrelli, NSF, based on 1999 Common Core of Data, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES); NCES, 1998 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey; UCLA Higher Education Research Institute,1998 American Freshman Survey (estimate); and NCES, 1998 IPEDS Completions Survey </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>A world-class science and engineering workforce is indispensable: </li></ul><ul><li>Innovation accounts for 50% of long-term US economic growth </li></ul><ul><li>Human capital is our most precious innovation asset </li></ul><ul><li>The growth of science, math and engineering capacity among our worldwide economic competitors is considerable. </li></ul>Why this Matters
  6. 6. NCTM Professional Oath <ul><li>This matters for more personal reasons: </li></ul><ul><li>“ Students are my first priority </li></ul><ul><li>I promise that I will use my knowledge to benefit students. </li></ul><ul><li>I will ensure that students in my classes receive the information and support they need to study mathematics and improve their knowledge. </li></ul><ul><li>I will encourage all students of differing abilities to participate in intellectually honest math courses and will use a variety of strategies to help each student learn.” </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><ul><li>BEST is a public-private partnership building a stronger, more diverse U.S. workforce in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. </li></ul></ul>Mission
  8. 8. Goals <ul><li>In other words…. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>BEST seeks to ensure that the current crisis remains quiet no longer and that the decisive outcome is for the better. </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Background <ul><li>Launched September 2001 </li></ul><ul><li>$2M Seed funding from 7 federal agencies, led by the National Science Foundation </li></ul><ul><li>Corporate and Foundation Sponsors: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Alcoa Foundation Lockheed Martin </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>American Institutes for Research Lounsbery Foundation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CH2M Hill QUALCOMM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hewlett Packard Microsoft </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Pfizer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Intel Foundation TXU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W. K. Kellogg Foundation </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Strategy <ul><ul><li>Convene the nation’s most respected practitioners and researchers to identify effective practices to increase diversity in pre-K-12, higher education, and the workplace. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disseminate findings and work with stakeholders to drive systemwide change. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Empower districts and schools to implement change </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Leverage Points <ul><li>BEST looks to: </li></ul><ul><li>PreK-12 as the foundation of mathematics, science and pre-engineering knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Higher Ed for specialization and degree completion </li></ul><ul><li>Workplace for a focus on retention and advancement </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Solutions require effective programs </li></ul><ul><li>… and program effectiveness </li></ul><ul><li>must rest on evidence. </li></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>BEST’s PreK-12 Methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1) Define an Approach </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2) Create a National Sample </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3) Apply Criteria to Rate Programs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4) Distill Design Principles </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Define an Approach <ul><li>BEST, in collaboration with the American Institutes of Research, developed a protocol to guide an in-depth analysis of research evidence. </li></ul><ul><li>The protocol defined what could be considered a rigorous study by assigning meaningful ratings of the research evidence for the outcomes of students who experience a given intervention and those who do not. </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>Verified if 5 studies of acceptable rigor conducted by independent evaluators have substantially positive results. At least two of the studies must be of high rigor, and none of the studies of acceptable rigor can have substantially negative findings. </li></ul><ul><li>Probable if the results of two or more acceptably rigorous studies by independent researchers or evaluators show positive immediate or longer-term effects and no substantially negative studies. </li></ul><ul><li>Notable if at least one acceptably rigorous study is substantially positive and no studies have substantially negative results. </li></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>Merits further research investment if annual data on student outcomes from developers or from less rigorous evaluations contains descriptive evidence that a program is successfully serving one or more of the targeted populations. </li></ul><ul><li>Information not available if programs have little research evidence of effectiveness, or descriptive evidence of student outcomes was not sufficient to indicate that the program is successfully serving one of the targeted populations. </li></ul>
  17. 17. National Sample <ul><li>From the collective professional judgment of the Blue Ribbon Panel: </li></ul><ul><li>Over 200 programs were nominated </li></ul><ul><li>34 programs were culled out for analysis representing a cross-section of interventions varying in content, purpose, grade level, mode of delivery and sponsorship. </li></ul><ul><li>BEST makes no claim that every worthy program was considered. </li></ul>
