Education-Watch

What is the achievement gap?

We talk about the achievement gap all the time in education and more frequently in greater politics as well. While many know what the achievement gap is in terms of high-level themes and ideas, I sometimes wonder if enough people know the actual data that drives the divide.

Valerie Strauss at the Washington Post may have had the same concern. This evening she released a brief article pointing to the numbers behind what we know as the achievement gap.

----------------------------------------------------

Here is the short list:

-- 22% of children in the US live below the poverty line (as of the end of 2011)

-- 6% of white children, 15% of Asian children, 19% of Pacific Islander children, 31% of American Indian children, 38% of Hispanic children, and 42% of black children go to high-poverty schools (as of the 2010-2011 school year)

--  5% of school age children (2.7 million kids between 5 and 17) speak English with difficulty

----------------------------------------------------

The article itself has more detail and is a good springboard for getting more of the facts.

Why are states cutting education spending?

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities just released new analysis pointing to troublesome declines in state spending on education. Their research shows that 26 states are budgeting less per student in the 2013 fiscal year than than did for 2012. On top of this 35 states are still spending less per student than they did prior to the recession.

I honestly don't understand how government officials can actively ignore the relationship between quality and equitable education with strong economic performance. 

With so much focus on the presidential election, I hope Americans don't lose sight of their local political priorities.

We spend a lot of time talking about education in presidential elections, but we forget that the federal government accounts for very little of most school districts' budgets (on average only 7%). Education is ultimately a state issue and it is at the state level that we need to hold our politicians the most accountable.

(Source: Huffington Post)

PS

Hong Kong vs National Education

While we have serious problems in our American education system and this is where most of our focus should be allocated, I do think sometimes it is important to understand problems in education elsewhere.

And Hong Kong is certainly facing a major problem in the present day.

Recently, the government of mainland China decided to impose its national education program on Hong Kong, an island technically a part of the greater Chinese nation, but had been allowed considerably more freedom and independence due to most of its development in the modern day occurring under British rule.

The national education program is problematic in that many of the lessons are infused with Chinese communist party propaganda and tends to slightly alter or ignore major historical pieces in China's and the world's histories that don't align with China's government's supported agenda.

Many people in Hong Kong have taken to the streets in protest. This protest is the first major protest in Hong Kong that is directly in opposition to mainland policies.

How much influence should government have over what's learned in schools? How much influence should communities have? What do y'all think is going to happen in Hong Kong?

Successful Mainstreaming

A recent study is praising New York City's Department of Education for successfully preparing its schools for new special education reforms that support "mainstreaming" (this is the practice of having all special needs students, aside from those with extreme conditions, attend class alongside non-special needs students).

This city had previously seen high rates of segregation between special needs and other students. Many special needs kids had to commute out of their assigned school zones in order to attend schools with the necessary support resources.

Reform efforts have been mostly positive with new teacher training and increased staffing of special needs specialists being key hallmarks of the initiative.

Some have questioned though if the city has missed an opportunity to evaluate the funding behind special needs programs. Currently schools are given specific funding allocations per special needs students. This often times creates imbalances in funding and program quality as most programs themselves require a base budget and, once this number is reached, can support a larger number of students equally.

What do you all think of NYC's success? What can be done about how special education is funded?

Who gets the Department of Education's "Race to the Top" funding?

The US Department's $400MM grant program meant to assist local education programs in their efforts to close the achievement gap has been swamped with applications for funding (almost 900).

The program does require applicants to serve student populations characterized by at least a 40% low income student population and to install superintendent, principal, and teacher evaluations by the end of 2015's school year.

There is some question about how applicants are chosen and whether or not initiatives receiving funding have actually been proven successful via research. Ultimately though, I like the direction, but think funding allocation needs to be more deliberate and understanding of the programs' actual chances of success.

A well-known education historian, Diane Ravitch, also questions whether turning this process into a competitions for money is the right cultural norm to set in education.

What do you all think? Should Race to the Top be organized differently?

(Source: USA Today)

PS

International Education Rankings: What's weighing us down?

Alfonzo Porter, author of More Like Barack, Less Like Tupac: Eradicating the Academic Achievement Gap by Countering Decades of the Hip Hop Hoax, wrote a blog post for the Washington Post discussing the reasons behind America's low international rankings in global education.

After reviewing an NASSP (National Association of Secondary School Principals) study of US scores on the 2010 PISA (Program for International Student Assessment), Porter, like many who go through our national PISA results, realized that something was amiss.

The US somewhat mediocre results on PISA have less to do with the overall state of American schools and have more to do with the state of schools mostly serving low SES students. The results of this subgroup seem to significantly depress national results in a way that is unique to the US (for example, if schools with student bodies of 10% or less below the poverty line are reviewed separately, these institutions on average outperform the world considerably).

So why hasn't this fact been made clearer when discussing US standings in education? How do we combat poverty both in our schools and in general? Why aren't we more nationally concerned with the growing rate of child poverty (see recent post)?

The Rule: Separate but Equal?

Deborah Simmons of the Washington Times posted an opinion piece yesterday afternoon tracing the notion of "equality" in our education system.

Her article brought up an interesting point I had never considered before.

Most understand that "separate but equal" does not and cannot exist. As the famous quote from Brown v the Board of Education suggests, "separate but equal is inherently unequal."

So why then is this seemingly the standard for education in this country?

Simmons points out that practices such as the use of lotteries in admissions, basing assigned schools off of zip codes (which is directly tied to income), constantly redrawing boundaries, and ear-marking school resources and funding for specific areas are ultimately in the vein of discriminatory. While maybe not the historically acknowledged "separate but equal" policies, these institutions also prevent every child (of every race and SES) from having access to the best education.

I wonder why we don't think of these practices as we would of historical segregation ..... What do you all think?

Education: Obama v. Romney on the Government's and Private Sector's Roles

The Huffington Post released an article today that runs through the big differences in Obama's and Romney's stances on education in regards to the roles of the private sector and federal government. I've listed the big points below:

------------------------------

Charter Schools and Vouchers:

Obama has embraced charter schools more than his teacher union supporters would have liked. He has redirected funding to the most successful of these programs (notably $50MM to the KIPP network of schools).

Romney would go a step further in support of more private involvement in education. He is calling for a $25B voucher system to support more school choice (beyond the standard public school) for disabled and impoverished students.

------------------------------

For-Profit Colleges

Obama seeks to hold for-profit colleges more accountable for their students' job placements. He is trying to pull federal aid from institutions who seem to support student debt hikes more than vocational opportunity and success.

Romney believe for-profit colleges are generally good and is seeking to repeal the regulations related to Obama's policies listed above. Ryan (Romney's running mate) has also supported cutting Pell Grants as a part of budget tightening. They suggest that these grants may raise the cost of education for everyone else.

------------------------------

Personally, I still think both candidates have been somewhat vague and ambivalent in their positions in education. I am looking forward to the debates ......

Book Review:

Saving the School: The True Story of a Principal, a Teacher, a Coach, a Bunch of Kids and a Year in the Crosshairs of Education Reform

A new book by Michael Brick is hitting stores. The account follows Reagan High School in East Austin and the school's efforts to, in one year, prevent permanent closure due to low test scores.

Interestingly enough, while the school's scores weren't high, in the few years building up to its 2009-2010 school year (the time period in which Brick follows the school), improvements were being made and scores were climbing. Unfortunately though, the Texas school review process does not weigh "improvement" significantly against absolute results.

The major takeaway from Brick's book though is the power of the school community. He reveals how major changes, reforms, and improvements can be made in twelve short months when every person connected to a school gets involved and invests themselves completely.

I think Reagan proves that not only does community matter, but that educational reforms don't need to take decades. Successful reforms CAN happen in the short term and ARE driven by communities working together.

Where else have you all seen this lesson play out? Lets get inspired!

Scholarship Squeeze

As many of you know, being a student looking to college today is not a fun position to be in. While heading to school should be one of the most invigorating moments of a kid's life, now the excitement is tempered by massive financial concern.

College tuition is on the rise for both public and private schools. Student debt is at an all-time high and the loans associated with this debt have become more stringent in terms of payment horizons and interest.

Unfortunately, more trouble is brewing.

Reuters recently reported that on top of both the problems posed above, the money behind merit based scholarship programs is disappearing.

In the last year alone, students reporting any reliance on scholarship money dropped from 45% nationally to 35%.

Is college the next financial bubble? How do we protect this institution, the students who seek education at these places, and the economic benefits tied into their success?

(Source: Reuters)

PS

Privatizing Education

Daniel L Bennett of Forbes recently released a review of a new collection of essays entitled, The Profit Motive in Education: Continuing the Revolution.

The collection is split into three key sections:

1) Key concepts connecting profit-seeking and education. This section is mainly a criticism of the private sector's involvement in education.

2) Stories of educational entrepreneurs and their for-profit school models. This section shows how entrepreneurs in education and the competition between them can drive both quality and affordability in education.