  18. 18. Apply Criteria <ul><li>Probable </li></ul><ul><li>Project SEED ( Special Elementary Education for the Disadvantaged ) </li></ul><ul><li>Direct Instruction Mathematics </li></ul><ul><li>Notable </li></ul><ul><li>AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination ) </li></ul><ul><li>Algebra Project </li></ul><ul><li>FAST (Foundational Approaches in Science Teaching ) </li></ul><ul><li>Gateway to Higher Education </li></ul><ul><li>Project GRAD (Graduation Really Achieves Dreams) </li></ul><ul><li>Puente </li></ul><ul><li>Yup’ik Mathematics </li></ul>
  19. 19. Design Principles <ul><li>Defined outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Persistence </li></ul><ul><li>Personalization </li></ul><ul><li>Challenging content </li></ul><ul><li>Engaged adults </li></ul>
  20. 20. “ Anti Design Principles” <ul><li>Defined outcomes </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Blurred Vision </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Intervention du jour </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Over-reliance on testing to measure performance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Competing Agendas </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Persistence </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discretionary Funding </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Political Bias </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inconsistent Leadership </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Motivation </li></ul></ul></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>Personalization </li></ul><ul><ul><li>School & Class sizes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Insufficient Time to Develop Relationships </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>among teachers, parents and students </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Challenging Content </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Teaching to Inadequate Tests </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitively Undemanding Curricula </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>Engaged Adults </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Safety </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Workload </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Attitude </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of Cultural Competencies </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. Effective PreK-12 programs must be more closely aligned to system-wide reform. Disseminate Findings
  24. 24. System-wide <ul><li>Premise: A rising tide lifts all boats </li></ul><ul><li>Leverage Points: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Teachers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Curriculum </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>School and Class Size </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Technology </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Targeted <ul><li>Premise: The PreK-12 system cannot meet </li></ul><ul><li> the challenge alone </li></ul><ul><li>Leverage Points: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Individual Students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mentoring </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Parents </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Role Models </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Empower <ul><li>Help communities anticipate and meet the challenge of broadening the pipeline: </li></ul><ul><li>Congressional Briefing </li></ul><ul><li>Department of Defense </li></ul><ul><li>San Diego Foundation </li></ul>
  27. 27. District Appropriate Questions <ul><li>Defined Outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>1) How well defined are the outcomes of the science, mathematics or pre-engineering program? </li></ul><ul><li>2) Are these outcomes fully understood by students, teachers, parents, school boards and other educational decision makers? </li></ul><ul><li>3) What evidence indicates the desired outcomes are being reached? </li></ul>
  28. 28. <ul><li>Persistence </li></ul><ul><li> 1) How long has the program lasted? </li></ul><ul><li> 2) Has the program shown the capacity to scale up in different settings? </li></ul><ul><li>3) Has the program proved sustainable in changing conditions? Why and how? </li></ul>
  29. 29. <ul><li>Personalization </li></ul><ul><li>1) How is one-on-one contact between students and teachers organized; e.g., mentors, tutors, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>2) How are teachers, tutors and mentors selected and trained? </li></ul><ul><li>3) What indicators provide evidence that significant personalization has been achieved and has been effective? </li></ul>
  30. 30. <ul><li>Challenging Content </li></ul><ul><li>1) Does content match state standards and assessments as well as national standards? </li></ul><ul><li>2) Is mastery of content a high expectation for all students and is this well communicated to students and parents? </li></ul><ul><li>3) How much pertinent training do program instructors have and what level of credential is required? </li></ul>
  31. 31. <ul><li>Engaged Adults </li></ul><ul><li>1) Do all adults engaged in the program buy into it and believe in the capacity of all students to succeed? </li></ul><ul><li>2) What is the consistency of staff involved in the program over time? </li></ul><ul><li>3) Is parental support sought and encouraged? Is the level of support measured? </li></ul>
  32. 32. Read the Report <ul><li>WHAT IT TAKES: </li></ul><ul><li>BROADENING THE BASE OF </li></ul><ul><li>PRE-K –12 MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION </li></ul><ul><li>www.bestworkforce.org </li></ul>

×