3) Alternative models to current educational structures. This last section is certainly the most interesting in my view.

----------------------------------------

The question of whether or not privatization and related concepts are good or bad  in regards to the present and impending challenges faced in many social sector fields has been asked repeatedly. Education has not been immune to this (particularly in terms of higher education, charter schools, and even the voucher system to a degree).

What are all of your views on privatization in education? Has partial privatization been a good thing? Should there be more? Less? Sound off!

I don't want to talk about Education if we're only discussing cutting it .....

Newsday reported this morning that Obama plans to release new campaign ads that target Ryan's record and current stance on education.

While I have disagreed with the logic and "facts" behind some of Obama's ads, I think on the education front he seems to have the Romney/Ryan ticket cornered correctly. 

Ryan, in his budget proposal, cuts several programs in education, particularly the Pell Grants program (which is scholarship money awarded almost 10 million students in place of them having to take out loans). When recently asked about education, Romney deflected and pointed to rising college costs. I am not sure if this problem is one stemming from Obama and his policies at all.

One thing that confuses me with both candidates is their unwillingness to cut or even consider cutting military spending. Our country's military spending is out of control, yet Obama has promised to maintain current spending levels and Romney wants to increase the military.

(See below for current federal spending breakdown .... keep in mind total spending for 2012 is projected at just below $4.5 Trillion)

Would someone please explain to me why education cuts seem guaranteed in the next four years, yet our military is expecting a funding increase?

Textbooks and Techbooks

The New York Times reported yesterday afternoon a new trend towards techbooks (aka an umbrella term to include all e-learning feasibly able to replaces or be supplemental to standard hard-copy textbooks).

Interestingly, this drive to techbooks is stemming not from a new age of technological innovation, but from slipping profits of major media and technology companies.

The article's authors, Brooks Barnes and Amy Chozick, point to these profit-hungry companies (many of which are or can be educational, such as the Discovery network and Apple through its techbook initiative on the new iPad) and explain the opportunity they may see in the $3B textbook industry (with another $4B market in supplemental products).

Do you all think it is a good thing so many companies that may not have experience in formal education are stepping up to bat? Should some regulation be in place that monitors consistency across the various formats available? Are textbooks a quickly becoming a thing of the past?

Weight In!

No Options for Students with Special Needs

Student and family choice are concepts that have recently penetrated the language and ideas of policy-makers in relation to schools. Voucher programs are driven by this idea as well as the push for more charter, magnet, and other specialized schools.

But, as Christina Hoag notes in a recent article she published with ABC News, special needs students and their families have not experienced this growth of options. In fact, Hoag explains that as more options have been created for other students, this special needs group has seen their singular public education choice erode. 

This is mainly because of how schools are funded. Although they often receive extra money for special needs kids, many times these programs are the first to see budget cuts and funds allocated often underestimate real costs (a special needs student can cost up to 4x as much as an average student). And since special needs students tend to perform worse on standardized tests, as other kids move away from the standard public schools, these schools are left with heightened problems related to declining test scores.

Should more school alternatives be incentivized or even forced to admit more students with special needs (beyond those with just minor issues)? How do we ensure the financial burden of supporting this group of students isn't disproportional? 

Obama on Republicans and Education

This morning Reuters reported a brief review of Obama's radio/internet address from this week.

In the address, Obama attacked Republicans for wanting to make cuts to Education and related these cuts to jobs lost in the field. While not directly naming Ryan, Obama clearly had the VP candidate's budget plan in mind.

-----------------------------------

Interestingly enough, Obama may have inadvertently pointed out flaws of his own educational policy background:

1) Jobs. He kept mentioning that 300,000 education jobs have been lost since 2009. It is 2012 today. If America was bleeding teaching jobs over the last three years, couldn't Obama have done more about this? If he didn't in his last term, what guarantee do we have he'll do it in his next?

2) Budget Cuts. On top of this the federal budget for education in 2012 is smaller than it was in 2011. Again, if education cuts is an issue for him, why didn't he push to prevent this cut from last year to the federal budget for education?

-----------------------------------

Certainly Ryan's budget worries me in terms of what it could have meant for Education (and its total disregard of cuts to military spending). BUT, while Obama keeps telling us he is an "Education President", actions speak louder than words and it is in this translation Obama tends to stumble.

More and more, I am beginning to believe education is less of a black-and-white, Republican position - Democrat position issue and more of an area where party lines are blurred. It seems every politician ultimately has their own stance.

What is definitely clear is that whatever position is taken, education as an issue is an important topic that desperately needs to see policy reforms actually executed and implemented.